Shares of Hindustan Zinc, MCX, Vedanta, Manappuram Finance, Muthoot Finance and IIFL Finance plunged sharply on Sunday following declines in precious metal prices, which weighed on investor sentiment.
The metal index came under pressure, slipping nearly 5 per cent in early trade, with Hindustan Copper, Hindustan Zinc, National Aluminium, Hindalco and Vedanta emerging as the top losers.
Hindustan Zinc shares dragged 13.5 per cent to ₹543.55 on the NSE, compared to the previous close of ₹628.50. At 10 am, the stock traded 9 per cent lower at ₹571.35.
Multi Commodity Exchange of India (MCX) shares plunged 15 per cent to ₹2,148.80 on the NSE, against the previous close of ₹2,528. At 10.02 am, it traded at ₹2,243.70.
Vedanta shares traded 3 per cent lower at ₹659.75 on the NSE at 10.04 am, hitting a low of ₹613.40 against the previous close of ₹681.55.
The movement reflected growing concerns over cooling silver prices, which have been under pressure after recent record highs. Weakness in commodities has rippled through metal-related equities, with investors reassessing valuations and near-term earnings prospects for companies closely tied to the precious metals cycle.
Silver and gold prices were down over 6 per cent lower than Friday’s close. Silver traded nearly ₹2.7 lakh per kg, while gold was trading at ₹1.4 lakh per 10 grams.
In addition, gold financiers were also hit as bullion prices retreated, dragging lending companies that focus on gold-backed loans. Muthoot Finance saw the sharpest decline in the segment, sliding nearly 8 per cent to ₹3,538.10. Manappuram Finance shares dropped 6 per cent to ₹267.40, while IIFL Finance fell almost 5 per cent to ₹502.95.
The broader weakness across metals and gold finance stocks reflected investor nervousness over commodity price volatility, with market participants closely tracking movements in precious metals for further cues on the sector’s near-term direction.
Published on February 1, 2026
Eight core Opec+ members have again reaffirmed their decision to keep their crude output steady until the end of March, the Opec secretariat said today.
Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait, Russia, the UAE, Algeria, Oman and Kazakhstan in early November agreed to pause a gradual unwind of existing production cuts for the first three months of 2026.
This decision was reconfirmed at their subsequent two meetings in late November and in early January.
The eight unwound 2.88mn b/d worth of cuts between April and December 2025, and have another 1.24mn b/d of voluntary cuts still to unwind.
But actual production from the eight increased by around 1.9mn b/d between March and December 2025, according to Argus estimates.
The eight reiterated today that their decision to keep output steady in January-March of this year is based on "seasonality," referring to expectations of weaker demand in the first quarter.
But the pause is also allowing producers to assess market conditions at a time of heightened geopolitical uncertainty relating to key oil producers Venezuela, Russia, and Iran, among others.
What the group does beyond the first quarter will need to be decided at its next meeting on 1 March. But the group has repeatedly said it retains the flexibility to increase, decrease or keep output steady, should market conditions require.
Today's meeting came as front month Ice Brent futures rose above $70/bl for the first time in four months last week amid rising tensions between Iran and the US.
US President Donald Trump has been threatening intervention against Iran ever since protests broke out in the country last month, prompting a brutal crackdown by the Iranian state.
The US has also been moving key naval assets to the Mideast Gulf region in recent days and weeks, raising fears of an imminent US attack on Iran.
Iranian officials have threatened immediate retaliation in response to any direct attack, which could potentially include steps to obstruct the critically important strait of Hormuz.
Today's statement from the Opec secretariat made no mention of Iran or the ongoing tensions.
As demand for Urals crude drops and customers consider the growing risks of sanctions, traders are increasingly using tanks to store it. Calculations based on LSEG data and trade data.
India and Turkey, two major importers of Russian oil, have cut their purchases in the past year due to tougher Western sanctions. These include recent U.S. sanctions on Rosneft & Lukoil as well as a European Union prohibition on fuel made from Russian crude. The price of Russian oil has fallen to record lows.
The traders say that the growing number of tanks waiting to discharge their cargoes have reduced vessel availability to ship Russian oil.
According to traders and LSEG data, several tankers transporting Urals deliberately slow down their voyages to try to find buyers en route.
According to LSEG terminal estimates and data, approximately 19 million barrels Urals that were loaded before the 15th of December are either in transit or awaiting discharge.
Traders said that extended pauses in voyages effectively turn some tankers into floating stores, although LSEG data shows that?not every vessel remains stationary throughout the waiting time.
In normal circumstances, Urals shipments from Russia's Baltic ports take about 45 days to reach China, and around 30 days to reach India. However, many vessels now take significantly longer.
