Broker Check

772-287-8089

Since 2000: The S&P 500 With Dividends vs. Gold and Traditional Havens

Since 2000: The S&P 500 With Dividends vs. Gold and Traditional Havens

| July 06, 2026
■ KFSC MACRO INTELLIGENCE COMMENTARY  ·  JULY 2026
KFSC MACRO INTELLIGENCE COMMENTARY  ·  10-14 MIN READ
Each line starts at $1,000,000 on December 31, 1999. The S&P 500 line includes reinvested dividends. Gold, major currencies, the U.S. Dollar Index, and a 10-year Treasury total-return estimate are shown for historical comparison.
This piece is not a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any asset. It is the step back we take when volatility rises: the last 26½ weeks measured against the 26½-year trend.
Market data as of the July 2, 2026 close; sources and series construction are described in the Methodology and Sources

When volatility rises, our discipline is to step back. Take gold’s last 26½ weeks as of July 2: 14 of the 27 were up weeks, including the most recent one, yet the stretch as a whole runs from a January record through a fall of about 24%[1]. No single week told that story, and no single week can tell you what built a trend, whether the support underneath it is still there, or whether that support is changing. That takes a longer look. This chart is that look: 26½ years of it. And behind the chart sits the structure: the KFSC Macro Regime Model reads each trend through four frameworks - Monetary Integrity, Liquidity Transmission, Strategic Scarcity, and Market Structure - asking whether each one is supportive or not, both inside the trend and in the conditions around it.

We included the S&P 500 with dividends reinvested so stocks receive full credit for their total return. A comparison against the price index alone would understate stocks by $3.19M over this window: $8.28M with dividends reinvested versus $5.09M without[2][3]. The dashed line shows the price-only version, so the difference is visible on the chart itself. The other lines - gold, the Swiss franc, the Japanese yen, the dollar itself, and the debt of the U.S. government - are the assets often viewed as safe havens; the box below defines what that phrase does and does not mean, and the scorecard shows how each one actually behaved.[1][2][3]

What “safe haven” means here. A safe haven is an asset people have historically moved toward when they are worried: about markets, about inflation, or about money itself[5]. The name describes behavior, not a promise. Nothing on this page is guaranteed, and each of the havens on this chart has fallen hard at some point; the scorecard below shows when, and by how much. A haven is a harbor: it is where ships head in a storm, not a guarantee that nothing sinks.
Since 2000: the S&P 500 with dividends vs. gold and traditional havens. Growth of $1,000,000, Dec 31, 1999 to Jul 2, 2026, log scale: gold $14.32M, S&P 500 total return $8.28M, S&P 500 price only $5.09M, 10-year Treasury total return $2.71M, Swiss franc $1.98M, U.S. dollar index $990K, Japanese yen $630K. A historical illustration, not any investor’s return and not a recommendation.
How to read this: a historical illustration, not an actual client return and not a recommendation. The chart uses a log scale: equal vertical moves are equal percentage moves, which makes 26½ years of very different lines comparable at a glance. The S&P 500 line includes reinvested dividends[2][3]; gold is shown using the spot price; the franc, yen, and Dollar Index lines show exchange-rate or index movement - currency-value signals, not investment returns; the Treasury line is a computed total-return estimate, not a published index[1]. Results exclude taxes, advisory fees, fund expenses, trading costs, gold storage and insurance, and client-specific allocations. December 31, 1999 sits at the end of a long stock-market advance and just before the 2000–2002 decline: this is one historical window, not proof that one asset is better than another in all periods, and different start or end dates may produce different results. Gold’s line ends about 24% below its January 28, 2026 record on daily closes: the endpoint is not a peak. Indexes are unmanaged and are not available for direct investment. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
What this chart shows
Are stocks treated fairly here?Yes. The S&P 500 line includes dividends, reinvested: $8.28M versus $5.09M from price alone.[2][3]
Is this saying gold is the better asset?No. This is one historical window, with one specific starting point, right before the 2000–2002 decline. Different start or end dates would tell the story differently.[2]
Was gold smooth?No. Gold fell 41.8% between 2011 and 2015 on month-end closes, and it sits about 24% below its January 2026 record as of July 2.[1]
Did the assets often viewed as safe havens avoid deep falls?No. Three of the seven lines are still below a prior peak, and two ended below the starting $1,000,000.[1][2][3]
What is the point?Different assets respond to different risks and serve different functions. And when volatility rises, we do not just step back to the longer trend; we read it through the four frameworks of the KFSC Macro Regime Model described above, asking whether each one still supports the trend or has turned against it, inside the trend and outside it. That is the discipline behind each “what built the trend” note on this page, and it is why we read any single year against the longer record.
S&P 500 Total Return
$8.3M
about 8.3 times the start, with dividends reinvested · +8.3% per year · index calculation, before any fund fees or taxes
What dividends added
+$3.2M
the gap between $8.3M with dividends reinvested and $5.1M from price alone · same index, same 26½ years
Gold (spot)
$14.3M
about 14.3 times the starting money · +10.6% per year · price only, $287.50 → $4,116.39 · Dec 31, 1999 – Jul 2, 2026
10-Yr Treasury Total Return
$2.7M
about 2.7 times the start · +3.8% per year · computed estimate; the 10-year yield fell from 6.44% to 4.48% · still below its July 2020 peak

