You had to pay a lot for your stock. Then something happened with investors toward Blackstone, Ares, and Apollo, where the market decided it loves these companies and will pay a premium—25 to 35 times, up to 50 times forward earnings for these private credit firms. My attitude last year was no thank you, so I was a bit cautious. But now if earnings are okay, it's still rich, but if these companies are down from 50 to 35 times, that's more comfortably in the range of the last five or six years. And they're paying 9% right now. BDCs pay 9%. Even with valuation concerns, you're making money back with that dividend. Whether you buy BDCs or the management companies, you're getting better value than last year. Moving to gold—I know I'm a broken record—we're seeing gold re-emerge as a leading global currency. What we saw in Venezuela reinforces geopolitical uncertainty, some generated by the US. It was a Biden administration that seized Russian assets; it was Trump that went into a South American country and surprised the world. The world is reminded daily that if the US government doesn't like what you're doing, you never know what they'll do. Central banks in China and India are not dollar-centric. As emerging markets grow, they'll buy more gold. These are crazy charts from gold history. The main point is when you have a paradigm change, you can't look backward. Gold isn't tethered to income, but it's a bearer asset increasingly in demand from emerging markets. The main point is when it changes, it moves by leaps and bounds, so don't expect a well-behaved chart. If you own it, don't be scared out of your position. It could correct 20% in a bull market, but all the trends will be the same in 2026, 2027, 2028—multi-year. For AI, we have a two-year compute shortage, so I'm comfortable with 2026 and 2027, but not sure after that. Whenever there are monopolies like Nvidia, competitors emerge. That was the DeepSeek concern. The visibility is not as long out there. I have more confidence that the gold bull run will last longer than the AI bull market. It's a global shift. It irritates me when people talk about inflation versus gold. Gold is a global asset. Last year we had a fall in inflation and a big rise in gold. The narrative missing is think global.
Before you get to India, can I ask you a precious metals question?
I can't not ask you about your thoughts on silver given how it's performed of late. I'm bullish on copper. I've never understood silver. It's appreciated way faster and more than gold. If it's in a reasonable proportion in your portfolio, I'll still have dinner with you, but it's just been too volatile over history, driven by industrial demand relative to investment demand. I view it as a pale competitor and a sign of exuberance. It's gone berserk, and so has copper. There may be real froth, which is a warning. So it sounds like you're saying gold is going through a permanent or secular repricing.
Do you believe silver is being repriced as well, forgetting about how high it could go?
Yes, to the extent you're forcing me. Niall Ferguson wrote an interesting piece comparing the world today to 1906. The main point is that developed markets are shrinking as a percentage of world GDP, and the world still wants a global currency. Gold was the global currency back then, not dominated by a world power. It's just going back to the way it was. Why fight it? Makes sense to me. I'll skip my India charts. I just articulated that India is going to become the size of Europe in 10 years. It had an off year last year, but I'm still pounding the table with high conviction. They did a lot of pro-business reforms. Valuations are high, but those companies are growing.
I want to save time for my favorite section, the beaten-up area. Go for it.
VanEck has been enthusiastic about Bitcoin since 2017. It's a reasonable companion to gold. But something fundamentally broke in the old Bitcoin cycle. Bitcoin's supply is capped, and every four years miners get half the Bitcoin. There was a four-year cycle where Bitcoin was the best asset for three years and worst for the fourth. You'll notice we haven't had three years of best performance. Bitcoin disappointed traditional investors and was the worst performing asset last year. The four-year cycle is broken. I'm concerned about 2026, which would have been a normal bad year. There should be more uncertainty around Bitcoin price predictions. I haven't changed my view on gold. Bitcoin is at 90,000 now. If it goes down to the 70s, that would be a great buy. We have a split view at VanEck. I want to let it rest for 3 to 6 months before getting very enthusiastic. I haven't sold any of my Bitcoin. In 2023, I pounded the table with both fists on gold and Bitcoin. Now maybe one fist on Bitcoin. It's corrected, but not more than that. There is an adjacent area in tokens and crypto that was wiped out last year. Most tokens were down 57% per an index. Ethereum is struggling. My colleagues are drooling at opportunities. One example is Hyperliquid, a decentralized offshore derivatives exchange. It generated $1.25 billion in revenue with a $26 billion market cap. If you find the right use case, there are values in tokens. There's a lot of damage in the crypto world, but opportunities exist.