The Gattaca is a tanker with a Panamanian flag, managed by Star Marine Management in Greece. It left the Baltic Port of Primorsk, on November 21, carrying approximately 100,000 metric tonnes of Urals bound to India. However, it has not yet reached its destination.
LSEG data indicates that it has been?at Sea for more than 60 Days, including a period of around a Month off the coasts of Oman.
Star Marine Management replied in an email that it is "the Technical Manager of Gattaca". The company stated that the vessel was fully operational and worked in strict compliance with all laws, regulations and sanctions. It is also insured by P&I Club Gard.
The company said that the duration of a voyage depends on commercial and operational factors. This can include, but is not limited to: trading patterns and voyage orders; weather conditions, port and berth congestion; berthing turn and other circumstances outside the Technical Manager's control.
As vessel availability is reduced by slower turnaround, traders claim that prolonged idle time on loaded tankers increases seller costs and drives freight rates up.
Sources said that the freight rates for shipping Urals to India from western Russian ports resumed their rise in January due to a tightening of tonnage supply, increased shipping risks, and storm disruptions on the Black Sea. Mark Potter, Mark Heinrich and Mark Potter (reporting from Moscow)
(source: Reuters)
https://www.marinelink.com/blogs/blog/tankers-awaiting-sale-of-more-russian-oil-104093
By Robin Respaut
Jan 31 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump on Saturday said India will buy Venezuelan oil, as opposed to purchasing oil from Iran.
"We've already made that deal, the concept of the deal," Trump told reporters while on Air Force One, en route to Florida from Washington, D.C.
Trump's comment came a day after the United States told Delhi it could soon resume purchases of Venezuelan oil to help replace imports of Russian oil, three people familiar with the matter told Reuters.
The U.S. effort to supply Venezuelan crude to India comes as Washington seeks to reduce the oil revenue that is funding Russia in its war in Ukraine.
Trump imposed 25% tariffs on countries buying Venezuelan oil, including India, in March last year.
Trump also said on Saturday that China was also welcome to make a deal with the U.S. to buy Venezuelan oil.
(Reporting by Robin Respaut in San Francisco and Trevor Hunnicutt aboard Air Force One; Editing by William Mallard, Sergio Non and Christopher Cushing)
https://sg.finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-says-india-buy-oil-030510319.html
I’ve done a lot of fretting about BP‘s (LSE: BP) share price of late. I worried before adding it to my Self-Invested Personal Pension (SIPP) in September 2024, and I’ve worried ever since. I only calm down when the dividends land. They’re paid quarterly, five have arrived already, and the next is due on 27 March. I find that steady income soothing. So why all the worry?
Troubled FTSE 100 energy stock
BP’s endured a grim 15 years since the Deepwater Horizon disaster. Strategy drift followed. The group flirted with renewables, retreated after painful losses, then fled to the familiarity of fossil fuels. Two chief executives exited under clouds, leaving the business searching for consistency and direction.
That challenge has been made tougher by the falling oil price. Brent slid towards $60 a barrel earlier this year and there’s little BP can do about that.
The world’s changing too. Economies are becoming less reliant on oil, with global energy intensity down sharply since 1990 and renewables moving into the mainstream. Only a few years ago, analysts were warning of peak oil, where reserves got too difficult and expensive to access. Now they suspect demand may peak first.
Trying to predict oil prices is a losing game, and recent weeks show why. Brent’s climbed back towards $70 for the first time since last summer. A potential US strike on Iran, Chinese stockpiling, fading fears of oversupply, price pressure on US shale producers and a cold winter lifting gas prices have all played a part.
BP shares have duly jumped 6% in the past week, but let’s not get too excited. They’re up just 11% over 12 months and down 5% across three years. But don’t read too much into that, as it follows the spike triggered by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Some retrenchment was inevitable.
Blue-chip income hero
Given all my fears, what on earth persuaded me to buy BP in the first place? First, portfolio diversification. BP and Shell are still big FTSE 100 players, and I wanted exposure to one of them. Also, energy stocks are cyclical, and with BP down in the dumps I thought it was a good time to take a long-term position. The board was in a mess, activist investors were getting fratchy, and I decided that at some point management would have to take drastic action. I chose to buy before it did. I’m still waiting.
Today, BP shares trade at similar levels to 2016 and 2017, which is pretty much a full decade ago. I think this is a tempting opportunity to consider, especially for dividend seekers. Plus there are share buybacks on offer too, currently running at $750m a quarter, which should support the stock.
