\n Gold can serve several purposes in a private client portfolio, from long-term wealth preservation to short-term trading or collateral for borrowing. The form in which a client holds it matters. A physical bar, an exchange-traded fund (ETF) and a tokenised fund can provide exposure to the same metal while creating different ownership rights, dealing arrangements and routes to liquidity. For advisers working with high net worth (HNW) clients, understanding those differences is part of establishing what the allocation is meant to achieve.
\n
\nThat was the setting for Gold 360, a Hubbis webinar held on 15 October 2026 in partnership with DigiFT and J. Rotbart & Co. The discussion brought together perspectives from physical precious metals, family office portfolio management, economics, digital assets and commodity broking. Participants explored gold\u2019s role amid geopolitical uncertainty and currency debasement, alongside the practical choices involved in buying, storing, trading and borrowing against it. Their differing preferences made the discussion particularly useful: enthusiasm for gold did not produce a single answer about how clients should own or access it.\n <\/p>\n
Moderator: Michael Stanhope, Founder and Chief Executive Officer, Hubbis<\/p>\n
Speakers<\/p>\n
\n\tJoshua Rotbart, Founder and Managing Partner, J. Rotbart & Co.
\n\tHenry Zhang, Founder and Group Chief Executive Officer, DigiFT
\n\tMauricio Ribeiro, Partner, MOIQ Capital
\n\tDeepak Mehra, Chief Economist, Commercial Bank of Dubai
\n\tRaymond Chng, Financial Markets & Precious Metals, Straits Financial Group
<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Key Takeaways<\/p>\n
\n\tThe purpose of a gold allocation should guide the choice of instrument. Wealth preservation, tactical trading and access to collateral do not necessarily call for the same holding structure.
\n\tDirect physical ownership gives clients control over identifiable metal, while purchase, custody, insurance, transport and eventual resale remain practical considerations.
\n\tETFs provide a convenient route to price exposure. Their legal structures and physical backing differ, and holding a share does not necessarily confer a right to withdraw a bar.
\n\tTokenisation can change how an investment is accessed, transferred and used as collateral without changing the underlying asset\u2019s risk and return characteristics.
\n\tStorage jurisdiction and the ability to move holdings deserve attention alongside the purchase itself, particularly for families planning over many years.
\n\tPrivacy and control remain subject to lawful disclosure and due diligence. An allocation held outside a bank should not be confused with an exemption from reporting obligations.
<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
View this webinar On Demand HERE<\/a>.<\/p>\n Find out more about DigiFT HERE<\/a>. And find out more about J. Rotbart & Co. HERE<\/a>.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n The discussion moved between the reasons clients hold gold and the arrangements needed to make that holding useful. It also exposed an important distinction between direct ownership of metal and investment exposure delivered through a financial product. Those choices shaped the debate about liquidity, operational convenience and what happens when a client wants to take possession or raise cash.<\/p>\n The Portfolio Purpose Comes First<\/p>\n Geopolitics provided much of the backdrop. Participants linked demand for gold to conflict, uncertainty about established alliances and a desire to reduce dependence on any one currency or financial system. Central bank purchases were an influential signal for private clients considering their own diversification. The discussion treated that official-sector interest as part of the case for holding gold, rather than simply a reason to trade its latest price move.<\/p>\n One panellist framed the allocation as financial insurance, drawing on the experience of currency depreciation in Turkey, Egypt and Lebanon. The concern was broader than the performance of a conventional investment portfolio: a family could retain a nominal bank balance while losing much of its purchasing power. Physical displacement added another dimension to the discussion of preserving wealth through disruption.<\/p>\n That perspective also shaped the response to a question about falling gold prices. A short-term decline did not, in the panellist\u2019s view, settle whether an allocation served a longer-term protective purpose. \u201cStocks, they give you growth,\u201d the participant said. \u201cBonds give you income,\u201d while \u201cGold gives you protection.\u201d A suggested allocation of 5\u201310% was presented as that panellist\u2019s portfolio view, rather than a universal requirement.<\/p>\n For advisers, the discussion placed the client\u2019s objective ahead of the instrument. Someone seeking a holding to preserve family wealth over many years may place particular value on direct ownership and custody. Someone expressing a short-term market view may attach greater importance to dealing convenience. The participants\u2019 preferences became clearer once those different purposes were separated.