I was flying back from giving a presentation in Vancouver last week and browsed through the financial publications at an airport newsstand, scanning to see what passes as mainstream advice these days. I spotted Money Magazine’s May issue and saw an article titled “5 Ways to Invest if You’re Worried About a Crash.” My curiosity was piqued—surely they’ll mention gold… right?
I wasn’t holding my breath. This publication has been a wonderful contrary indicator for gold—an issue in December 2015 actually claimed Lego sets were a better investment than gold, for example, and it marked, almost to the day, the very bottom of the gold bear market and the perfect time to buy. I’m convinced this magazine will also give us a clear sell signal (“Buy Gold Now!” or some such headline) AFTER the price has already skyrocketed. I guess I should thank them ahead of time.
Anyway, I turned to the article and read the subtitle:
“Worried about how shaky stocks have become lately? These five investments can act like shock absorbers in a diversified portfolio.”
Okay, surely this has got to include something about gold. I know from past issues that they don’t like precious metals, but they can’t possibly ignore what history has shown.
I was wrong. Gold is not mentioned once. The closest they get is suggesting “commodities.” And their recommended pick in that category was for a natural resource fund, whose top 10 holdings include exactly zero exposure to precious metals.
As bad as that was, it’s what I read next that stunned me. All four of their other recommendations were to—I’m not kidding—buy more stocks!
I actually laughed out loud; my seat mate glanced over at me, concerned...