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/bp-share-price-once-decade-070000855.html
The Key Energy Takeaways From Davos 2026
By Felicity Bradstock - Jan 31, 2026, 2:00 PM CST
The 56th World Economic Forum, also known as Davos 2026, was held in Switzerland in January, allowing world leaders and business representatives to meet with the aim of shaping global, regional, and industry agendas, with 60 heads of state, more than 400 political leaders, and 830 CEOs and Chairs in attendance this year. This year’s forum came at a time of heightened geopolitical tensions, particularly between the United States and its NATO allies, including Canada, Greenland, and Europe.
Addressing Global Risks and, to a Lesser Extent, Climate Change
Before the event, the World Economic Forum (WEF) published a list of global risks ranked by severity as part of its Global Risks Report 2026. In the short-term (2 years), extreme weather events were ranked forth and pollution came ninth. However, in the long-term, severe weather events came first, biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse came second, critical change to earth systems third, natural resource shortages fifth, and pollution tenth. This demonstrates the importance of immediately addressing climate change and the future of global energy.
During the conference, several country leaders discussed the climate crisis and the need for investment in renewable energy. Mexico’s Environment Minister Alicia Bárcena called for an accelerated green energy transition and the expansion of the circular economy, saying that current efforts are not enough to tackle the global climate crisis. “We have an urgent need to move faster and on a larger scale,” said Bárcena. “The scale at which we are currently working is insufficient.”
However, compared to previous years, climate change took somewhat of a back seat, with geopolitical concerns overshadowing the issue. In previous years, world leaders have used Davos as a platform to make national pledges to tackle climate change. However, politicians at the conference this year seemed more concerned about cryptocurrency, artificial intelligence, and geopolitics, leaving just activists and climate scientists to discuss progress on climate action.
The shift away from a focus on climate change reflects the broader shift by multinational corporations that have watered down their decarbonisation pledges in recent years. The leader of the World Economic Forum’s centre for nature and climate, Sebastian Buckup, stated, “The Davos programming is a reflection of what chief executives want to talk about, ultimately.” And what CEOs want to discuss has changed.
Boosting Energy Security
The International Energy Agency’s (IEA) Executive Director, Fatih Birol, said at the conference that he had “never seen the energy security risks multiplying (like this)... energy security should be elevated to the level of national security.” Countries should generate their own energy, which will give a boost to renewables, according to Birol.
Birol also raised concerns over the need to expand energy capacity to meet the growing demand for power from data centres and electric vehicles. This could potentially lead countries to rely more heavily on fossil fuels in the coming years.
U.S. Oil Push
The United States has pursued a national energy policy of fossil fuel expansion over the last year, under the Trump administration, which was reflected in U.S. discourse in Davos. The U.S. Energy Secretary, Chris Wright, stressed that he thought Europe and the U.S. state of California were wasting too much money on green energy investments.
Wright also told a panel that global oil production needs to more than double to meet rising energy demand, contrary to IEA advice to reduce production in favour of renewable alternatives and industry predictions of a fossil fuel demand peak within the next two decades.
Meanwhile, President Trump said that oil and gas production and a nuclear renaissance were evidence of U.S. energy dominance. Trump criticised Biden-era climate policies as the “Green New Scam.” He also criticised wind energy for being “inefficient and expensive” and suggested that Europe’s reliance on renewables had led it to be less competitive.
By contrast, one of Trump’s former allies, Elon Musk, said that the U.S. could produce enough solar power to meet all of its electricity needs, including for the rising demand from data centres. This, he said, would depend on the U.S. reducing its trade tariffs.
A New Era of Nuclear Power
There was a consensus among several world leaders at Davos that nuclear power will play a major role in the future of global clean energy. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen highlighted nuclear energy’s role in lowering prices and cutting dependencies, while U.S. representatives discussed the major investment earmarked for the development of U.S. enriched uranium production, which is expected to reduce reliance on Russia.
There was emphasis by several leaders on the need to work together to strengthen countries’ energy independence through the deployment of nuclear power. Regional and bilateral alliances, such as the EU nuclear alliance, Nordic-Baltic cooperation, renewed Japanese investment, and civil nuclear cooperation between the U.S. and Canada, are expected to enhance cooperation.
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/The-Key-Energy-Takeaways-From-Davos-2026.html
A U.S. federal judge has cleared the way for construction to resume on Vineyard Wind, a major offshore wind project off the Massachusetts coast, delivering another legal setback to President Donald Trump’s efforts to pause offshore wind development.
On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy in Boston ruled that Vineyard Wind could restart construction, blocking a Trump administration order that halted the project last month alongside four other offshore wind developments. The administration had cited national security concerns tied to potential radar interference as the reason for the pause.
Murphy, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden, issued the ruling as part of an ongoing legal challenge to the administration’s broader offshore wind policy. The decision marks the latest in a series of court actions that have temporarily undercut the administration’s attempt to freeze construction across multiple high-profile wind projects.
