Category: Uncategorized

Gold is often explained through a simple macro relationship: when real interest rates rise, gold should weaken; when real rates fall, gold should strengthen. The logic is reasonable. Gold does not pay interest, so higher inflation-adjusted yields increase the opportunity cost of holding it. A stronger U.S. dollar can create an additional headwind because gold is priced globally in dollars.

But markets rarely move according to one variable alone. Recent history has repeatedly shown periods when gold remained firm or even rose sharply while real yields were moving in what would normally be considered an unfavorable direction. The useful question is not whether the relationship between gold and real yields has disappeared. It has not. The better question is: what can become powerful enough to temporarily override it?

Real Yields Still Matter

Real yields remain one of the most useful variables for understanding gold because they represent the return available on government bonds after accounting for inflation expectations. When real yields rise, investors can earn a larger inflation-adjusted return from interest-bearing assets. All else equal, that tends to make a non-yielding asset such as gold relatively less attractive.

The important phrase is all else equal. In practice, all else is rarely equal. Gold is influenced simultaneously by currency movements, central-bank reserve decisions, geopolitical risk, fiscal concerns, investment flows, physical demand and market positioning. When several of those forces line up in the same direction, the effect of higher real yields can be outweighed.

The World Gold Council noted in its December 2024 market commentary that the previously close relationship between gold and real interest rates had shown a notable breakdown over the preceding two years, pointing to emerging-market central-bank buying and geopolitical risk as key factors.

October 2024: Gold Rises While Real Yields Climb

October 23, 2024 provides a useful example. U.S. Treasury data show that the 10-year real yield increased from 1.87% on October 22 to 1.93% on October 23. Normally, that type of move would be expected to create a headwind for gold. Instead, spot gold reached a then-record intraday high of $2,750.21 per ounce that day, driven by geopolitical tensions and uncertainty surrounding the approaching U.S. presidential election.

That episode demonstrates why a rising-yield environment should not automatically be translated into a bearish gold conclusion. The yield signal was still a headwind. It simply was not the strongest force influencing the market at that moment.

Official-sector demand was also unusually powerful during the broader period. The World Gold Council later reported that central banks added approximately 1,045 tonnes of gold to their reserves during 2024, the third consecutive year in which purchases exceeded 1,000 tonnes.

Central Banks Operate on a Different Horizon

One reason gold can resist higher yields is that central-bank demand is driven by objectives that differ from those of many private investors. Reserve managers consider liquidity, security, diversification, currency exposure and geopolitical resilience. The return available on government bonds matters, but it is only one part of the decision.

According to the World Gold Council, central banks made net purchases of about 289 tonnes during the second quarter of 2026. The Council’s 2026 Central Bank Gold Reserves Survey found that 89% of reserve managers expected global central-bank gold holdings to increase over the following 12 months, while a record 45% expected their own institutions to increase their holdings.

Demand motivated by long-term reserve diversification can therefore provide support even when the shorter-term real-yield environment becomes less favorable.

ETF Flows and Geopolitical Risk Can Override the Daily Signal

Investment flows provide another example of why a single-variable model can sometimes struggle. In August 2026, global physically backed gold ETFs attracted approximately $18 billion in net inflows, with holdings increasing by 121 tonnes to a record 4,189 tonnes. During the same month, gold rose 13.3%, ending August at $4,563 per ounce, the third strongest monthly return in a quarter century.

Large portfolio reallocations can create buying pressure that is not fully explained by the daily change in Treasury real yields. Real yields are an important pricing variable, but they are not a complete description of who is buying gold, how aggressively they are buying it, or why.

Gold can also behave differently when investors are not simply comparing expected returns. During periods of geopolitical stress or concern about sovereign debt and currencies, investors may place greater value on diversification and perceived protection against extreme outcomes. The question shifts from does gold provide a better yield than a Treasury bond to how does this asset behave if the risk I am concerned about actually materializes.

What This Means in Practice

Positioning and market structure add a shorter-term layer. Futures positioning, options activity, stop orders and momentum strategies can amplify moves after a macro catalyst. Once gold begins moving strongly, tactical and systematic flows can reinforce the move even when the rates backdrop initially appears inconsistent with it.

This is why macro analysis works better as context than as a mechanical trading signal. The real-yields framework is a useful starting point for understanding why gold tends to move in a particular direction over time. It becomes less reliable as a tool for predicting what happens in any specific week or month, because that shorter time frame is when the competing forces described above are most likely to matter.

The practical takeaway is straightforward: a rising real-yield environment is a genuine headwind for gold, but it is not a guarantee of gold weakness. When central banks are buying persistently, when investment flows are unusually strong, or when geopolitical or fiscal risk is elevated, gold can hold firm or even rally despite unfavorable yield conditions. Understanding both the relationship and its limits is more useful than treating either as absolute.

For more finance and markets analysis, LinkedIn Daily welcomes finance guest posts from contributors with first-hand market expertise.

