Gold's glow fades as inflation cools and China fears ease – where does gold go from here in 2025?
Why are gold prices dropping despite inflation worries?
Live Events
How are trade talks influencing gold's movement?
Is the fed expected to cut rates again this year?
How have other precious metals reacted?
Where does gold go from here in 2025?
FAQs:
(You can now subscribe to our
(You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel
Gold prices dipped slightly on Wednesday as investors took a closer look at weaker U.S. inflation numbers for April and signs of easing trade tensions between the U.S. and China. After reaching historic highs last month, gold continues to hover in a volatile zone as markets shift focus toward economic data and the Federal Reserve's next move on interest rates.Spot gold fell 0.6% to $3,232.50 per ounce by 10:05 a.m. in London, following a 0.4% gain on Tuesday. Earlier in the session, prices dropped by as much as 0.9% before recovering some ground. This marks the second decline in three days for the precious metal. Meanwhile, the Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index was also down 0.4%, giving some support to gold's floor.The latest U.S. inflation report showed that consumer prices rose less than expected in April, signaling that companies might not be rushing to pass on higher tariffs to customers. This shift eases immediate inflation concerns and lowers expectations of aggressive Federal Reserve action, both of which traditionally boost gold demand.With the inflation print coming in softer, markets now see a stronger chance of interest rate cuts later in 2025. Since gold doesn't yield interest, lower rates typically make it more attractive compared to bonds or savings accounts.Tensions between the United States and China appear to be cooling. A weekend meeting in Switzerland led to a breakthrough in trade negotiations, and new U.S. tariff rates came in lower than expected. That reduced investors' need for safe-haven assets like gold.According to Justin Lin, analyst at Global X ETFs, 'The U.S.–China tariff rates surprised materially to the downside, which eases investor concerns around trade-driven growth risks.' He added that investors are moving capital out of defensive sectors like gold, seeking returns in riskier assets.The latest inflation data may increase the chances of the Federal Reserve cutting rates later this year. With growth concerns still lingering and inflation cooling, pressure is mounting on the Fed to support the economy further. That said, the Fed has been cautious, and investors are closely watching upcoming economic indicators for clearer guidance.A weaker dollar—partly driven by discussions between the U.S. and South Korea over currency policies—has also added to market speculation on Fed actions. A falling dollar typically supports gold prices, but it hasn't been enough to hold prices up this week.The broader precious metals market showed mixed results. Silver prices edged slightly lower, reflecting similar sentiment to gold. However, platinum and palladium prices moved higher, suggesting that some industrial demand remains resilient even amid broader uncertainty.This divergence points to a complex market environment where investor demand and industrial use are influencing metals in different ways.Despite the short-term dip, gold remains up about 20% in 2025, having previously surged to a record high above $3,500 per ounce last month. That rally was fueled by earlier fears that the U.S.-China conflict would drag down global growth or trigger inflation.Now, with those fears easing and inflation cooling, gold's momentum may slow—but not disappear. If the Fed moves to cut rates or if new tensions flare, gold could rebound sharply.Gold prices are dropping due to weaker U.S. inflation and easing trade tensions.Lower interest rates make gold more attractive since it doesn't pay interest.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
24 minutes ago
- Time of India
India expects EU trade deal by year end as Cyprus pledges support
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel India expects to finalise a free trade agreement with the European Union by the end of this year, Prime Minister Narendra Modi said on Monday, while Cyprus, which assumes the EU presidency in 2026, said better ties would be its on an official visit to the east Mediterranean island, said there were unlimited possibilities in expanding economic ties with Cyprus in a visit aimed at pushing forward India's global trade agenda."We are working on finalising a mutually beneficial India-EU trade agreement by the end of this year," Modi said in joint remarks with Cypriot President Nikos is pursuing a trade link by sea and rail known as the India-Middle East-Europe Corridor , but the visit is being held in the shadow of an escalating crisis in the Middle East."We agree the India - Middle East Europe Corridor will pave the way for peace and prosperity in the region," Modi which has close relations with India through its shared membership of the Commonwealth, is offering facilities to be a first point of entry to Europe and a transhipment hub, Christodoulides said."A strengthening of EU-India relations will be among the priorities of the Cypriot EU presidency," Christodoulides said. Cyprus assumes the rotating six-month presidency of the bloc in early 2026.