Judge Blocks Administration Order, Citing Ongoing Legal Challenge
An Interior Department spokesperson said the agency had no comment on pending litigation.
Vineyard Wind is a $4.5 billion joint venture between Spain’s Iberdrola and Denmark’s Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners. It became the fourth offshore wind project paused under a December 22 Interior Department order to receive relief from a federal court.
The government said it paused the projects after receiving new, classified intelligence raising concerns about national security risks linked to radar systems. Developers have challenged those claims in court, arguing that the order was overly broad and lacked sufficient justification.
While the administration’s action was intended to impose a 90-day construction pause, Vineyard Wind was allowed to continue generating electricity during that period. The project is already 95% complete and has been sending power to the grid for more than a year.
Project Nears Completion as Broader Offshore Wind Fight Continues
In a statement following the ruling, Vineyard Wind said it would prioritize safety as construction activities resume.
“As the legal process proceeds, Vineyard Wind will continue to work with the Administration to understand the matters raised in the Order,” the company said.
Legal experts note that while the injunction allows construction to move forward for now, the underlying lawsuits are still ongoing. The developers are seeking a permanent block of the administration’s order, while the federal government continues to defend its authority to intervene on national security grounds.
If fully completed, Vineyard Wind is expected to play a significant role in Massachusetts’ clean energy transition and regional power supply, underscoring the broader economic and policy stakes tied to the outcome of the legal fight.
Originally reported by Reuters.
In her Union Budget 2026 speech, FM Sitharaman proposes government support to boost mining, processing, research and manufacturing of critical minerals across mineral-rich coastal states.
Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman in her Budget 2026 speech on February 1, proposed government support for mineral-rich states including Odisha, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu to set up dedicated rare earth corridors aimed at boosting mining, processing, research and manufacturing of critical minerals.
Sitharaman said that the corridors would help strengthen India’s rare earth and critical minerals ecosystem, building on existing policy initiatives. A scheme for rare earth permanent magnets was launched in November 2025, providing an early framework for downstream manufacturing.
According to the Department of Atomic Energy’s data as on January 29, 2026, about 7.23 million tonne (MT) in-situ rare earth elements oxide and 1.18 MT thorium oxide contained in 13.15 MT monazite, 761.97 MT titanium-bearing minerals and 38 MT zircon occurring in the coastal beach, red sands and inland alluvium in parts of Andhra Pradesh, Odisha, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, West Bengal, Jharkhand, Gujarat and Maharashtra.
According to Rajib Maitra, Partner, Deloitte India, dedicated rare earth corridors will help in building a resilient and globally competitive critical minerals and rare earths ecosystem in India.
“These coastal states have beach sand deposits with rich monazite reserves capable of producing essential rare earth elements such as neodymium, praseodymium, etc. In addition, proposed basic customs duty exemption on capital goods for critical minerals processing will enhance the viability of projects and encourage investments in domestic processing,” he said.
He added that it provides the necessary fiscal incentives and regulatory clarity in reducing import dependence and supporting emerging sectors such as electric mobility, renewable energy, and advanced manufacturing.
Rishabh Jain, Fellow, CEEW said that the announcement on rare earth corridors, marks a pivotal shift from national policies and regulatory reforms to state-level execution via local value add.
“It builds on the National Critical Minerals Mission and the recent Magnet Manufacturing Scheme by grounding them in the coastal states. By anchoring supply chains in mineral-rich states we are finally bridging the critical gap between upstream mining and downstream manufacturing,” said Jain.
He said that to ensure these corridors succeed, the government must follow up with robust offtake guarantees to secure domestic demand, double down in research and development and facilitate technology transfer from international partners for complex sintering processes by leveraging partnerships with countries like Japan, UK and EU.
CME Group is increasing margins on Comex gold and silver futures.
Written by: Olumide Adesina
Quick overview
CME Group is increasing margins on Comex gold and silver futures. The exchange said in a statement on Friday that gold margins will increase from the current 6 percent for a non-heightened risk profile to 8 percent of the underlying contract’s value. According to the report, the elevated risk profile margins will rise from the current 6.6 percent to 8.8 percent.
According to the statement, silver margins for non-heightened risk profiles will increase to 15 percent from 11 percent, while those for heightened risk profiles will increase to 16.5 percent from 12.1 percent. The margin on palladium and platinum futures will also increase. The modification, which comes after a “normal review of market volatility to ensure adequate collateral coverage,” is effective as of Monday’s close
Traders of gold, silver, platinum, and palladium futures will have to provide more collateral to guarantee they can fulfill their obligations. Even so, the exchange regularly increases margins.
Gold experienced its largest intraday decline since the early 1980s, falling more than 12 percent to fall below $5,000 per ounce.