<\/p>\n Physical Ownership and the Work Around It<\/p>\n The physical-gold case centred on identifiable metal. A client could know where a bar was held, identify it by number and arrange to inspect or withdraw it. That direct connection to an asset was especially important to participants who viewed gold as a means of reducing reliance on financial intermediaries. Others acknowledged the appeal while drawing attention to the costs and processes around custody, transport and verification of purity.<\/p>\n There was a useful disagreement over how demanding those arrangements need to be. One participant described the checks involved in handling bullion as lengthy and operationally involved. Another argued that a specialist provider could make purchase, storage and sale straightforward for the client. The difference lay partly in whether the investor coordinated those tasks individually or used a provider to organise them together.<\/p>\n The choice of provider also mattered independently of the vault. A panellist described a client considering a move from bank custody to a private dealer even though the metal would remain within the same storage facility. The attraction, in that account, was the process for accessing the holding. \u201cCall your banker. And ask to withdraw 1 kilogram of gold,\u201d the participant recalled advising. The example showed why advisers should examine the withdrawal arrangements as well as the location named on a custody statement.<\/p>\n Taking a bar home introduced a separate consideration. One participant cautioned that removing bullion from the professional custody chain could affect the terms on which it was subsequently accepted for resale. Personal possession and uninterrupted marketability were therefore different questions. The discussion also extended to specialist services around the holding, including insured shipment, borrowing against precious metals and conversion between physical metals and digital assets.<\/p>\n ETFs and the Role of Market Access<\/p>\n ETFs were widely recognised as a convenient way to obtain gold exposure, particularly for trading. Participants who preferred physical ownership for longer-term preservation still saw a role for a product that could be bought and sold through an existing investment account. A family office perspective accommodated several forms of gold within the client base, with the choice depending on the intended use.<\/p>\n The debate was sharper on what an investor actually owns. Some participants expressed a strong preference for holding the metal directly rather than relying on a financial structure. The distinction depends on the product: physically backed ETFs hold bullion, and their investors can own beneficial interests in a trust. The rights attached to that interest differ from direct title to a particular bar available for personal withdrawal. Understanding the structure beneath the investment is therefore part of assessing its suitability for the client\u2019s purpose.<\/p>\n The discussion used SPDR Gold Shares, traded under the ticker GLD, to illustrate the redemption question. Ordinary shareholders cannot simply present a single share and collect physical gold; creation and redemption arrangements operate through authorised participants. Understanding that mechanism helps an adviser explain the product\u2019s purpose without implying that convenient price exposure and personal access to bullion are interchangeable.<\/p>\n Commodity broking added another use for financial gold markets. Dealers handling physical bullion may need to hedge price movements, while other clients want to express a market view through spot trading or derivatives. These activities address the management of an exposure rather than the same objective as a family\u2019s long-term custody arrangement. The panel\u2019s contrasting perspectives allowed both needs to remain visible.<\/p>\n What Tokenisation Changes<\/p>\n The tokenisation discussion began with the rights represented by a token. It might relate to ownership of vaulted metal or provide exposure through a fund that owns gold. Those structures should be understood before considering the technology used to transfer them. A digital representation does not, by itself, establish that every holder has a claim to collect a particular physical bar.<\/p>\n Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation (OCBC), Lion Global Investors and DigiFT collaborated on one example, the OCBC-LionGlobal Physical Gold Fund Token (GOLDX), launched in April 2026. It provides exposure to the LionGlobal Singapore Physical Gold Fund. The relevant distinction was between the physical backing of the underlying investment and the investor\u2019s rights under the tokenised product. Its launch arrangements described subscriptions and redemptions in stablecoins or fiat currency; the bullion backing does not itself confer a right to physical delivery.