Why a 42-Year Veteran Wants Gold Below $4,000 Before Buying Back in

Peter Grandich sold almost everything near gold’s parabolic peak in late January, when sentiment was euphoric. Now, with bullion roughly 25% below that record, he is waiting for one more drop below $4,000/oz before committing fully. To most forecasters, that gold price prediction looks needlessly cautious; to contrarians, it looks like discipline.

The backdrop is unusually split. Gold set a record near $5,595/oz on 29 January 2026 and traded around $4,173 as of 9 October 2026. Copper went the other way, hitting records in September of US$14,875/t on the London Metal Exchange (LME) and US$6.83/lb on COMEX, the main US futures exchange. Uranium equities sit well off their highs.

Grandich draws on a 42-year career in resources and calls the current metals supply picture the most bullish he has seen. That view is worth testing against institutional forecasts, not repeating.

Here is where his gold, copper and uranium calls line up with the evidence, where they part ways, and which risks sit beneath both.

Why is a veteran waiting for gold to drop below $4,000?

In January the mood around gold was close to giddy. Nine months later, Grandich says sentiment has swung almost to the opposite extreme, with many investors convinced the rally is over.

His sequence is deliberate. He sold nearly everything except one stock near the peak, has since re-entered some trades, and is now waiting for a brief move under $4,000. His case rests on sentiment and positioning, not a change in fundamentals.

The sharp swings from a January record to a roughly 25% drawdown are a textbook case of gold market volatility, where positioning and sentiment can overwhelm fundamentals for months at a time.

The price map shows how far the metal has already travelled:

• Record: about $5,590-$5,595/oz on 28-29 January 2026, according to HSBC, Metals Focus and Reuters. (The original interview cited about $5,405, and S&P Global refers only to a peak “above $5,500“; the higher figure has the widest support.)
• March: gold fell nearly 15% and held above roughly $4,400, per S&P Global, before J.P. Morgan identified a late-March floor near $4,170.
• Q2 2026: gold’s worst quarter since 2013, according to Reuters.
• Now: about $4,173 on 9 October (Metalcharts), after $4,152 on 6 October (Metals Focus) and a close near $4,140 on 2 October (HSBC).

Grandich’s base-building idea A short dip below $4,000 would, in his view, act as a psychological flush that sets a strong base for the next leg higher.

From there, his timeline calls for a retest of this year’s highs in 2027 and new records in 2028.

The point to take from this is proximity. With gold within about 4% of his trigger level, you should treat the dip as a near-term scenario you can plan around, not a distant hypothetical.

Do the forecasts, rates and physical buyers back the 2028 record call?

The mainstream explanation for the correction is macro. Reuters links the Q2 slide to the Iran war, an energy-price spike and renewed rate-hike expectations, which strengthened the US dollar and weighed on assets that pay no yield. Axi points to the nomination of Kevin Warsh, seen as a hawkish Federal Reserve chair, as a trigger for a roughly 20% fall after the record.

Grandich rejects the idea that rising rates automatically hurt gold. He cites the 1970s and the 2022-2023 hiking cycle, when the Fed lifted rates from near zero to above 5% while gold climbed from about $1,800 to its record.

He also frames recent weakness as a paper-versus-physical story. Paper markets trade gold contracts and claims without moving metal, such as COMEX futures and the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA) over-the-counter market; physical buyers take delivery of bars and coins. Grandich argues paper selling drove the drop while physical buyers, increasingly in Asia, used it to accumulate. Public analysis explicitly linking this correction to that split is limited, so treat it as his interpretation rather than an established finding.

What central banks and Chinese buyers are signalling

The buying itself is measurable. World Gold Council (WGC) data shows:

• 39 tonnes of net central-bank purchases in August 2026, taking year-to-date buying to 170 tonnes
• China’s central bank (PBoC) leading with 20 tonnes in August and about 80 tonnes year-to-date
• 22 consecutive months of PBoC buying
• PBoC holdings of about 2,387 tonnes, roughly 9% of reserves

S&P Global and Reuters both credit this demand, alongside ETF flows, with cushioning the retreat. Grandich adds that some Wall Street voices now suggest a 60/20/20 portfolio, moving part of the bond allocation in a traditional 60/40 mix into gold.

Persistent PBoC accumulation reflects a broader strategy of reserve diversification, which helps explain why official-sector demand has kept absorbing supply even as prices corrected sharply.