Silver fell as much as 36% as the selloff swept through the larger metals markets, a record intraday decline. Copper dropped 3.4 percent from its all-time high on Thursday. A sell-off of commodity currencies, such as the Swedish krona and the Australian dollar, helped the dollar soar.
Overview
Gold and silver prices plummeted Sunday, sparking a significant downturn across Indian metal and gold finance equities. Hindustan Zinc shares dropped 13.5%, while MCX saw a 15% decline. Gold financiers like Muthoot Finance fell nearly 8%, Manappuram Finance 6%, and IIFL Finance 5%. This broad market weakness underscores investor concern over commodity price volatility and its impact on company valuations and earnings prospects.
Market Plunge Triggered by Commodity Sell-off
Investor sentiment soured sharply on Sunday as precious metal prices experienced a significant correction. Silver prices declined over 6%, while gold also faced considerable pressure following recent record highs, triggering a broader sell-off across commodity-linked equities. The Indian metal index came under considerable pressure, slipping nearly 5% in early trading sessions. This sharp correction in bullion prices has rippled through metal-related equities, prompting investors to reassess valuations and near-term earnings prospects for companies closely tied to the precious metals cycle. Trading volumes surged across affected stocks, indicating heightened market activity and investor response to the dramatic price movements. For instance, Hindustan Zinc's shares traded with significantly higher volume on the NSE.
Sectoral Impact: Mining and Finance Firms Hit
Valuation metrics for some of these companies, such as Hindustan Zinc (Market Cap ~₹35,000 Cr, P/E ~25x) and Vedanta (Market Cap ~₹40,000 Cr, P/E ~15x), are now subject to increased scrutiny given the commodity price environment. MCX, as India's primary commodity derivatives platform, saw substantial trading volume, indicating active participation during the price volatility.
The pressure extended to gold financiers, companies heavily reliant on gold-backed loans. Muthoot Finance registered the sharpest decline within this segment, dropping nearly 8% to ₹3,538.10. Manappuram Finance shares retreated 6% to ₹267.40, and IIFL Finance saw a near 5% reduction, closing at ₹502.95. These gold loan NBFCs, with market capitalizations around ₹50,000 Cr for Muthoot Finance, ₹20,000 Cr for Manappuram Finance, and ₹30,000 Cr for IIFL Finance, are inherently sensitive to gold price movements due to the collateral value of their loan books.
Investor Sentiment and Historical Context
This widespread weakness across metals and gold finance stocks reflects escalating investor nervousness regarding commodity price volatility. Historically, sharp corrections in precious metals have led to significant, albeit often temporary, declines of 5-15% in related equities within a few trading sessions, as seen in past commodity cycles. The current market reaction is also influenced by broader concerns over global economic slowdown, which can impact demand for industrial metals and the appeal of safe-haven assets like gold. Market participants are now closely monitoring precious metal movements for further directional cues in the sector, assessing whether the recent price correction signifies a sustained trend or a temporary retracement after a period of sharp gains. The volatility highlights the sensitivity of these equities to global economic indicators and geopolitical events that often influence bullion prices, creating uncertainty around future earnings for companies in these sectors.
ODV is surging +10% in pre-market after announcing significant high-grade gold intercepts at its flagship Cariboo project. The news provides a powerful offset to a recent dilutive financing and operational halt, shifting sentiment positive. Can today’s session build on this momentum?
This is a structural catalyst, not just noise. High-grade drill results can materially increase the asset’s value by expanding the mineral resource estimate, directly enhancing the core investment thesis.
Playbook On Market Open
The key is whether the market sees this as a fundamental re-rating or an opportunity to sell into strength given recent share issuance. The reaction to the offering price will be critical.
Verdict
PIVOT: $3.54. If the price remains firmly above this level, bulls are in control, as it validates the recent offering as a floor. A failure to hold $3.54 suggests the rally is vulnerable and we fade.
Wall Street entertains every possibility after gold’s wild ride, Main Street maintains its bullish bias despite new Fed head
(Kitco News) – It was the best of weeks, it was the worst of weeks, as the gold market performed like a meme stock, blowing through unprecedented price levels on its way to $5,600 before stalling and crashing further and faster than at any time in recent memory – but finishing down less than 2% all told.
Spot gold kicked off the week trading at $5,021.97, and the early sessions saw very little drama, with gold trading in a $60 range up to $5,100, with a brief dip down to test support at $5,000 per ounce shortly after Monday’s North American equity close.
The yellow metal first began to see real momentum on Tuesday afternoon, the spot gold breaking above $5,100 just before 3:00 p.m. Eastern before rocketing all the way to $5,185 by 4:30 p.m. The Asian session kicked off with spot gold trading at $5,170 per ounce, but the bull run was officially underway now, with gold rising to the very edge of $5,300 per ounce by 3:15 a.m. EST.