Mint
29 minutes ago
- Mint
Barry Eichengreen: Is the US Federal Reserve's independence at threat?
The independence of the US Federal Reserve is back in the spotlight. Late last month, Fed Chair Jerome Powell met at the White House with President Donald Trump 'to discuss economic developments," as the Fed antiseptically put it in a post-meeting statement. Market participants will wonder what went on. Held at the president's request, the meeting was exceptional but not unprecedented. Fed chairs have met with presidents on occasion, although those occasions generally were less than propitious. In 1965, William McChesney Martin met with Lyndon B. Johnson at LBJ's Texas ranch. Johnson worried that a Fed interest-rate hike had created headwinds for growth, and anticipated a challenging midterm election. Also Read: Powell versus Trump: Why Fed independence matters in times of turmoil Johnson confronted the Fed chair physically as well as verbally, using his considerable girth to pin Martin to a wall. The impact on Fed policy is disputed to this day. President Richard Nixon met with his Fed Chair Arthur Burns on scores of occasions, regularly pressing him to pursue expansionary monetary policies, which Burns obligingly did. In 1984, with another election looming, Ronald Reagan summoned Paul Volcker to the White House, where James Baker, the president's chief of staff, instructed Volcker not to raise rates. Ben Bernanke met repeatedly with George W. Bush during the Global Financial Crisis, when cooperation to prevent collapse of the financial system was imperative. Powell himself dined with Trump at the White House in 2019. Periodic meetings pose no threat to central bank independence. Independence requires accountability. And in describing the Fed's priorities and general outlook to the president, the Fed chair is demonstrating accountability to the public. But as in the case of Nixon and Burns, a president who regularly harangues the Fed chair, specifically over interest-rate policy, threatens that independence. Also Read: The US-China trade truce doesn't solve the Fed's headache Trump has, of course, repeatedly criticized the Fed's interest-rate decisions. The post-meeting statement issued by the Fed was careful to say that 'expectations for monetary policy" were not discussed. So far so good, assuming the statement can be taken at face value. The second event raising questions about Fed independence was the Supreme Court's 22 May decision in Trump vs Wilcox in which the court granted an administration request to allow the president to fire members of independent government agencies such as the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which oversees union elections and labour laws. Technically, the court paused a lower court ruling that would have stayed the president's power of dismissal, suggesting that presidential discretion is justified because NLRB members 'exercise considerable executive power." In other words, they are de facto members of the executive branch, subordinate to the president. This logic would appear to put the Federal Reserve squarely in Trump's crosshairs. Also Read: Barry Eichengreen: Trump is taking aim at the IMF, World Bank and US Fed But in a 6-3 ruling, the six-member majority on the court explicitly exempted the Fed. 'The Federal Reserve," the justices reasoned, 'is a uniquely structured, quasi-private entity that follows in the distinct historical tradition of the First and Second Banks of the United States." This argument might be seen as providing strong support for Fed independence, except that it is illiterate, illogical and ahistorical. The First and Second Banks of the US, which executed limited functions on behalf of the government between 1791 and 1836, were private banks, full stop. Along with providing depository services to the government, they competed with other banks, extending commercial loans. There was nothing quasi about their private status. In contrast, the Federal Reserve Board—if we assume that's what the justices mean when they write 'Federal Reserve"—is made up of seven presidentially-appointed public servants. The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), responsible for interest-rate policy, includes those seven board members and five regional Reserve Bank presidents, who are appointed by Reserve Bank directors, subject to the approval of the Federal Reserve Board. The regional Reserve Banks come closest to being 'quasi-private,' because private citizens serve on their boards. But to argue that