<p>This is mostly just a though that hit me and won't let me go. Imagine that you don't trust fractional reserve banking and you're convinced that the whole stock market is going to go down the drain. You decide that you want to put your money into something that is a good combination of stable and tangible.</p>
<p>Now, the first thing that comes to mind is gold, but that it actually rather unstable if you look at the part 50 years of prices. The next thing is land, but that tends to be very expensive (you're not rich, you need something that's valuable in smaller amounts).</p>
<p>So; the thing I'm wondering, is <em>what would you buy that is stable enough that you're likely to not lose all your savings to fluctuations in price, yet small enough you can keep your life savings (say USD 100 000) hidden in your home without needing a huge safe?</em> Gemstones? Rare earth metals?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-08-11T22:49:51.243Z
I think the story is missing some zombies in order to be really cool.
Michael Greinecker
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-08-12T07:50:23.453Z
This seems to be a personal finance question? Those belong to [Money.SE].
Giskard
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-08-12T08:48:25.680Z
Most stable for what purpose? If you look at gold, you look at the price against USD most likely. Generally, any value you see somewhere is against a currency. USD 100.000 doesn't mean much unless you know the purchasing power (what you can buy with it). If the entire banking system collapses and all stocks are worthless it would mean that all big companies are worthless, which can only be the case if they do not produce and sell anymore. In this situation, it doesn't matter if you hold gold, platinum, Barby dolls birthstones or sports NFTs. Without a working economy nothing will be valuable.
Alex
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-08-15T07:05:20.583Z
@Alex I am aware of that. What I meant by "most stable" could be elaborated as "whatever is most likely to retain the same purchasing power even in the case of a severe economic recession making stocks/currencies take a nosedive". I'm not talking about a collapse of society, more like a second Great Depression. In such a case, gold would probably lose a lot of its value, but perhaps copper would retain more of its value since it has a lot more uses and will still be needed even in a recession.
Anju Maaka
<saving>
Which high-value material is most stable if you want to keep your savings "at home"?
Anju Maaka
# Which high-value material is most stable if you want to keep your savings "at home"?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-08-11)

This is mostly just a though that hit me and won't let me go. Imagine that you don't trust fractional reserve banking and you're convinced that the whole stock market is going to go down the drain. You decide that you want to put your money into something that is a good combination of stable and tangible.

Now, the first thing that comes to mind is gold, but that it actually rather unstable if you look at the part 50 years of prices. The next thing is land, but that tends to be very expensive (you're not rich, you need something that's valuable in smaller amounts).

So; the thing I'm wondering, is *what would you buy that is stable enough that you're likely to not lose all your savings to fluctuations in price, yet small enough you can keep your life savings (say USD 100 000) hidden in your home without needing a huge safe?* Gemstones? Rare earth metals?

**Tags:** saving
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: I think the story is missing some zombies in order to be really cool.  
> **username_2**: This seems to be a personal finance question? Those belong to [Money.SE].  
> **username_3**: Most stable for what purpose? If you look at gold, you look at the price against USD most likely. Generally, any value you see somewhere is against a currency. USD 100.000 doesn't mean much unless you know the purchasing power (what you can buy with it). If the entire banking system collapses and all stocks are worthless it would mean that all big companies are worthless, which can only be the case if they do not produce and sell anymore. In this situation, it doesn't matter if you hold gold, platinum, Barby dolls birthstones or sports NFTs. Without a working economy nothing will be valuable.  
> **username_0**: @Alex I am aware of that. What I meant by "most stable" could be elaborated as "whatever is most likely to retain the same purchasing power even in the case of a severe economic recession making stocks/currencies take a nosedive". I'm not talking about a collapse of society, more like a second Great Depression. In such a case, gold would probably lose a lot of its value, but perhaps copper would retain more of its value since it has a lot more uses and will still be needed even in a recession.  

---

## 0 answers

