Some Thoughts on Silver’s All Time High

The ancient people of Uruk— who lived in modern-day southern Iraq more than 5,000 years ago— didn’t seem terribly interested in bequeathing colorful stories of their civilization to history.

Rather than memorializing abundant tales of their immense works, or chisel countless tablets embellishing stories of their military victories, the main artifacts they left behind to modern historians are rather mundane market accounts and grain prices.

It would be as if the only thing to be locked into a time capsule from our own era were the stock section of the Wall Street Journal. It would hardly be a reasonable description of our time.

Nevertheless, the ancient scribes of Uruk went to great lengths to record financial and commercial transactions. And one of the things we can see from their civilization is that they used silver (and NOT gold) as the primary medium of exchange.

It’s interesting to note that they did not bother minting coins. Rather, silver was weighed in bulk— the unit of measurement eventually becoming the shekel, around 8.3 grams— and then traded for grain.

(Just imagine paying for your groceries by piling a bunch of scrap and raw silver onto a scale.)

Gold was obviously a well-known commodity and considered extremely valuable… but far too rare to be used as everyday money. So silver remained the dominant financial standard for thousands of years.

Even by the time of the ancient Greeks, and then subsequently the Roman Republic, silver coins (the Greek drachma and Roman denarius) were the primary currencies of those civilizations.

But by then there was a bi-metallic system… a fixed ‘exchange rate’ that governments set between gold and silver.

In ancient Babylon during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar II, for example, cuneiform tablets show silver being exchanged for gold at a ratio of 10 to 1.

A few decades later, in the 6th century BC, King Croesus of Lydia minted the first standardized gold and silver coins, setting an official exchange rate—again, roughly 10 to 1.

The Persians under Darius the Great fixed it at 13 to 1. The Romans under Julius Caesar set it at 12 to 1.

Even as recently as 1792, the newly formed United States established a silver-to-gold ratio of 15 to 1 in the very first Coinage Act.

It wasn’t until the late 20th century—when postwar Bretton Woods gold standard was fully abandoned—that this ratio between gold and silver was finally left to the market. Since then it’s ranged from about 25:1… all the way up to 120:1.

Right now it’s somewhere in the middle of that modern range— around 73:1… and the ratio has been falling fast, primarily because silver has been on an absolute tear.

This is pretty crazy when you think about it; gold has skyrocketed this year. But silver is up even more.

And there are a lot of people who focus very heavily on this silver-to-gold ratio and believe that it will inevitably fall to its historic average of roughly 50:1. Still others think that the ratio will fall even further to 15:1, where it was originally set by Congress in 1792.

This would mean $85+ silver, or even $250+ silver.

But here’s the problem: the gold/silver ratio is meaningless. There’s no law or financial regulation requiring the ratio to be at a certain level. Just because it has historically hovered around 50:1 doesn’t mean it can’t go to 5,000:1.

Instead, in order to understand either metal’s trajectory, we should look at supply and demand.

This is why we’ve been so bullish on gold; for the past three years, central bank demand for gold has been soaring, primarily because foreign countries have been rapidly and aggressively diversifying their US dollar holdings.

And for a sovereign government, gold makes a lot of sense. It’s portable. Universally recognized. It’s a traditional strategic reserve asset.

And most importantly, unlike US government bonds or even IMF “Strategic Drawing Rights”, gold isn’t controlled by anyone… no other government, central bank, or supranational institution.

So there’s zero counterparty risk, i.e. no country has to be worried about being sanctioned or frozen out of its own gold bullion holdings.

This trend of foreign governments and central banks buying massive quantities of  gold has sent the metal to its all-time high. And that extra demand has been more than enough to offset weakening gold demand in the jewelry sector.

Moreover, as we regularly argue, this trend is not going away anytime soon. As long as the US fiscal situation remains dismal, foreign countries will continue diversifying out of the dollar.

Silver, on the other hand, does not have such a strong long-term catalyst.

Central banks aren’t buying it; the market is far too small, and silver far too cheap. Foreign countries can much more easily buy $100 billion worth of gold. They just can’t do that with silver.

We’ve predicted in the past that silver would likely follow gold’s run-up— NOT because it shares the same monetary fundamentals, but because investor psychology.

Obviously there’s no telling how far this speculation can go; investors could potentially push silver prices much, much higher from here.

But without that same long-term institutional demand from central banks, silver’s trajectory is much harder to predict… and to justify.

It’s also noteworthy that more than half of silver demand comes from industrial applications such as solar panels, electric vehicles, 5G infrastructure, semiconductors, and medical technologies.

According to the Silver Institute, industrial demand for silver hit an all-time high of 680.5 million ounces in 2024, the fourth straight year of growth in that category.

Importantly, total silver demand has consistently outpaced supply. The global silver market ran a structural deficit in both 2023 and 2024, meaning more silver was consumed than produced.

This created an obvious catalyst for higher silver prices.

But it’s important to understand that industrial demand is not the same as central bank demand.

When central banks buy gold, they aren’t trying to time the market or flip it for a profit. They’re diversifying reserves. It’s a long-term, strategic shift—motivated by growing mistrust in the US dollar.

In short, central banks buy gold irrespective of price.

But silver doesn’t have that kind of anchor. Industrial demand is highly cyclical. It depends on global manufacturing activity, tech infrastructure, energy-sector spending, and overall economic health.

In an economic slowdown, much of that industrial demand could dry up quickly.

If the AI bubble bursts and data centers downsize, silver demand slows. If the “green energy” push implodes, and people decide they don’t want—or can’t afford—electric vehicles and solar panels, silver demand drops.

Jewelry demand, though smaller than industrial, faces the same problem. It’s sensitive to consumer spending.

To be clear, I’m not suggesting that the silver price is going to fall. I’m saying that it’s important to understand the differences.

With gold, foreign central banks are a clear and obvious long-term driver of demand. Silver demand, on the other hand, is being driven by speculation and highly volatile (and unpredictable) global economic factors.

And I think it’s important to be clear-eyed about the differences.

Source

Simon Black is an international investor, entrepreneur and permanent traveler. His daily letter is both educational and entertaining, and we suggest that those who want unbiased, actionable information about global opportunities sign up for Sovereign Man’s free, actionable newsletter at http://www.SovereignMan.com.

From Simon Black of SovereignMan.com

Source: https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/some-thoughts-on-silvers-all-time-high-153993/