Seven assets, one scorecard

Each row is one claim on $1,000,000: what it grew to, how hard it fell along the way, and how long the worst wait lasted.
Source: as in the chart above[1][2][3]. Values, drops, and waits are measured on month-end closes, so the drops shown are shallower than the same episodes measured on daily closes. Each drop names its window; “still below peak” rows are live and unresolved as of July 2, 2026. The “what built the trend” and “2026 so far” notes are the plain-English output of the four-framework read described above: our interpretation of the sourced data, descriptive of conditions through July 2, 2026, not predictive of what comes next.
RecoveredFell, then went on to set a new peak (4 of 7)Still below a prior peakThe wait for a new peak is still running (3 of 7)
Seven series, one starting dollar, 1999–2026  value · pace · worst drop · longest wait · what built the trend · 2026 so far
Gold (spot)The highest line on this chart, and not a straight one: as of Jul 2 it sits about 24% below its January 2026 record on daily closes.✓ Recovered
Value, Jul 2, 2026$14.32M14.32x the start
Per year+10.6%annualized, 26.5 yrs
Worst drop−41.8%Aug 2011 → Dec 2015, month-end closes
Longest wait for a new peak8.9 yearsAug 2011 peak was not seen again until Jul 2020
What built the trend · as we read itLong stretches when cash paid at or below inflation, a dollar well off its 2002 high, and central banks buying since about 2010.[1][6][7]
2026 so far · headwindThe 10-year yield out-pays core inflation by about 1.6 points (4.48% vs. 2.85%) and the dollar has firmed since late January; gold is −4.6% year-to-date, about 24% below its record.[1][7]
S&P 500 Total ReturnU.S. stocks with dividends reinvested: the growth engine of the seven, cut in half in the 2008 crisis.✓ Recovered
Value, Jul 2, 2026$8.28M8.28x the start
Per year+8.3%annualized, 26.5 yrs
Worst drop−51.1%Oct 2007 → Feb 2009, month-end closes
Longest wait for a new peak6.2 yearsAug 2000 peak was not seen again until Oct 2006
What built the trend · as we read itBusiness earnings and reinvested dividends did the compounding; the dividends alone are the $3.2M gap versus the price-only line.[2][3]
2026 so far · tailwind+9.9% year-to-date with dividends reinvested.[2][3]
S&P 500 Price OnlyThe same index without dividends; the gap versus the line above is what reinvested dividends added.✓ Recovered
Value, Jul 2, 2026$5.09M5.09x the start
Per year+6.3%annualized, 26.5 yrs
Worst drop−52.6%Oct 2007 → Feb 2009, month-end closes
Longest wait for a new peak6.8 yearsAug 2000 peak was not seen again until May 2007
What built the trend · as we read itThe same engine without the dividend reinvestment, a difference that compounds to $3.2M over the window.[2]
2026 so far · tailwind+9.3% year-to-date.[2]
10-Yr Treasury Total ReturnU.S. government debt with interest reinvested: a computed estimate, steady for two decades, then hit by the 2022 rate rise.⚠ Still below peak
Value, Jul 2, 2026$2.71M2.71x the start
Per year+3.8%annualized, 26.5 yrs
Worst drop−26.4%Jul 2020 → Oct 2023, month-end closes
Longest wait for a new peak6.0 yrs and countingthe Jul 2020 peak has not been regained as of Jul 2, 2026
What built the trend · as we read itFour decades of falling yields ended at 0.50% in March 2020; the climb to 4.48% repriced the bond, and the line has yet to regain its 2020 peak.[1]
2026 so far · mixedThe yield rose from 4.15% to 4.48% this year; the price loss roughly ate the interest, leaving the line about flat (−0.1% year-to-date). A 4%-plus starting yield now does more of the work than a 0.5% yield could in 2020.[1]
Swiss Franc vs USDLong viewed as the discipline currency: it nearly doubled against the dollar, but spent 14½ years regaining one peak.✓ Recovered
Value, Jul 2, 2026$1.98M1.98x the start
Per year+2.6%annualized, 26.5 yrs
Worst drop−23.7%Jul 2011 → Nov 2015, month-end closes
Longest wait for a new peak14.5 yearsJul 2011 peak was not seen again until Jan 2026
What built the trend · as we read itAs we read it, Switzerland’s low-inflation reputation did the work: the franc’s dollar value roughly doubled over the window.[1]
2026 so far · mild headwind−1.3% year-to-date against a firmer dollar, just below the January peak that took 14½ years to regain.[1]
U.S. Dollar IndexThe dollar measured against major currencies: a currency-value signal, and a round trip to roughly where it started 26½ years ago.⚠ Still below peak
Value, Jul 2, 2026$990K0.99x the start
Per yearabout flatannualized, 26.5 yrs
Worst drop−40.3%Jan 2002 → Mar 2008, month-end closes
Longest wait for a new peak24.5 yrs and countingthe Jan 2002 peak has not been regained as of Jul 2, 2026
What built the trend · as we read itStill below its 2002 peak; the full window is a round trip to roughly flat. Over this window it has tended to move opposite the gold line: firmer dollar, softer gold, and the reverse.[1]
2026 so far · tailwind for the dollar+2.5% year-to-date, firming from 96.2 in late January to 100.8.[1]
Japanese Yen vs USDA currency long viewed as a refuge: it lost ground for a decade and a half, and its lowest point of the whole span is June 2026.⚠ Still below peak
Value, Jul 2, 2026$630K0.63x the start
Per year−1.7%annualized, 26.5 yrs
Worst drop−53.1%Jan 2012 → Jun 2026, month-end closes
Longest wait for a new peak14.5 yrs and countingthe Jan 2012 peak has not been regained as of Jul 2, 2026
What built the trend · as we read itThe longest slide on the board: the yen has lost ground against the dollar since 2012, and it is the only line whose low point is now.[1]
2026 so far · headwind−2.8% year-to-date; June 2026 was its weakest reading of the entire 26½ years.[1]
The patterns, good and bad. The storms did not synchronize: in 2008 stocks fell 51.1% while gold fell 25.6% and set new highs by September 2009, about two and a half years before stocks regained their 2007 peak; in 2011–2015 gold fell 41.8% while stocks compounded; in 2026 gold is off about 24% while stocks sit about 1.7% from a record.[1][2][3] Both growth engines recovered from their worst falls in this window; the Treasury, dollar, and yen lines are still waiting.[1][2][3] The waits are the real warning: six to twenty-four years and counting across the board.[1][2][3] And the present inversion: the asset held for calm is at crisis-era volatility while the equity market runs below its own median.[1][8][9][10] When a line falls hard - as gold has this year - the fall alone does not say whether the trend is ending. You have to ask what built the trend and whether it is still standing; that is the question our July 2 gold commentary works through. This is one historical window with one starting point, not proof that one asset is better than another. History for context, not a prediction.