When I started building a learning website for Commerce students, I assumed improvement meant adding more.

More pages. More features. More categories. More quizzes. More tools.

That felt like progress because every new addition was visible. But after spending time using the site the way a student would use it, I realised something uncomfortable: a product can become more complete while becoming harder to use.

That changed the way I think about product simplicity.

Users Experience the Path Between Features

The first lesson was that users do not experience features one by one. They experience the path between them.

A notes page may be useful. A quiz may be useful. A test series may be useful. But if a student has to move through several menus, repeated categories and unclear buttons to reach them, the value of those features drops quickly.

I began asking a much simpler question: what is the student actually trying to do right now? Usually the answer was not to explore the platform. It was something like: I need notes for this chapter. I want to test whether I understand this topic. I have an exam soon and need practice.

Once I looked at the website through those tasks, a lot of unnecessary complexity became obvious.

Repeated Choices Create Friction

The second lesson was that repeated choices create friction.

On a desktop screen, a long navigation structure can look organised. On a phone, the same structure can feel exhausting. Students may open a site between classes, during travel or while revising quickly. If every action requires another decision, the interface starts competing with the learning.

I learned to prefer one obvious next action over several equally visible options. That does not mean removing everything. It means deciding what deserves attention first.

For example, if a student finishes a chapter note, the next useful action may be a short quiz. So instead of sending them back to a large menu, the page can simply say: Test this chapter now.

Mobile-First Changes Product Priorities

The third lesson was that mobile-first is not only a design choice. It changes product priorities.

When I looked at the site mainly on a laptop, I cared about how much information I could display. When I looked at it on a phone, I cared about how quickly a student could reach the right thing. That pushed me toward shorter paths, clearer buttons, fewer repeated sections and lighter pages.

Performance became part of usability too. A visually impressive page that takes too long to load does not feel impressive to the person waiting for it. In education especially, the website should disappear into the background. The student should be thinking about the concept, not about the interface.

Every Feature Creates Maintenance Work

The fourth lesson was that every feature creates maintenance work. This was probably the easiest thing to underestimate.

Adding a feature is not a one-time decision. It creates future work: bugs, mobile testing, content updates, navigation changes, performance checks and questions about how the feature connects with everything else.

A feature therefore has a cost even if it is technically free to build. That made me more selective. Instead of asking can I add this, I started asking will students use this enough to justify the complexity it adds.

AI Helps Generate Options, Not Decide What Should Exist

The fifth lesson was about AI tools. AI can make it extremely easy to produce more: more copy, more components, more ideas, more variations. That speed is useful, but it can also make a product noisy very quickly.

I found that the important human job was still deciding what should exist at all. AI can help generate options, debug code or suggest layouts. It cannot automatically know which feature matters most to a specific group of students. That judgment still comes from observing the user, testing the experience and being willing to remove things.

Low Traffic Still Teaches You Something

The sixth lesson was that low traffic can still teach you something. When a website is small, it is tempting to think there is not enough data to learn from. But even a small number of real users can reveal basic problems: which pages do they reach first, where do they stop, which resources do they actually use, what do they ignore completely.

Sometimes the most useful product decision is not adding a new feature. It is making an existing useful feature easier to find.

Building a small education website has made me much less impressed by feature count and much more interested in clarity. A good product does not have to constantly announce everything it can do. It should help the user complete the thing they came for with as little unnecessary effort as possible.

If you want to share insights like this with a professional audience, LinkedIn Daily welcomes technology guest posts from founders and builders with first-hand product experience.

There was a time when a brand needed a television commercial, a newspaper advertisement or a billboard to become visible. Today, a person with a smartphone, an idea and an audience can influence what thousands of people watch, discuss and eventually buy.

India is witnessing a remarkable shift in the way marketing works. The rise of the creator economy has changed the relationship between brands, consumers and content. Marketing has moved closer to everyday conversations, personal recommendations and communities built around shared interests.

This transformation is particularly visible among young Indians. A college student making videos about fashion, a young professional reviewing technology, a home cook sharing recipes, or a creator explaining personal finance can build an audience that traditional advertising often takes years to develop. Their influence comes from familiarity. Their audience sees them regularly, understands their personality and often develops a sense of trust around their recommendations.

This has created a new question for marketers: How do you sell to a generation that can recognise an advertisement within seconds?

The answer increasingly lies in becoming part of the conversation rather than simply interrupting it.

From Advertising to Influence

Traditional advertising largely depended on reach. A brand wanted its message to reach as many people as possible. The creator economy has introduced another dimension: relevance.

A creator with 50,000 followers who focuses entirely on fitness may offer more value to a sportswear brand than a celebrity with several million followers whose audience has little interest in fitness.

This changes how marketers think about influence. The size of an audience still matters, yet the quality of the relationship between creator and audience can matter even more. A creator speaks in a language that feels familiar. The content often appears within the natural flow of the audience’s daily digital life.