Where the consensus parts ways with Grandich

Most forecasts keep gold averaging above $4,000 through 2026-2027. When forecasters cut averages while central banks keep buying, you are looking at a thesis that is directionally supported but probably slower than the dip-then-launch version. That should shape how patiently you size a position.

Is copper at $7 a stretch or just a few cents away?

Grandich’s copper target barely qualifies as bold. COMEX peaked at US$6.83/lb (about US$15,057/t) around 9-10 September, leaving his $7 call only about 2.5% above the record. Early October trading sat in a US$6.57-6.67/lb range, while the LME set its record of US$14,875/t on 10 September and hovered near US$14,800/t late in the month.

His ladder has tracked closely so far: $4 in 2024, $5 in 2025, $6 in 2026, and $7 in 2027, possibly earlier. He argues spare supply no longer exists.

The structural case is a widening gap between what the world needs and what mines can deliver. Demand comes from electrification, power grids, electric vehicles and AI data centres, while supply faces:

• falling ore grades, meaning less copper per tonne of rock mined
• shortages of concentrate, the partly processed ore smelters need
• political, geological and community obstacles at mine sites
• lead times of 15-20 years for new mines, according to Coface (cited by Grandich)

The scale of the gap S&P Global’s “Copper in the Age of AI” projects demand rising from about 28 Mt in 2025 to 42 Mt by 2040, with a possible shortfall of about 10 Mt without new mine investment.

Coface, again via Grandich, sees a shortage of up to 17% by 2035.

The case against a straight line to $7

S&P Global has also argued the other side. Its April outlook put the 2026 average just above US$12,100/t and cautioned that copper could ease as supply concerns fade, demand softens and speculation normalises.

Record prices can trigger demand destruction, where buyers substitute or delay purchases. Slower Chinese growth or tariff frictions could also cap demand, though that remains a risk rather than a verified forecast.

So the real question with $7 is timing and durability, not possibility. Ask yourself whether you are positioning for a spike or a sustained deficit, because one is a trade and the other is a multi-year holding.

How would you act on this, and what could go wrong?

Grandich’s playbook favours gold-copper projects, strong management and safe jurisdictions. His largest-ever position is North Copper and Gold on Vancouver Island, led by former Barrick executive Alex Davidson. For investors avoiding single stocks, he points to the GDX and GDXJ gold-miner ETFs, and he prefers being early over late.

Canada features heavily. Under proposed tax and permitting incentives, he says a major could get about 25% cost relief, and majors are acquiring with stock rather than debt. Canada’s June 2026 Nuclear Energy Strategy supports up to 10 new large reactors through financing, tax incentives and faster approvals.

On uranium, Grandich says stocks are 30-50% off their highs (independent drawdown data was not found) and would buy on further weakness, possibly around year-end tax-loss selling. Spot uranium oxide (U3O8) was US$85/lb at 30 June 2026, well below the US$125-150/lb incentive price thought necessary for broad new mine development.

Where the thesis can break

History offers cautions rather than precise statistics:

1. Miner leverage: gold miners have historically fallen far harder than bullion, as after the 2011 peak.
2. Sequence risk: a large gold allocation made just before a correction, such as early 2013, can lag for years.
3. Uranium precedent: equities endured deep, prolonged slumps after the mid-2000s spike and Fukushima.
4. False bottoms: spotting capitulation in real time is hard.
5. Cycle length: the 2000s commodity boom ran for a decade or more.

Grandich’s own horizon is 3-5 years. Size any miner or uranium position for volatility and dilution, not for the headline target.

Investors weighing the GDX and GDXJ route will find our full explainer on gold and silver miners ETFs useful for comparing fund structures and how miners amplify bullion moves.

Weighing a patient hard-asset thesis against a shallower-dip reality

The evidence backs a structurally bullish view on gold, copper and uranium. Where Grandich diverges is the path: most forecasters expect a shallower, slower gold consolidation than a sharp sub-$4,000 flush, while copper’s record shows $7 is already close.

Acting on the thesis means believing three things: central-bank buying persists, copper’s deficit outlasts cyclical easing, and you can stay patient through volatility. Watch the Fed’s easing path, monthly WGC purchase data, and copper inventories and prices against the $6.83 record.

This article is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial advice. Investors should conduct their own research and consult with financial professionals before making investment decisions. Past performance does not guarantee future results, and forecasts are speculative and subject to change.