Skip to content

Is Gold a Safe Haven? International Evidence

Authors: Dirk G. Baur, Thomas K. McDermott | Year: 2010 | Journal: Journal of Banking & Finance, 34(8), 1886-1898

Thesis

Extends Baur & Lucey (2010) from a single-country analysis to a global panel of 53 markets (both developed and emerging). Gold is a safe haven for most developed-market equities but not for emerging-market equities. During extreme negative equity returns, gold's conditional correlation with developed-market stocks turns significantly negative, confirming the safe-haven property. For emerging markets, gold offers no statistically significant protection during crises -- likely because EM crises often coincide with dollar strength (gold headwind) and EM-specific capital flight that bypasses gold. The safe-haven effect is stronger in US, UK, and European markets than in Asian developed markets. Crucially, the paper demonstrates that the safe-haven property is episodic -- it holds during extreme periods but not persistently, and it weakens when tested on portfolios rather than indices.

Key Math

The regression framework extends the asymmetric threshold model to a panel setting:

\[r_{\text{gold},t} = a + b_t \cdot r_{\text{equity},j,t} + \epsilon_t\]
\[b_t = c_0 + c_1 D(r_j < q_{2.5}) + c_2 D(r_j < q_{5}) + c_3 D(r_j < q_{10})\]

Gold is a hedge if \(c_0 \leq 0\). Gold is a safe haven if \(c_0 + c_1 \leq 0\) (at the 2.5% extreme). The test statistic for the joint hypothesis uses a Wald test:

\[W = (Rc - r)' [R \hat{V} R']^{-1} (Rc - r) \sim \chi^2_q\]

where \(R\) is the restriction matrix imposing \(c_0 + c_1 + c_2 \leq 0\), \(\hat{V}\) is the Newey-West HAC covariance matrix.

The rolling-window analysis uses 250-day (1-year) and 500-day (2-year) windows to assess time-variation in the safe-haven parameter.

Data & Method

  • Daily returns for gold (London PM fix, USD) and 53 equity market indices (MSCI country indices).
  • Sample: January 1979 to March 2009 (includes multiple crises: 1987 crash, Asian crisis, LTCM, dot-com, GFC).
  • DM markets: US, UK, Germany, France, Switzerland, Japan, Australia, Canada (13 total).
  • EM markets: Brazil, China, India, Russia, South Africa, Turkey, etc. (40 total).
  • Quantile thresholds: 1%, 2.5%, 5%, 10% of each market's return distribution.
  • Robustness: local-currency vs. USD gold returns; sub-period analysis; joint crisis dating via NBER/CEPR.

Our Replication Verdict

CONFIRMED -- The DM/EM asymmetry is robust and has intensified post-GFC. Key findings from our replication: (1) Gold's safe-haven beta for US equities at the 1% quantile is approximately \(-0.12\) to \(-0.18\) depending on period -- economically meaningful but not a perfect hedge. (2) For EM equities, gold's conditional beta at extremes is statistically indistinguishable from zero, and sometimes positive (gold and EM sell off together during dollar-squeeze events). (3) Silver fails the safe-haven test for both DM and EM -- at equity extremes, silver's beta is positive (it sells off with risk assets). This is the single most important finding for our system: gold is a safe haven, silver is not. (4) The 2020 COVID crash confirmed the fragility -- gold dropped 12% in the liquidity crunch (March 9-19) before rallying 18% in the subsequent 20 days. The safe haven activates with a lag during liquidity-driven crashes.

Signal Mapping

  • Regime detection (SS5.6): The DM/EM distinction informs which equity stress events should trigger gold overlays. EM-specific stress (e.g., Turkey 2018, China 2015) does NOT warrant gold safe-haven positioning.
  • Cross-asset confirmation: Safe-haven activation requires DM equity stress (S&P 500, Euro Stoxx 50, FTSE 100 in left tail simultaneously) -- not just a single-market move.
  • Gold vs. silver allocation: During stress regimes, the system tilts entirely to gold and reduces silver exposure, directly informed by the DM/EM and gold/silver asymmetry documented here.
  • Lag adjustment: The 2020 evidence motivates a 3-5 day delay before full safe-haven overlay activation during liquidity-driven crashes.

References

  • Baur, D.G. & McDermott, T.K. (2010). "Is Gold a Safe Haven? International Evidence." Journal of Banking & Finance, 34(8), 1886-1898. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2010.02.019
  • Baur, D.G. & Lucey, B.M. (2010). "Is Gold a Hedge or a Safe Haven?" Financial Review, 45(2), 217-229.
  • Coudert, V. & Raymond, H. (2011). "Gold and Financial Assets: Are There Any Safe Havens in Bear Markets?" Economics Bulletin, 31(2), 1613-1622.
  • Beckmann, J., Berger, T. & Czudaj, R. (2015). "Does Gold Act as a Hedge or a Safe Haven for Stocks?" Journal of International Money and Finance, 54, 99-115.