<\/p>\n The strongest practical case concerned investors whose capital was already held in digital wallets. Buying a conventional investment could require them to convert stablecoins into fiat currency, move the proceeds into a bank or brokerage account and then place the investment. Bringing an asset on-chain offered an alternative route within the infrastructure they were already using. Participants saw particular relevance for crypto-native HNW clients and younger investors, without suggesting that every existing gold holder needed to change their arrangements.<\/p>\n A Saturday allocation example made the timing argument tangible. A tokenised route could offer flexibility when conventional markets or dealing channels were closed. How far that flexibility extends depends on the product\u2019s pricing, liquidity and transaction arrangements. Investors satisfied with their existing bank or brokerage access might see little reason to adopt another format.<\/p>\n The conversation then moved beyond holding an asset to using it. Participants discussed near-real-time settlement, digital evidence of ownership and the possibility of linking collateral to borrowing through automated processes. One panellist described a gold-token collateral use case involving Morpho, an on-chain lending protocol, while acknowledging that available liquidity was still small compared with traditional markets. Liquidity remained a practical constraint on how widely such a facility could be used.<\/p>\n The technology\u2019s contribution was ultimately framed around distribution and use. \u201cThe tokenization doesn\u2019t change the risk-return profile of the underlying assets,\u201d one panellist said. That principle left room for better access and more convenient collateral arrangements while keeping attention on the investment beneath the token, the rights attached to it and the services actually available to its holder.<\/p>\n Storage Diversification and the Limits of Privacy<\/p>\n Long-term ownership returned the discussion to geography. Participants described families holding gold across Singapore, Hong Kong and Switzerland, and a client considering New Zealand as an alternative location. The reasoning was specific to each family\u2019s perception of political risk and its planning horizon. A jurisdiction regarded as secure today might be assessed differently over the next ten or fifteen years.<\/p>\n A panellist\u2019s account of moving clients\u2019 gold from Hong Kong during periods of unrest showed how a storage decision could become an operational requirement. Diversification depended on more than spreading holdings across addresses: a provider also needed the ability to arrange movement when circumstances changed. As one participant put it, \u201cNoah built the ark before the flood, not when it was raining.\u201d<\/p>\n The closing exchange drew a distinction between privately held assets and secrecy. Participants discussed the greater personal control clients associated with physical ownership, but also the due diligence expected of dealers and their responsibility to respond to lawful requests. The Common Reporting Standard (CRS), which provides for the exchange of specified financial account information between participating jurisdictions, formed part of that discussion. Holding physical gold outside a bank does not establish that an investor has no tax or disclosure obligations.<\/p>\n The practical implication for an adviser was to connect the investment decision with the client\u2019s intended use of the holding. A family should understand what it owns, who holds it, how it can be accessed and what must happen before it can be sold, moved or used as collateral. Those answers give substance to the allocation, whether the chosen route is a physical bar, an ETF or a tokenised investment.<\/p>\n **<\/p>\n Disclaimer: This article summarises a webinar discussion and reflects information available as at 15 October 2026. It is for general information only and is not tax, legal, financial, investment or other professional advice or a recommendation. Its contents may not apply to individual circumstances, products or jurisdictions. Hubbis accepts no responsibility or liability for actions taken or omitted in reliance on it. Readers should obtain independent advice from qualified professionals before making any decision.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Gold can serve several purposes in a private client portfolio, from long-term wealth preservation to short-term trading or…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":632442,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[14],"tags":[138,246,111,139,69,244,245],"class_list":["post-632441","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-personal-finance","tag-business","tag-finance","tag-new-zealand","tag-newzealand","tag-nz","tag-personal-finance","tag-personalfinance"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/632441","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=632441"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/632441\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/632442"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=632441"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=632441"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=632441"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}