For brands, this creates an opportunity to communicate through people rather than advertisements. For consumers, it creates a more personalised marketplace.

India Has a Unique Advantage

India’s creator economy is developing within an unusually diverse cultural environment. The Indian internet is multilingual, multicultural and increasingly accessible beyond major metropolitan cities. Content in Hindi, Bengali, Tamil, Telugu, Marathi, Malayalam and several other languages has created communities that traditional national advertising often struggled to reach with the same degree of intimacy.

A creator from a smaller city can speak directly to people who share similar experiences. That matters for marketing.

A consumer from Patna may respond differently to a product recommendation from someone who understands the lifestyle, aspirations and purchasing habits of people in Patna than to a global celebrity endorsing the same product.

The creator becomes a bridge between the brand and the consumer. This is perhaps one of the most interesting developments in Indian marketing. Influence is becoming more decentralised.

The Consumer Has Become Part of the Marketing System

The creator economy has also changed the role of the consumer. People no longer simply watch advertisements. They comment, remix, review, recommend, criticise and create their own responses.

A product can become popular because thousands of ordinary users decide to talk about it. A restaurant can gain attention because customers create videos around their experience. A small business can build national visibility through a single piece of content.

This creates a marketing environment where brands have less control over the complete narrative. Consumers participate in shaping the reputation of a brand.

For management students, this offers an important lesson. Marketing today requires an understanding of behaviour, psychology, community and culture alongside traditional concepts such as positioning and promotion.

The question has moved from “How can we reach consumers?” towards “Why would consumers want to talk about us?”

That is a very different marketing problem.

The Rise of the Micro Creator

One of the most fascinating developments within the creator economy is the growing importance of smaller creators. A creator with a relatively modest audience can possess something extremely valuable: credibility within a specific community.

A student creator discussing MBA life may influence aspiring management students more effectively than a general lifestyle celebrity. A local food creator may influence restaurant choices within a particular city. A finance educator may develop a highly engaged audience interested in personal finance.

This is where segmentation becomes real.

Instead of communicating one message to millions of people, brands can work with multiple communities and allow each creator to communicate the brand in a context that feels natural.

Marketing becomes more personal.

The Challenge of Authenticity

There is also a paradox at the centre of the creator economy. The more creators work with brands, the more carefully audiences examine sponsored content.

People understand that creators earn money through collaborations. The problem begins when commercial communication becomes difficult to distinguish from genuine recommendation.

Trust therefore becomes one of the most valuable assets in creator marketing. A creator can spend years building credibility and lose part of that trust through a poorly chosen collaboration.

Brands face the same challenge. A campaign may generate millions of views while producing little meaningful connection with consumers.

This is why marketers need to look beyond impressions and follower counts.

What did people actually remember? Did they discuss the product? Did they search for it? Did they purchase it? Did they return? Did the campaign create a long term relationship?

These questions matter far more than a large number appearing on a social media dashboard.

From Virality to Value

The obsession with going viral can sometimes distract marketers from the larger purpose of marketing.

Virality creates attention. Value creates relationships.

A campaign that receives millions of views for a few days may disappear from public memory quickly. Meanwhile, a creator who consistently educates an audience about a particular category can influence purchasing behaviour over a much longer period.

This distinction is especially important for management students entering the marketing profession. Marketing success cannot be understood through views alone.

A successful campaign should connect attention with business objectives. Brand awareness, consideration, conversion, retention and customer loyalty all form part of the larger picture.

The creator economy therefore needs better measurement. The future belongs to marketers who can combine creativity with analytics.

What Comes Next?

Artificial intelligence will make this ecosystem even more interesting. Content creation is becoming faster. Images, videos, scripts and campaign ideas can be generated within minutes.

Yet technology creates an interesting contradiction. When content becomes easier to produce, genuine human connection can become more valuable.

The future of marketing may therefore involve a strange combination of advanced technology and deeply human communication.

AI can help a brand produce content. A creator can give that content context. A community can give it meaning. And consumers ultimately decide whether it deserves attention.

India’s creator economy is still evolving. New platforms will emerge. New formats will replace old ones. Some creators will become businesses themselves, while traditional businesses will increasingly behave like media companies.

The larger transformation, however, has already begun.

Marketing is moving from a world where brands spoke to consumers towards a world where brands participate in communities.

The most powerful marketing message of the future may come from a person sitting in a college room, a small studio or a neighbourhood café, speaking to an audience that trusts them.

The billboard is still there. The television advertisement still exists. The corporate campaign still matters.

Yet beside all of them stands a new force.

A creator with a phone, a community and something worth saying.

Passionate about marketing or business? LinkedIn Daily welcomes guest posts from emerging professionals and industry experts. Visit our write for us page to submit your pitch.

That may be one of the most important changes Indian marketing has seen in a generation.