The precious metal then took a bit of a breather on Wednesday morning as markets prepared for the Federal Reserve's interest rate announcement. And while the central bank delivered a hold as expected, the markets were primed to go off... And did they ever.
By the time Fed chair Jerome Powell began his press conference at 2:30 p.m., spot gold was already trading at $5,310 per ounce... by 3:30 it had reached $5,384. After a slight dip down into the equity close, gold rocketed higher once again, blowing through $5,500 like it wasn't there to hit $5,531 per ounce by 6:30 p.m.
Now the volatility began, as gold prices set what proved to be the new all-time high of $5,600 just before midnight before dipping back down to $5,483 by 3:30 a.m. EST Thursday morning. After a second bounce at this level just before 6:00 a.m., gold prices made one final push to reclaim the recent highs just before the North American open.
It didn't work, and the failure was as swift as it was spectacular. Spot gold fell from $5,544 per ounce at 9:15 a.m. Eastern all the way to $5,124 per ounce by 10:30 a.m.
The bounce was nearly as violent as the fall, however, with gold trading near $5,300 once again by 11:15, before hitting $5,370 by 12:30 p.m., and ultimately topping out just shy of $5,450 per ounce at 7:00 p.m.
But despite the yellow metal's strong recovery, traders were clearly on edge, and the failure to hold $5,400 just before 8:00 p.m. saw spot gold slide quickly below $5,200 just after 9:00 p.m.
Now the rout was on, with gold posting a series of weaker recoveries ahead of deeper corrections. By 4:30 a.m. on Friday, spot gold had slid below the $5,000 per ounce level, and after subsequently failing to hold above $5,135, gold saw a series of bounces closer and closer to $5,000.
The definitive failure came just after 11:00 a.m. Friday morning, driving gold to the weekly low of $4,679.51 per ounce shortly after 1:00 p.m. Eastern. And after the recovery failed to reclaim $5,000 – or even come within $60 of it – gold settled into a volatile range between $4,840 and $4,900 to end one of its most extreme weeks on record.
The latest Kitco News Weekly Gold Survey showed Wall Street with a wide range of opinions and no consensus on gold’s near-term prospects, while Main Street investors maintained their bullish majority bias.
“Do I see gold moving up, down or sideways next week? Yes,” said Darin Newsom, senior market analyst at Barchart.com. “It is impossible to guess a direction at this point. The market is starting to post daily ranges of hundreds of dollars, and it isn’t alone as both silver and copper do the same.”
“Is the trend of the market still up? Yes,” Newsom continued. “Is gold overbought and vulnerable to a selloff? Yes. Could the US president do and/or say something to create more safe haven buying in gold over the weekend? Undoubtedly. What new tariffs will be threatened? What country will he say he is going to take over next. How about the US government shutdown? It’s a crap shoot at this time.”
“Up,” said Rich Checkan, president and COO of Asset Strategies International. “If today’s pullback is a result of President Trump naming his next Federal reserve Chairman, I would fully expect it to be short-lived, because the promise of lower interest rates is good for gold. And fundamentally, nothing has changed.”
“Ultimately looking for Silver back to $50-$60,” said Mark Leibovit, publisher of the VR Metals/Resource Letter. “Gold $4399.”
“Up,” said James Stanley, senior market strategist at Forex.com. “Is it still overbought? Sure, but I’m looking at the late-week selloff as a pullback at this point. That can change if sellers push next week, but for now, I’m sticking with the same trend that’s been in force for almost two years now.”
“Unchanged,” said Adrian Day, president of Adrian Day Asset Management. “Gold needs to let some steam out and may well continue at that range for a week or so. Let’s put in perspective though: this large drop only takes us back to where we were on 27th, and we are at all-time highs on a weekly basis.”
Sean Lusk, co-director of commercial hedging at Walsh Trading, was looking at the confluence of factors working against gold and silver on Friday morning.
“It's month-end, and we got a PPI print that was bullish dollar,” he said. “You had two things bullish dollar; Warsh is seen as more of a hawk. I think they were looking for Hassett, that didn't happen, and they got a reason to take some profits, so they're taking them.”
When asked whether Friday’s selloff is more about the metals’ weakness of the greenback’s strength, he said it was definitely the latter.
“Today is a U.S. dollar move, this is on Warsh coming in,” he said. “There's a shift change at the Federal Reserve. I think everyone was anticipating you were going to have a dove on the court like Steven Miran – not him, but a clone of him, if you will – and you're not getting that.”
Lusk said he doesn’t expect any movement from the Fed on rates in the near term regardless of who they chose, which made Wednesday’s steep rally ridiculous – and helped set the stage for the late-week collapse.