Don't apologize. I wasn't bullish on some of these things 3 months ago, so at least there's that. I get people saying I need more bulls on my channel. I don't screen for bullishness; it's hard to find people who are bullish. It's great to have you telling that side of the story so empirically. Did you say you have an ETF for that crypto space?
Yes, our ETF ticker is NODE. It's actively managed. The portfolio manager Matt Siegel used to work with Cathie Wood. Because of ETF transparency, you can see what he owns and why.
That's fantastic. Does VanEck have an ETF for India?
We have two: GLIN for growth leaders, and DGIN for Digital India, focusing on tech.
You made a compelling case for a risk-on year. What worries do you have? Statistically, we've had two good years, and a four-peat is rare. Do you have concerns about the math?
Two things. First, a normal year includes a 10% sell-off. Even without macro surprises, you'll get volatility. Second, if profits rise 10%, investors might not chase higher PEs, so the market could be flat. Valuations are at historical highs; it's unlikely they go higher.
Cape ratios are at historic extremes. What about bonds for 2026?
You only get yields from bonds, and I want to get paid, so I'm a higher-yield BDC person. I don't see huge risks to the US economy, so I don't need investment-grade bonds with duration risk. We have CLO ETFs I like. I'm risk-on right now.
Given the mid-term election and affordability concerns, do you think the economy could perform well enough to swing the midterms toward the current administration?
It's hard to predict, but there's a scenario where the incumbent does okay. The key is people feeling better economically. Scott Bessent noted that tax refunds from tax breaks and no taxes on tips could boost income. Bessent runs the IRS, so he has visibility. I think they're conscious of the political cycle.
Thank you so much for these quarterly outlooks. Is there anything I haven't asked about?
I'd love to talk about Venezuela. In the next 10 years, we'll have four huge economies: US, Europe, China, India. Other countries must fit in. South America is realigning. If Venezuela transitions to a pro-market economy and Colombia moves right, South America could become pro-business. The gang situation there is unbelievable. Eight million refugees left Venezuela, affecting Colombia and Peru. In Peru, gangs are taking over mining, forestry, and agriculture. This is a humanitarian issue. Miami is the capital of South America. If things improve, Republicans might have more lock on Southern Florida. But it doesn't matter for markets—they can't turn on oil production overnight.
So it could have positive implications but not much for markets?
Correct. The only possible effect is added US unpredictability driving gold demand.
Assuming the US successfully revitalizes the Monroe Doctrine and helps South America become market-friendly, does that change your long-term outlook?
Good humanitarian, nothingburger economics. From a foreign policy perspective, the gang threat was real. Trump is a law-and-order president. That's the main point.
I appreciate you highlighting that. My sister lives in Colombia. The refugee crisis and crime are real. A lot of us don't fully understand.
People in the region don't want lawlessness. Bukele in El Salvador has been extreme on law and order. There's a regional sensibility now. The younger generation is more connected through crypto and social media. The trend toward law and order and pro-business will be interesting to watch.
Last question: where can people follow you?
On X (Twitter) as Jan Van Eck number three, and on LinkedIn. I post podcasts and videos. The VanEck website has our outlooks. I'll get you the deck to distribute.
Fantastic. Sign up at thoughtfulmoney.com/newsletter for the slides. Thank you, Jan. Happy New Year.
Now we bring in the lead partners from New Harbor Financial, John Loder and Mike Preston. Hope you had a wonderful holiday.
We did, Adam. Thank you. Great to be back.
Great to be with you, Adam. I still have my Christmas tree up—it's fake, but I've been busy.
I know you were busy at year-end. Thanks for making time. Jan was optimistic and risk-on. Mike, your reaction?
I really enjoyed Jan's talk. We're big fans of VanEck. Disclaimer: nothing is a recommendation. GDX is in our portfolio. We've seen a big move in miners, and we don't think it's over. We agree with Jan's risk-on view but may differ on the timeframe. We might see a blow-off top in the S&P, then crash risk. For tactical investors, watch for that big move. For passive, reduce equities to 30%. Jan said the Fed will have quick short interventions in crises. I'm not so sure—if a big crisis hits, it'll be the Fed constantly to the rescue. He talked about fiscal policy improving; I'm not sure about that data. The transcript ends here.
