Betting on gold-backed stablecoin is a losing game says STASIS CEO
By FF Newsroom · 19 February 2020

By Gregory Klumov, CEO of STASIS
Gold has been regarded as an eternal value since times immemorial. It’s still a measure of wealth that layers any world’s powerhouse foundations, leverage that caused wars and changed the global political landscape throughout the ages.
The last century, however, has brought more changes within the existing world monetary system than all the previous millenniums. Following the national fiat currency advents, over the past 20 years the digital world with electronic money has stepped in and we have come close to the days when E-money 2.0 is being established with the help of emerging blockchain technology. Nowadays we witness an asset fusion process taking place: digital currencies are backed not only by public interest and hype but also by the particular assets or commodities. But the question is, can the past merge with the future success to provide better financial solutions?
Choosing the underlying asset for stablecoin
Many stablecoin projects haven’t produced the value and strength anticipated a few years ago when more and more companies concluded that unbacked cryptocurrencies couldn’t lead the future of the digital market. Out of all the projects ever launched, the Stable Report data indicates that more than 150 stablecoins are either inactive or dead. Moreover, more than 40 stablecoin projects that were backed by gold have already closed up the shop.
According to Blockdata, it’s vital that fiat-backed stablecoins have some type of centralized entity controlling the security and that gold-backed assets have to be able to prove that the gold reserves exist and are stored somewhere safe. If a stablecoin is backed by gold reserves, it should be solid enough to survive the extreme market movements often experienced by other digital currencies.
However, gold itself is not a stable asset - it’s a public store and a way of accumulating value over the long run. Therefore, how can such an asset be the ultimate measure of value in the future?
The business model of stablecoins is built around the fact that the issuer receives interest income from money market rates which allows them to pay back the audit, board of directors, and engage in business development. Regardless of issuing a gold-backed stablecoin, it is necessary to pay extra for the storage of collateral, plus it is impossible to audit.
Moreover, gold is a metal that can be faked by using tungsten. The main reasons for tungsten fake gold bars are to protect the wire from corrosion or to solder it to other metals. Tungsten fake gold saves energy and poses no pollution threat to the environment, therefore it’s sustainable.
Maintenance of huge amounts of gold results in a negative carry - a condition where investments cost more than they return over the short-term. This is very expensive and therefore even while they maintain the price of gold, per unit, gold-backed tokens are doomed to decaying value.
The rotten foundations of gold-backed stablecoins
While companies jumped on the crypto bandwagon in droves following Bitcoin Core’s (BTC) meteoric price increase in 2017, the logical choice would have been for these projects to follow suit.
The reality of last year’s market states that gold is not the best option to choose for the currency of the future. As many gold-backed stablecoin projects have failed, there are specific reasons behind this outcome:
- Gold-backed stablecoin is derivative for an action that changes in price and, therefore, can be classified as a security.
- Millennials or the new generation do not and will not rely on old-world values such as gold. Which is nothing but a relic of the past for them.
- Current Bitcoin generations rely on crypto to pay for their everyday Latte or shopping rather than gold coins.
- Gold has a potentially unlimited supply, which is not a feature of the Bitcoin or other crypto assets with a fixed amount of coins that could be mined.
- We don't know the exact (or even close) numbers of gold assets held by governments, which are not likely audited - even Fort Knox was never ever audited!