Goldman Sachs has cut its year-end gold price target to $4,900 per ounce from what had been one of Wall Street’s most aggressive bullish calls, stripping $500 off the forecast after the Federal Reserve’s first meeting under Chairman Kevin Warsh made clear that rate cuts are off the table for 2026 and hikes may be next.

The revision marks a significant tactical retreat by the bank that told investors to “go for gold” in late 2024. Goldman still calls itself structurally bullish, but the shift in Fed posture under Warsh has forced a recalibration of near-term risk that metals investors cannot afford to ignore.

Gold was already down about 1.5% on the day, per market commentary, at the time the Bloomberg report on the Goldman note was published Friday morning. The metal has struggled in recent months as a Middle East war initially lifted energy prices and stoked expectations for tighter monetary policy. Now, with the Fed signaling growing support for hikes this year, the headwinds have sharpened.

What Goldman Actually Said

Analysts Lina Thomas and Daan Struyven, the pair behind Goldman’s commodities research on bullion, framed the downgrade in carefully hedged language:

“Our gold price views remain structurally constructive but tactically cautious, with near-term downside risk and medium-term upside risk.”

Related Posts
Fed rate hikes may run deeper than Wall Street expected

That sentence does a lot of work. “Structurally constructive” keeps the long-term thesis intact. “Tactically cautious” is the operative phrase for anyone managing a position today. The distinction matters because it tells you Goldman hasn’t abandoned its secular gold view. It has, however, acknowledged that the monetary policy backdrop has changed beneath its feet.

The cut was driven by two linked factors. First, Goldman’s own economists pushed back their expectations for U.S. rate cuts to June and December of next year. Previously, they had penciled in cuts for December 2026 and March 2027. That delay alone reshapes the calculus for gold-backed ETF inflows, which Goldman now expects to be lower.

Second, and more consequential, is the downside scenario the analysts laid out. If the Fed were to hike rates, Thomas and Struyven warned that “demand for gold as a macro policy hedge could unwind more persistently,” with prices falling to $4,400 by year-end. That is a $500 gap below even the revised base case, and it reflects a world where gold’s role as a hedge against policy uncertainty actually works against it when policy tightens credibly.

The Warsh Factor

The catalyst behind all of this is Kevin Warsh’s debut as Fed chairman. Appointed by President Trump, Warsh had been expected by some to bring a more accommodative posture. As we covered in detail when Warsh’s hawkish debut jolted the bond market, the opposite happened. His first meeting was described as “surprisingly hawkish,” with Warsh vowing to restore price stability. The Fed held rates unchanged, but the messaging tilted hard toward further tightening.

That hawkish tilt created an awkward dynamic. Trump had repeatedly lashed out at Warsh’s predecessor for not slashing rates enough. Now his own appointee is presiding over a Fed that is openly discussing hikes. Rob Kaplan, Goldman’s vice chairman and a former Dallas Fed president, told Bloomberg Television this week that the Fed may need to raise rates as soon as September if inflation remains elevated.

Kaplan’s remark is worth pausing on. He is not a sitting Fed official, but he is a former regional Fed president now embedded at the same bank issuing the gold downgrade. His willingness to float a September hike publicly, even as a conditional, signals that Goldman’s internal view of the rate path has shifted materially.

Goldman had been one of the most consistently bullish and high-profile voices on bullion in recent years. In late 2024, the bank advised investors to “go for gold,” a call that correctly anticipated a major rally. That track record gave the bank’s gold calls outsized influence in the market. A $500 haircut from that same desk carries weight precisely because of the credibility earned on the way up.

Why the ETF Channel Matters

Goldman’s revised forecast hinges partly on lower expected inflows into gold-backed ETFs. This is the mechanism that connects Fed policy to gold prices most directly for Western investors. When rate expectations shift higher, the opportunity cost of holding a non-yielding asset like gold rises. Money flows out of bullion ETFs and into instruments that now offer better risk-adjusted returns at the short end of the curve.