the same is true of the FOMC or the Federal Reserve System as a whole is a non sequitur. Also Read: The Fed's 'Mission Impossible' is now 'Mission Accomplished' Beyond the Fed's governance is the scope of its authority. The First and Second Banks of the US lacked statutory authority to regulate banks, a key public-policy mandate of the Federal Reserve. In justifying its decision, the majority cited an earlier ruling, Seila Law LLC vs Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, in which the court affirmed the president's power to remove the heads of agencies led by a single director and not a board. That decision included a footnote that the Second Bank and the Fed 'can claim a special historical status." But it provided no legal basis for that statement, and no judgment of validity of the claim. The note reads like a ChatGPT hallucination. Removing checks on presidential powers while arbitrarily exempting the Fed opens the door to arbitrarily not exempting the US central bank. Advocates of Fed independence should be worried. Maybe that's what Trump and Powell talked about. ©2025/Project Syndicate The author is professor of economics and political science at the University of California, Berkeley, and the author, most recently, of 'In Defense of Public Debt'
Mint
31 minutes ago
- Mint
Gold prices cross ₹1 lakh mark: Can they rise further? Experts share short-term targets
Gold prices today surged to a historic high in the domestic futures market, as rising geopolitical tensions between Israel and Iran reignited global risk aversion. On the Multi Commodity Exchange (MCX), gold August futures briefly touched an unprecedented level of ₹ 1,01,078 per 10 grams before stabilising around ₹ 1,00,290 by mid-morning on June 16. While the latest flare-up in the Middle East—marked by fresh hostilities between Israel and Iran—lent strength to global safe-haven demand, gains were tempered by the strengthening US dollar and cautious investor sentiment ahead of the US Federal Reserve's policy decision scheduled for June 18. Israel has launched renewed military action against Iran, escalating fears of an all-out regional conflict, which, according to Manav Modi, Senior Analyst at Motilal Oswal Financial Services, has pushed investors towards safe-haven assets, with domestic gold hovering around ₹ 1 lakh and international prices near $3,500 an ounce. The US has warned of potential involvement, and Israel has declared a state of emergency. This geopolitical uncertainty has sharply increased the risk premium across markets. Modi added that US inflation data has come in softer than expected, yet the Producer Price Index (PPI) slightly exceeded estimates, reflecting a mixed macroeconomic environment. Aksha Kamboj, Vice President of the India Bullion and Jewellers Association, said that the renewed tensions have overshadowed the recent positive US CPI report, reducing the chances of an imminent Fed rate cut. She warned that any collapse in nuclear negotiations between Iran and the US could trigger another spike in gold prices. Additionally, investor attention is also fixed on the upcoming US Federal Reserve policy decision. Despite cooling inflation, the Fed is expected to maintain a cautious stance due to uncertainties surrounding US tariff policies and global trade dynamics. NS Ramaswamy, Head of the Commodity Desk at Ventura Securities, noted that gold is benefiting from "risk-off" sentiment. He added that global central banks are on track to accumulate more than 1,000 metric tons of gold in 2025—marking the fourth consecutive year of robust official sector buying, underscoring gold's role as a strategic hedge. Colin Shah, Managing Director of Kama Jewelry, pointed out that the weakening rupee is further fueling domestic gold prices. Although prices crossed ₹ 1 lakh, Shah expects resistance in the short term and anticipates some correction amid volatility. He projects gold to trade between ₹ 1,00,200 and ₹ 1,00,500 in the near term, with medium-term direction contingent on global developments. From a technical standpoint, Ventura's Ramaswamy sees key resistance for COMEX gold at $3,476 and forecasts a potential surge to $3,540 if current momentum sustains. On MCX, August gold futures are supported at ₹ 98,900, with potential upside targets around ₹ 1,02,000 in the short term, provided geopolitical risks persist. In international markets, support levels are seen at $3,400 and $3,345, while short-term bullish targets remain intact as long as safe-haven flows dominate market sentiment.
