Stocks or physical?

D

Dusty

Active Member
Silver Stacker
As you guys are aware the word on the street is invest in gold stocks over physical and of corse it's not without it's risks as always, but what are you guys doing?

I'm leaning towards stocks but I'm unsure.

Is there a company you could share or are you going to push me towards physical?

Alot of people seem to own ccu but they don't seem to move, maybe I'm better off holding cash what do you think?
 
If you already have a sizeable 'core' stack then it would be a good bet to play the quality juniors, however to invest purely in stocks by selling your core stack or substituting physical then the risks become obvious.

If income allows, allocate monthly weightings of your disposable income to both (note word - disposable).
 
Always diversify. Having an actively planned/managed allocation of cash, equities and physical PMs is always wise, especially when the markets are increasingly volatile.
 
Diversification is important in any portfolio even though they are both exposed to precious metal prices.

We could see stocks rise at a faster pace than the metal they produce, so it would be a good idea to buy stocks if a lot of your wealth is tied up in physical metals already.
 
The point is we are heading for a crash such as has never been seen before. You will need to access cash for necessities to live, any shares wont be worth (Jack Shit). If your wealth is tied up in precious metals at least it will hold its value unlike Fiat.
 
heyimderrick said:
Always diversify. Having an actively planned/managed allocation of cash, equities and physical PMs is always wise, especially when the markets are increasingly volatile.
Click to expand...
I totally agree with the posters opinion! Safe but wise answer. Having physical is a no brainer...good to have some. Good to have stocks because you can gain when physical goes up and when physical goes down, And of course cash is the ultimate in liquidity.
 
Butch said:
The point is we are heading for a crash such as has never been seen before. You will need to access cash for necessities to live, any shares wont be worth (Jack Shit). If your wealth is tied up in precious metals at least it will hold its value unlike Fiat.
Click to expand...

I actually think a collapse of fiat currency would force people into equities (in strong companies) and metals because that would be the only place to find a ROI. Shares of companies that produce tangible, desirable items will still be worth something. In the event of a crash and a spike in metals, for example, miners would benefit strongly if they own the land that they are producing from. Would shares take an initial hit, most likely, but they would likely recover strongly, and if the shares didn't bounce back, it's likely the company would initiate strong buybacks and/or hefty dividends.
 
Do both. If you have the money for it.

Treat your physical stash as your "savings account" for rainy day. Just buy those metals using your spare cash (which you normally put into your savings account) and don't sell any other them unless you really have too.

On the other hand your gold stocks are income producing portfolio. If you play Junior market, you can make alot of profits from buying low and selling high. If you play mid-major market, it is more advisable to buy and hold and let your share price appreciate sloooowly. My advise is play both junior and mid market.
 
I think it is important to note that if you have, or are starting a stock portfolio, loading it up with miners doesn't diversify you away from the volatility of PMs. In most cases, miner stocks are more volatile than the spot markets for PMs. If you have a large sum of physical, limit your stock exposure to miners or PM ETFs. You definitely want to have some good defensive/low volatility stocks in your portfolio. I have a trading account and a retirement account...both are managed very differently. Think of your goals and build your investments around them.
 
heyimderrick said:
I think it is important to note that if you have, or are starting a stock portfolio, loading it up with miners doesn't diversify you away from the volatility of PMs. In most cases, miner stocks are more volatile than the spot markets for PMs. If you have a large sum of physical, limit your stock exposure to miners or PM ETFs. You definitely want to have some good defensive/low volatility stocks in your portfolio. I have a trading account and a retirement account...both are managed very differently. Think of your goals and build your investments around them.
Click to expand...
Yes, If PMs are supposed to be 10-15% of total investments, then I believe, PM stocks should be no more than that % of total stock portfolio.
 
It's nice to have a bar of silver but stocks are really good when things take a turn its much easier to sell or buy for that matter.

Previous poster hit the nail on the head though with diversification.
 
Easiest question ever

Lower Risk----------Higher Risk
Physical-------------Stocks

Choose your allocation % based on your propensity to risk.
 
Stocks will always have counterparty risk. Gold in your own possession does not. With that said, there is a strong place for stocks in my portfolio.
 
Just came back from a free seminar yesterday where the guest speaker was a guy named Peter Daniels, who came from a third-generation welfare recipient family-turned-Christian business entrepreneur and philanthropist. His response to a question about whether ppl should get exposure to gold via mining shares was: "...when you invest, you need to maintain control. You have no control over shares and so therefore I (Peter Daniels) wouldn't buy them." , which I think is a fair statement though obviously do your own research and make up your own mind about it.

It could be argued that the price of gold and silver is also out of our control, but at least if you own physical then you have it in your possession without the counterparty risk.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top