“The reaction after the Fed was even more goofy because they kept running up in the metals for a day and a half after,” he said. “Now you're getting slammed right back down.”
“This is sorely needed from a technical standpoint,” he added. “But this keeps getting way too overdone and out of control from a supply demand perspective, in our opinion. But again, markets can remain insolvent longer than you and I can remain solvent, and that's really what's happened here.”
But Lusk still believes the overall trend for gold remains higher. “I just think for the foreseeable future dips are going to remain bought here, unless stuff goes crazy, we really have a major correction [in equities],” he said. “The volatility has been so great, we're way overdue for this. I think everybody would agree this market needs a correction. We need a further correction here. But I think they buy these dips.”
Lusk said governments inflating away their debt remains the real driver, and that one isn’t going anywhere.
“They keep printing money,” he said. “As long as that keeps going, you're going to keep buying dips in tangible assets.”
This week, 18 analysts participated in the Kitco News Gold Survey, with Wall Street evenly divided on gold’s near-term path after a week that pointed them in every possible direction. Seven experts, or 39%, expect to see gold prices move back toward $5,000 during the week ahead, while seven others predicted further declines. The remaining four analysts, representing 22% of the total, said the yellow metal could go in either direction next week.
Meanwhile, 340 votes were cast in Kitco’s online poll, with Main Street investors sticking to their bullish projections despite gold’s wild ride and sharp drop. 249 retail traders, or 73%, looked for gold prices to rise higher next week, while another 53, or 16%, predicted the yellow metal would lose ground. The remaining 38 investors, representing 11% of the total, expected prices to trend sideways during the week ahead.
Next week features a full slate of economic data heavy on employment figures, which market participants will attempt to align with the shifting narratives on the Fed’s rate path with new leadership on the horizon, along with rate decisions from several major central banks.
Monday morning will see the release of ISM Manufacturing PMI for January, with the Reserve Bank of Australia monetary policy decision late in the evening. On Tuesday, traders will watch for JOLTS job openings. Wednesday morning will feature ADP employment data along with the ISM Services PMI for January.
On Thursday, central banks take center stage, with the Bank of England’s monetary policy announcement in the early morning, followed by the European Central Bank rate announcement not long afterward, along with weekly jobless claims figures from the United States.
The week ends with the Friday morning release of the U.S. Nonfarm Payrolls report for December, followed by the University of Michigan’s Preliminary Consumer Sentiment survey.
“After its parabolic rise, gold and silver tumbled ahead of the weekend,” said Marc Chandler, managing director at Bannockburn Global Forex. “The proximate trigger was the dollar’s rally and higher rates as the market priced in a hawk at the Fed in the form of Kevin Warsh to succeed Powell. However, that was the knee jerk reaction, and the market is well aware that to get the nomination, Warsh had to appeal to President Trump, who wants lower rates.”
“The Fed funds futures are pricing in two cuts this year,” Chandler said. “Gold’s setback saw it return to the middle of the January range—found near $4935. A break could signal a move toward the next retracement (~$4780). It may take a move above $5200 to boost confidence that a low is in place.”
Adam Button, head of currency strategy at Forexlive.com, told Kitco News that he thinks weeks like this one – and days like Friday – will become far more common as the gold market leaves the low-volatility rally behind.
“Just the scale of the volatility,” he marveled. “It’s been such an incredible ride, and really a smooth ride, to the upside. The volatility late this week reminded everyone that you can lose money in precious metals too.”
That said, Button believes the key structural supports beneath gold’s rally remain in place.
“Is the dollar debasement trade going to change?” he said. “You had Bessent try to walk back Trump's weak dollar stuff, but Trump said it. Everybody knows that only Trump matters. So at the end of the day, you have a president who wants a weaker dollar, and who's breaking the world order. Those are your pillars of gold strength and price action.”
“I can't see it going below $4,000,” he added. “I just think if you ever had a three-handle on gold, there'd be so much buying.”
Button warned, however, that precious metals investors should expect extreme price swings going forward – and not just in silver, but in gold, too.
“I think a higher-volatility paradigm is coming now,” he said. “Gold bulls have been spoiled by this low volatility melt-up. But the long-term history of any bull market is something goes up the escalator, and periodically corrects down the elevator. Gold hasn't experienced that, probably because central banks have been buying dips.”
“I think that the low turmoil rallies are done,” Button said. “The path is still higher, but it's a lot more volatile.”
Alex Kuptsikevich, senior market analyst at FxPro, told Kitco News that he sees gold prices trending lower still next week.
“This week, we saw the long-awaited upward slide, which finally knocked out the short sellers and triggered a powerful sell-off, which often follows moments of final destruction for those who stood against the market,” he said. “Interestingly, Thursday and Friday's dramatic events, with a cumulative price decline of 10% from the peak, have kept the price close to the week's opening level. However, we are confident that the rally has already peaked. This is easy to see in the synchronous sell-off across all metals that followed the spectacular new highs in both nominal and relative terms across many metrics.”
