
Buy the dip in gold? Rupee range & Fed impact explained
Excerpts:
On Gold and Silver Correction
Q. Last week, both metals experienced heavy profit taking. How much of this correction can be attributed to the rebound in the dollar index and the US-Japan trade development?
Anindya Banerjee:
The relationship between bullion and the dollar index is strong. In addition, interest rate expectations from the Federal Reserve play an important role. Regarding the trade deals, the US recently signed important agreements with Japan and the European Union, and there has been a 90-day extension in the de-escalation between China and the US. These developments create a more stable policy environment, which has supported the dollar index and put downward pressure on gold and silver prices. This is the primary impact of the trade deals on the market as reflected in the dollar index movement.
Near-Term Outlook for Precious Metals
Q. With the Fed's upcoming policy decision and the August 1st US tariff deadline, what is the near-term outlook for precious metals? Could we see a sharp reversal?
Anindya Banerjee:
Since the crash in April and the unfolding of the Trump tariff drama, the market's expectation for Fed rate cuts has changed significantly. In April, market participants anticipated a reduction of 75 to 100 basis points, but that has now been revised to just a 25-basis-point cut by year-end. This change has supported the dollar index. In the current meeting, no rate cut is expected for July, though pressure may build on the Fed from August onward, particularly as the Trump administration continues to push for more aggressive cuts. However, given the high fiscal deficit and robust asset markets across various asset classes—even with looming tariff-induced inflation, it appears unlikely for the Fed to initiate significant cuts soon.
For gold, currently in a sideways correction since September, the price range is roughly $3,250 to $3,450 per ounce. On MCX, a key support level is around ₹97,000–₹97,300. Should this support break, gold prices could fall toward $3,250 (or approximately ₹95,000 on MCX). Positional traders should be patient and ready for potential erosion in price toward the lower bound. Silver, meanwhile, might outperform gold in this environment, partly due to its alignment with a strong base metals market.
Live Events
Impact of the Dollar Index and Emerging Market Currencies
Q. With the dollar index rebounding from three-week lows and showing high volatility, do you expect further strength? How might that affect gold prices and emerging market currencies like the rupee?
Anindya Banerjee:
The US dollar index looks poised for a significant rebound, potentially pushing above 102. The decline of earlier expectations that the Fed would implement significant rate cuts, which once drove the dollar index down from nearly 109 to 97, has now reversed. Moreover, the market currently exhibits heavy short positions, suggesting the potential for a short squeeze if a triggering event occurs. Under these conditions, unless a major global risk-off episode further accelerates the dollar's strength, we expect the index to remain largely sideways. This environment supports the notion of a sideways correction in gold prices.
USD-INR and Trade Developments
Q. The rupee has been weak lately, partly due to a domestic equity sell-off and stalled US-India trade talks. What is your view on the USD-INR for the coming week, especially in light of Fed policy risks?
Anindya Banerjee:
The uncertainty around trade negotiations between India and the US is weighing on the rupee, compounded by limited capital inflows. While there have been some debt inflows, equity markets are still facing outflows, and FDI figures have declined. Furthermore, the RBI's intervention by buying dollars helps support the lower side of the rupee. Presently, the technical range for the rupee is about 85–87 per USD. A breakout above 87 would be significant and could trigger an all-time high above 88. However, given that a trade deal with the US appears likely—reinforced by additional agreements such as the recent India-UK FTA, the rupee may find further support, keeping it within the current range.
Geopolitical Concerns and Commodity Markets
Q. There is significant tension between Thailand and Cambodia right now, along with other unresolved global trade issues. Could geopolitical concerns lend new support to gold and silver despite the recent corrections?
Anindya Banerjee:
Geopolitical tensions could impact gold and silver prices, but only if they reach a significant magnitude, similar to conflicts involving Israel and Iran or Ukraine and Russia. In the case of Cambodia and Thailand, while the situation is unfortunate, it does not currently have a global impact strong enough to influence bullion prices significantly. Moreover, even when geopolitics play a role, such impacts tend to be short-lived, lasting one to two days before fading.
