The war in Iran, after narrowly avoiding an even more destructive phase for the energy infrastructure of countries bordering the Islamic Republic, seems to have opened a first window of opportunity for dialogue. But while uncertainty continues to grow in the stock markets, gold is not behaving like the safe-haven asset that financial theory attributes to it.
Over the past month marked by the conflict, gold futures have fallen 15.8% (as of March 23), dropping to $4,439.50 per ounce and hitting an intraday low of $4,100. By comparison, over the same period, the S&P 500 index lost 3.29% and the Stoxx 600 lost 7.67%.
The paradox is clear: in the midst of the most severe energy shock since the 1970s, holding stocks has proven to be a safer bet than holding gold. This is only an apparent anomaly, behind which lie very specific dynamics.
Rates, the dollar, and profit-taking: why gold has lost its appeal
“It was a counterintuitive move, but to understand it, you also need to look at what happened in the meantime on the bond front,” explains Carlo Alberto De Casa, an analyst at Swissquote and a veteran of the precious metals market, to We Wealth.
The first key factor is the rise in yields. Over the past month, the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield has risen by more than 30 basis points to 4.352%, while the 10-year BTP yield has climbed by over 50 basis points to 3.849%, a ten-year high.
For gold holders, this means one very concrete thing: there are more low-risk alternatives capable of offering returns. “The yield on the main alternative safe-haven asset to gold, the U.S. Treasury, has risen significantly. Consequently, the opportunity cost of holding gold is increasing: today, those who hold it in their portfolios are no longer giving up 3–3.5%, but rather the 4–4.5% offered by government bonds,” notes De Casa. “That’s why competition for gold has become fiercer, and we’ve seen outflows toward government bonds.”
Yields are also being supported by shifting expectations regarding the Federal Reserve: while the market had priced in two rate cuts this year prior to the conflict, futures now indicate rates will remain unchanged through September 2027.
Two additional factors come into play. On one hand, the strengthening dollar has mitigated gold’s decline in other currencies. On the other, the base effect is at work: between 2024 and early 2026, gold had experienced an extraordinary rally, and part of the current decline represents a natural correction of those excesses.
Finally, technical dynamics also come into play during periods of stress. “Gold is often initially sold to meet margin calls, that is, to free up liquidity and cover other losing positions,” adds De Casa. However, this pressure tends to subside quickly: “Later on, the market rationalizes and realizes that gold is by no means an asset to be discarded, especially in times of uncertainty.”
Even in 2022, the early stages of the conflict in Ukraine did not drive gold higher; in fact, it declined in the months immediately following.
Support levels, alternatives, and strategies: is it time to re-enter the market?
According to De Casa, the $4,000 area represents a first significant technical level. “At these levels, one can begin to consider re-entering the market.
For those who stayed out, we’re approaching more attractive valuations.” However, the main unknown remains: whether the $4,000–$4,200 range will hold or if there’s room for further declines: “Much will depend on the evolution of the geopolitical crisis, oil price trends, and the implications for monetary policy.”
In the meantime, some investors are already looking at “purer” alternatives to protect themselves from inflation. “Inflation-linked bonds have seen positive inflows in anticipation of the energy impact, in contrast to the strong outflows from gold ETFs,” note analysts at Goldman Sachs.
According to UBS Wealth Management as well, gold could rise again if markets begin to focus on the negative impact of high energy prices on growth. However, in the short term, the recommendation remains cautious: “reduce some direct equity exposure and favor capital-protected solutions”—in other words, strengthen the bond component of the portfolio.