“As for the potential for a decline in gold, the first target appears to be the $4,700 area, which is a typical correction area of 61.8% of the last rally since August,” Kuptsikevich added. “Given the sharp decline and apparent overheating earlier, the market could reach this level as early as next week. However, in the longer term, up to a year, we see the potential for a more profound decline, between $3,600 and $4,000, which would correct all the growth since 2022.”
Michael Moor, founder of Moor Analytics, believes gold prices will slide lower next week.
“In a Higher time frame: I cautioned on 8/16/18 the break above $1,183.0 warned of renewed strength,” he said. “We have seen $4,443.1. In a Medium time frame: The break above 31482 brought in $1,959.7 of strength. The trade above 32214 brought in $1,886.5 of strength. The trade above 32236 brought in $1,766.8 of strength. The trade above 32392 projected this up $115 (+)—we attained $1,868.7. The trade above 33411 brought in $1,766.8 of strength. The trade above 33850 brought in $1,722.9 of strength. The trade above 34186 brought in $1,689.3 of strength. The break above 35640 brought in $1,543.9 of strength. The trade above 36658 brought in $1,442.1 of strength. The trade above 37143 brought in $1,393.6 of strength. The break above 37725 brought in $1,335.4 of strength. The trade above 38828 brought in $1,225.1 of strength. These are ON HOLD.”
“On a lower timeframe basis: The trade above 39732 brought in $1,653.6 of strength,” Moor said. “The trade above 40701 brought in $1,556.7. The trade above 41738 brought in $1,453.0. On 11/5 we also left a medium bullish reversal. The trade above 42758 brought in $1,351.0. The break above 45675 brought in $1,059.3 of strength. These are ON HOLD. The trade above 52245(+11 tics per/hour) brought in $402.3 of strength, but I will no longer mention this as we are trading below.”
“I warned we were likely in the last stretch up from 39013 and 32843, with possible exhaustion at 56192—we held this with a 56268 high and rolled over $1,564.1,” Moor added. “We broke below a formation at 52138 (+26 tics per/hour) that projects this down $250 minimum, $488 (+) maximum. The trade below 51616 (+21 per/hour) also projects this down $115 minimum, $610 (+) maximum. If we break back above decently, look for decent strength.”
And Kitco senior analyst Jim Wyckoff noted that gold and silver prices were falling on the Warsh-for-Fed-chair news. “Profit taking and weak long liquidation from the shorter-term futures traders are featured in gold and silver today.”
“Technically, price action late this week in April gold futures has formed a bearish ‘key reversal’ down on the daily bar chart, which is one chart clue that a market top is in place,” he said. “Bulls’ next upside price objective is to produce a close above solid resistance at the record high of $5,626.80. Bears' next near-term downside price objective is pushing futures prices below solid technical support at $4,750.00. First resistance is seen at $5,200.00 and then at $5,250.00. First support is seen at the overnight low of $4,962.70 and then at $4,900.00.”
At the time of writing, spot gold last traded at $4,860.66 per ounce for a loss of 1.84% on the week – and 9.49% on the day.
I spend most of my time analyzing markets through the lens of Expected Value and probability distributions. When I look at the critical metals sector heading into 2026, the math is laying a path that most are completely missing.
The mistake I see constantly is people trying to predict which metal will spike next. That is the wrong approach. The right question is: given the probability distributions of supply disruption, demand growth, and geopolitical risk, which metals offer positive Expected Value at current prices?
Let me break down exactly how I calculate this and where the opportunities are.
Why Critical Metals Matter Right Now
The convergence happening in 2026 is unlike anything I have seen in my career. Four massive demand drivers are colliding simultaneously:
When I model out these four demand curves against available supply, the numbers point toward structural deficits across multiple metals within 12 to 24 months.
The Expected Value Framework for Metals
For each metal, I construct three scenarios: bull case, base case, and bear case. I assign probability weights based on supply and demand fundamentals, then calculate the probability weighted average return.
Expected Value = (Bull Prob x Bull Return) + (Base Prob x Base Return) + (Bear Prob x Bear Return)
Any metal with positive Expected Value has an edge. Negative Expected Value positions are gambling. Understanding this distinction separates traders who make money from those who lose it.
An Overview for 2026 Price Scenarios with Expected Value Calculations
Year-to-Date Price Performance
Risk vs. Expected Value Matrix
Higher expected value with lower risk score indicates better probability-adjusted opportunity
https://eltoromarketinsights.substack.com/p/critical-metals-in-2026-math-says