Broader Commodity Trends
Q. What can we expect this week for bullion and other commodities?
Anindya Banerjee:
For bullion, silver appears attractive at its current levels (around ₹1,13,000–₹1,14,000) as medium-term players might consider accumulating longs. Gold should be viewed as a buy on dips, provided buyers are prepared for potential price drops to around ₹95,000 on MCX if key support breaks. On the broader commodity front, copper and aluminum seem promising, while oil is expected to remain range bound.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Hindustan Times
a minute ago
- Hindustan Times
How One Big Private-Equity Fund Makes Its Numbers Incomprehensible
Many fund managers strive to be transparent with their financial disclosures. Others are so obstructive that they might as well be kicking sand in investors' faces. While private equity is synonymous with opacity, the tricks of the trade are taking on greater importance as the industry seeks to broaden its reach among ordinary investors. President Trump last week signed an order seeking to open up Americans' class="backlink" data-vars-page-type="story" data-vars-link-type="Manual" data-vars-anchor-text="401(k) retirement accounts">401(k) retirement accounts to private equity and other alternative investments. Rep. Elise Stefanik (R., N.Y.) made headlines when she asked the Securities and Exchange Commission in June to investigate the way Harvard is valuing its private-equity holdings. To date, private equity has generally been the domain of institutions and high-net-worth individuals with long-term investment horizons and a high tolerance for risk and illiquidity. Less wealthy, ordinary investors have traditionally had only limited access. Their ability to participate has been growing, however, as more funds register with securities regulators and publicly disclose their financial reports. The funds may invest directly in other private-equity funds, or purchase stakes in them on the secondary market from existing investors. Such funds should, at a minimum, allow investors to see how much each private-equity holding originally cost and compare that with its latest carrying value. Some funds are making this exercise difficult. This is particularly problematic in light of recent controversies over some of the industry's valuation methods. Among the hottest flashpoints: Some funds have exploited an accounting loophole by buying stakes in other private-equity funds at big discounts on the secondary market and then marking them up immediately to their official net asset values. Sometimes the technique has resulted in gains of 1,000% or more in a single day. At many funds, such markups are at least easy to spot. The funds include clear, user-friendly tables in their financial reports that show each investment's cost, the latest fair value and the acquisition date. These data points are required disclosures under federal securities rules. Showing them alongside one another makes comparisons simple. In its latest annual report, Partners Group Private Equity (Master Fund) listed the cost figures for its private-equity investments in a footnote that spanned three pages. This is the second page of the footnote. But other funds make comparisons complicated, if not impossible, by listing the cost figures in lengthy footnotes, rather than in the main tables. The only way to determine the size of the markups is to manually match the costs for each investment (in the footnote) with the latest fair values listed on the disclosure table. Even that doesn't always for instance Partners Group Private Equity (Master Fund), which last reported almost $16 billion of net assets. It is the largest SEC-registered private-equity fund, according to Interval Fund Tracker. Individuals investing in the fund must meet certain minimum financial criteria. To exit from the fund, investors submit redemption requests during designated tender periods. The schedule of investments in the fund's latest annual report listed 1,089 individual private-equity investments in a table that included the fair value and acquisition date for each. In a footnote to that table, however, it listed 1,095 different cost figures. That is six more cost figures than there were investments. The footnote spanned three pages, single-spaced. In other words, there is no way someone reading the annual report could determine which cost figure applied to which investment—and no way to gauge which investments might have fishy markups. A review of previous reports showed the Partners Group fund sometimes had done this before. Regarding the cost-figure mismatch in the latest annual report, Partners Group spokeswoman Jenny Blinch said that 'there were a handful of investments to which the fund made follow-on investments in the same security,' and the cost figures listed for these in the footnote 'were disaggregated into the individual transactions.' After receiving questions about the practice, Blinch also said the fund plans 'to start including investment costs in the main table of the schedule of investments, alongside entry dates and current valuations.' The fund accounted for about 10% of Switzerland-based Partners Group's assets under management at year-end. A Wall Street Journal review of disclosures by other similar funds showed they use the same footnote technique. At those funds, however, it was at least possible to match costs to the corresponding investments. That