Guess that's true. We've been stuck here around 4.15 on the 10-year for a while. The housing market hasn't fallen apart, which is surprising when mortgage rates went from 3% to almost 7%. Rates doubled and housing prices went higher. The US has been handling these rates better. A 4% 10-year treasury is not out of the long-term norm. Inflation has been relatively behaved, employment softened, but it hasn't triggered a recession like the Sahm indicator predicted. He talked about specific opportunities in AI and suggested the AI bubble burst, but I'm not so sure. If we're right about a higher market, AI will do great. Mag 7s still have good earnings. But the big picture is we have a date with destiny: three times long-term normal valuations. I think 2026 is likely the year we enter the crisis of this fourth turning. If you're tactical short-term, maybe you can play the game, but otherwise dial down exposure. He talked about private credit, bullish on it, but we don't like it. Still bullish on gold, agree with him there. He was more cautious on Bitcoin. Bitcoin had a 30% pullback, historically it does this, pulled back to moving averages, signaled a bottom fish opportunity from 85k to 92-93k. We don't recommend much exposure, we tell people 5-10% precious metals, maybe 1-2% Bitcoin on top. We might be at a short-term low. Bottom line: Yiannis is decidedly bullish across the board, we're not. I think markets will trade lower, possibly 50% or more lower at some point in the next two years. We like VanEck's alternative viewpoint embracing real assets and Bitcoin. We'll have to be tactical, not passive. Reach out if you want to chat.
All right. Thanks, Mike. John, I got some questions for you, but first, anything you want to add to Mike's reaction to Jan's analysis there?
Yeah, I think Mike did a great job covering most of the bases. We appreciate the broad-based thought from VanEck. Valuations are black and white numbers but poor timing indicators. Fundamental thesis-driven viewpoints are important as a road map, but markets don't follow rules. For example, India had a strong fundamental case but was a laggard last year. We sold out not because the thesis changed but because the market stopped valuing it. We use technical analysis to guide us. Same with energy: we viewed it as undervalued but waited for technical signals before entering through oil and gas service companies. The bond market has been lopsidedly negative sentiment, but we are modestly invested in short-term treasuries with a small allocation to longer-term. I validate Jan's thoughtful pathway, but markets have a different way of interpreting things. There are compelling cases for silver both ways. The job of an investor is to handicap odds, but one should remember that markets will school you.
I really value Jan's outlooks. VanEck is a massive firm with ETFs across sectors. Jan sits at the center of all that information flow. I've recorded videos with Michael Howell, who predicts rough sledding due to liquidity flows. He makes cases for contrarian plays like bonds. I think Jan is right that we have more visibility into 2026. Markets and economy are two separate things; this may be a year that re-educates investors on that. It's great to hear the wisdom of guys like Jan.
Yeah, happy to talk about last year. We had a good year, beat the S&P 500, up net of fees around 20% plus. But I don't want anyone extrapolating. This year will be more challenging. We were bullish on precious metals, had hedges. We overweighted non-US equities like Latin America. Our simple recipe: be in areas that are relatively strong, avoid laggards. For example, energy was undervalued but a laggard, so we waited for technical signals before entering. Wall Street analysts are rarely this uniformly bullish, which is a contrarian reason for caution. We expect a different pathway than Jan. Right now our technical indicators are quite bullish, but that will change.
Well, folks, we're going to have Jan on every quarter this year, and New Harbor every week. On the energy side, John, you said you were waiting for the green light from the market. You did. What have the technicals been telling you and what impact do recent developments in Venezuela have on your outlook for energy?
Yeah, recent headlines affected oil market. Venezuela's oil numbers are not independently audited, take with grain of salt. The heavy crude is complicated to refine. There's a geopolitical game bigger than oil. This is not likely to have immediate tangible market effects. Our reason for being in energy is technical, not fundamental. If prices erode, we'll trim.
Mike, I'm going to give you the last topic: precious metals. They've cooled off a bit today, but silver hit new highs. There was a 15% correction, but resilience. What are you looking at most closely right now?
Yeah, we've seen good resilience. On the monthly chart, silver broke through previous highs and held. The daily chart is choppy. The gold-silver ratio has normalized to 55, not a screaming valuation advantage anymore. Mining stocks have lagged, but I believe they will catch up. I advise selling a little on the way up to rebalance.
I guess we won't know till we know, but I wouldn't have thought we'd be at $78 an ounce. It's amazing, and that's despite your strong bullishness on silver heading into 2025.
I was really bullish, but I didn't think we'd get here. The gold-silver ratio has normalized. I don't see a top in silver or gold.
If you take a look at some of the mining stocks, particularly silver miners, a lot of people have been saying...