The pattern is not new. Newsmax reported on a similar episode in 2013, when Morgan Stanley joined Goldman, UBS, and others in slashing gold forecasts as the Fed signaled tapering. That year, investors sold 537.3 metric tons from bullion-backed exchange-traded products, erasing more than $55 billion in fund values. Gold fell 23% that year, its worst annual drop in more than three decades.

The parallel is instructive but imperfect. In 2013, gold was coming off a speculative blow-off top in a market driven largely by post-crisis QE flows. Today’s gold market sits at much higher nominal levels and is supported by a broader base of central bank buying and geopolitical hedging demand that did not exist a decade ago. Still, the ETF channel remains a transmission mechanism that responds reliably to rate expectations, and Goldman is betting that mechanism will weigh on prices from here.

As we explored in our analysis of gold hitting a six-month low despite rising inflation, the metal can sell off even when the inflation case for owning it appears strong. The reason is usually the same: real yields and rate expectations matter more to price action in the short run than the inflation narrative does.

The Structural Case Hasn’t Disappeared

Goldman’s note is not a capitulation. A $4,900 year-end target still implies the bank expects gold to hold at historically elevated levels. The analysts explicitly preserved their medium-term upside view. What changed is timing and near-term risk, not the underlying thesis about gold’s role in a world of fiscal excess and geopolitical fragmentation.

That distinction is important for readers thinking about positioning. A $500 cut from a Wall Street forecast is a headline event. But it is not the same thing as a fundamental regime change in gold’s supply-demand picture or its monetary function. Goldman is telling its clients to be cautious now and patient later. The structural drivers they have cited in the past, including central bank accumulation, de-dollarization trends, and fiscal sustainability concerns, were not repudiated in this note.

The real question is whether the Fed follows through. If Warsh’s hawkishness turns out to be credible and sustained, gold faces a genuine headwind from rising real yields and a stronger dollar. If inflation remains sticky enough to prevent hikes, or if the economy softens under the weight of tighter financial conditions, the rate path could shift again. Goldman’s own rate-cut timeline of June and December next year suggests the bank expects easing to resume eventually, just not soon.

For investors who accumulated gold during the rally Goldman correctly called in late 2024, the message is not to panic. It is to recognize that the tailwind from expected rate cuts has been pulled forward and replaced, at least temporarily, by the opposite force. As we noted in our coverage of gold dropping below $4,200 on a hot CPI print, these recalibrations can be sharp but do not necessarily mark trend reversals.

What to Watch From Here

Several variables will determine whether Goldman’s base case or its downside scenario proves closer to reality:

  • September Fed meeting: Kaplan flagged this as a possible inflection point for a rate hike if inflation stays elevated. Any move toward tightening would pressure gold further.
  • ETF flows: Goldman’s lower inflow forecast is the mechanical driver of the price cut. If outflows accelerate, the downside scenario gains probability.
  • Warsh’s credibility arc: The new chairman’s hawkish debut set the tone, but sustaining that posture through political pressure and economic data will be the real test. As we discussed in our piece on Warsh’s quiet Fed and what it signals for gold, the gap between rhetoric and action is where the opportunity lies for metals investors.
  • Inflation trajectory: The Middle East conflict’s impact on energy prices has already shaped rate expectations. Whether that inflationary impulse persists or fades will determine how much room the Fed has to hold, cut, or hike.

Goldman’s $4,900 target is a number. What matters more is the framework behind it: a world where the Fed is no longer the gold market’s friend, at least not this year. That is a real change in the policy backdrop, and it deserves a real adjustment in expectations.

But policy regimes shift. They always do. And the same fiscal arithmetic that made Goldman bullish on gold in the first place has not improved just because the Fed found a new chairman willing to talk tough. The deficit is still there. The debt is still compounding. The question is only whether the system can tolerate the medicine long enough for it to matter.