is because the number of cost figures in the footnotes aligns with the number of disclosed investments. These include private-markets funds run by well-known managers such as Hamilton Lane, Franklin Resources, Coller Capital, Pantheon, Pomona and FlowStone. Ares Private Markets Fund's annual report shows cost figures in the main disclosure table, not a footnote. It bought stakes in 51 different private-equity funds on the secondary market on March 31, 2025, the last day of its fiscal year. The total cost was $330 million, and the Ares fund marked them up the same day to $377 million. The biggest percentage markup for a single investment was 57%, and the cumulative $47 million of paper gains that day amounted to 12% of the fund's total unrealized gains for the entire year. Ares ensured outsiders could at least look up those numbers. Anyone trying the same exercise with the Partners Group fund's last annual report would be stymied. Investors would be fair in suspecting that something here doesn't add up. Write to Jonathan Weil at
&w=3840&q=100)

First Post
a minute ago
- First Post
Not invited to Alaska, Zelenskyy heads to Berlin for Trump-Europe virtual meeting
Sidelined in the Alaska summit, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has arrived in Germany to join European partners in a meeting with US President Donald Trump. Together, the European leaders will press Trump to not sell out their interests in any deal with Vladimir Putin. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz walks with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the Chancellery in Berlin, Germany, May 28, 2025. (Photo: Annegret Hilse/Reuters) Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy travelled to Berlin on Wednesday for a German-hosted virtual meeting with Donald Trump and European leaders, two days before the US president meets Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska. Europe's leaders are trying to drive home the perils of selling out Kyiv's interests at the first US-Russia summit since 2021. Trump has said the Alaska talks will be a 'feel-out' meeting as he pursues a ceasefire in Moscow's war on Ukraine, having said last week, to consternation in Kyiv and Europe, that any deal would involve 'some swapping of territories'. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Zelenskyy will meet German Chancellor Friedrich Merz before a video conference with the leaders of Germany, Finland, France, Britain, Italy, Poland and the European Union at 2 pm (1200 GMT), the hosts said. Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte will also attend. Trump and Vice President JD Vance will join the call at 3 pm (1300 GMT). Europe and Kyiv fear unpredictable Alaska deal The unpredictability of the summit in Alaska has fuelled Europeans' fears that the US and Russia could take far-reaching decisions over their heads and even seek to coerce Ukraine into an unfavourable deal. 'We are focusing now to ensure that it does not happen — engaging with US partners and staying coordinated and united on the European side. Still a lot of time until Friday,' said one senior official from Eastern Europe. European leaders, wary of angering Trump, have repeatedly said they welcome his efforts while stressing that there should be no deal about Ukraine —almost a fifth of which Russia has occupied— without Ukraine's participation. Trump's administration tempered expectations on Tuesday for major progress toward a ceasefire, calling his meeting with Putin in Alaska a 'listening exercise'. Trump's agreement last week to the summit with Putin was an abrupt shift after weeks of voicing frustration with Putin for resisting the US peace initiative. Trump said his envoy had made 'great progress' at talks in Moscow. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Half a dozen senior European officials told Reuters that they see a risk of a deal being struck that is unfavourable for Europe and Ukraine's security. They said European unity would be vital if that happened. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Tuesday the summit would be a 'listening exercise' for Trump to hear what it would take to get to a deal. After the meeting with Trump, the 'coalition of the willing', a group of countries working on plans to support Ukraine in the event of a ceasefire, will also convene online. Battlefield pressure mounts on Ukraine A Gallup poll released last week found that 69 per cent of Ukrainians favour a negotiated end to the war as soon as possible. But polls also indicate Ukrainians do not want peace at any cost if that means crushing concessions. Ahead of the calls, Zelenskyy said it would be impossible for Kyiv to agree to a deal that would require it to withdraw its troops from the eastern Donbas region, a large swathe of which is already occupied by Russia. That, he told reporters on Tuesday, would deprive Ukraine of a vast defensive network in the region, easing the way for a Russian push deeper into Ukraine in the future. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD He said territorial issues could only be discussed once a ceasefire was in place and Ukraine had received security guarantees. Moscow's troops have recently ramped up pressure on the battlefield, tightening their stranglehold on the cities of Pokrovsk and Kostyantynivka in eastern Ukraine. (This is a wire copy. Except for the headline, the copy has not been edited by Firstpost staff.)


Hindustan Times
a minute ago
- Hindustan Times
Why China Loves and Fears Nvidia's H20 Chip
U.S. export controls on Nvidia's artificial-intelligence chips have been at the center of U.S.-China trade negotiations for months, yet it appears China is discouraging its companies from buying one of them: the H20s. Why? Sales of the chips to Chinese companies helped get China to agree to reboot its exports to the U.S. of rare-earth minerals used in cars, electronics and other products, according to U.S. officials. In more recent days, the Trump administration extracted an unprecedented 15% cut of chip sales to China by Nvidia and AMD in exchange for granting the companies export licenses, which could result in billions of dollars for the U.S. government. Beijing wants access to advanced Nvidia chips because its companies need them to help train state-of-the-art AI. The H20 isn't advanced enough to train large AI models, but it is one of the best chips on the market for powering inference, the ability of AI programs to tap their training to respond to user prompts. Still, Nvidia can't sell its most powerful chips used for AI training to China because of U.S. export controls. Chinese authorities are also worried about becoming too reliant on U.S. technology. They have repeatedly pushed domestic chip users to support Chinese chip makers whenever possible so that—eventually—the country can be self-reliant. China's Huawei and a few other companies already have chips that are useful for AI inference, similar to what Nvidia's H20 chips can do. But there are other obstacles. China's biggest issue with making chips for AI training is that its access to advanced chip-making equipment and other technology has been blocked by U.S. export controls that seek to maintain America's technology edge. That means even if they have good chip designs, they can hardly produce at scale. China's best chip manufacturer uses less advanced machines, keeping yields relatively low. Chinese engineers say companies often get hooked on Nvidia's software and tools, making them reluctant to switch to other vendors. Since the Trump administration relaxed controls on the H20 chip in July, major Chinese tech companies have ordered at least 700,000 of the chips, according to people familiar with the matter. The strong demand has prompted Nvidia to change course and arrange capacity with its contract manufacturer to make new H20s to meet the demand, the people said. Nvidia initially planned to use only existing inventory to fulfill orders. Nvidia declined to comment on its inventories or manufacturing plans. Some Chinese AI chip makers told officials in Beijing that U.S. export controls on chips had pushed Chinese companies to adopt homegrown alternatives faster and accelerate self-reliance. Trump's reversal, which will allow Nvidia chips to once again flow to China, could stymie that pace of improvement, they said. Some have also expressed skepticism about the security of Nvidia products. In late July, China's cyberspace regulator summoned Nvidia representatives to discuss alleged 'backdoor' security risks around the H20 chips, including the ability to track chip location and the possibility of a 'kill switch' in the chips that would be operable under U.S. orders. Chinese officials have also raised concerns over proposed U.S. legislation seeking to add tracking capabilities for advanced chips sold abroad. Nvidia and others in the industry have lobbied against the bill. The White House has said it wants to study chip tracking but hasn't weighed in on the legislation specifically. Chinese authorities have demanded that Nvidia go through a cybersecurity review before resuming shipments of the H20, according to people familiar with the matter. The authorities have told Nvidia's biggest Chinese customers, including Alibaba and TikTok parent ByteDance, not to buy Nvidia's H20s until the U.S. company clears the review, the people said. Nvidia has said there is no backdoor risk. 'Cybersecurity is critically important to us,' a company spokesman told The Wall Street Journal on Tuesday, reiterating that Nvidia chips don't have backdoors. 'The H20 is not a military product or for government infrastructure. China has ample supply of domestic chips to meet its needs. It won't and never has relied on American chips for government operations, just like the U.S. government would not rely on chips from China,' Nvidia's spokesman said. 'We hope to resume sales to approved commercial customers soon. Banning the sale of H20 in China would only harm U.S. economic and technology leadership with zero national-security benefit.' Write to Raffaele Huang at and Robbie Whelan at