The story behind the trends

In order: the era before this chart, the storms inside it, and the turn we are living through now.
The 20 years before this chart: headwind, then tailwind
What happened to gold in the 20 years before this chart begins?It fell, for nearly the whole stretch. After rising about 24-fold in the 1970s - roughly $35 in early 1970 to $835 in January 1980 - gold dropped about 70% to $252 by August 1999. Measured year-end to year-end, its price lost about 44% across 1980–1999.[1]
What was the headwind?Cash out-paid inflation, month after month. To break the 1970s inflation, the Federal Reserve under Paul Volcker pushed interest rates far above it: the 10-year Treasury yield reached 15.82% in September 1981, and from 1982 through 1999 it out-paid core inflation in all 216 months, by 4.3 points on average, while core inflation fell from 13.6% in mid-1980 to under 2%.[1][7] The dollar was also strengthening - the Dollar Index peaked at 164.72 in February 1985[1] - and central banks were selling gold.[6] When cash pays well above inflation, gold, which pays nothing, has real competition.
How long did the wait last?Nearly 20 years of decline, and about 28 years below the old peak. Gold did not close above its January 1980 level again until December 2007.[1] A working career passed between the old peak and the new one.
And since 2000?Largely the same forces, reversed. An agreement capping official gold sales took effect in late 1999, just as this window opens; one monetary historian credits it with transforming the gold market[5]. The return on cash spent long stretches at or below inflation, the dollar weakened from its 2001–2002 highs - about 121 on the index in mid-2001 to about 71 by April 2008[1] - and central banks moved from selling gold to buying it.[6] This chart’s 26½ years sit almost entirely inside that reversed setup. Drawn over 1980–1999 instead, the same chart would have shown gold near the bottom, which is exactly why no single window is a verdict.
Source: gold, 10-year Treasury yield, and Dollar Index from LSEG daily closes[1]; core inflation from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics[7]. Gold’s 1980–1999 figures are price only, measured on the same daily-close series as the chart; the 1980 peak and 1999 trough are peak-to-trough closes, and the year-end change is measured December to December. Central-bank selling and buying is a qualitative description from World Gold Council data[6]. History for context, not a prediction.
Since 2000: the headwinds inside the trends
What did the S&P 500 fight through since 2000?Four storms. The 2000–2002 unwind: −44.7% with dividends, and the price-only line did not durably escape its August 2000 level until February 2013. The 2007–2009 crisis: −51.1%. The COVID crash: −19.6% in essentially one month. And the 2022 rate shock: −23.8%, the first of the four caused by the end of falling rates rather than a credit or valuation event.[1][2][3]
What did gold fight through since 2000?Fewer storms, but one recurring condition: whenever cash out-pays inflation and the dollar strengthens, gold - which pays nothing - has real competition. The 2008 liquidation (−25.6%), the 2011–2015 unwind (−41.8%, the peak not regained until 2020), the 2020–2022 pullback (−17.3%), and this year’s fall are, as we read them, versions of that same condition.[1][7]
What is the difference between their headwinds?As we read it: the S&P’s headwinds were events: crashes it went on to recover from. Gold’s headwind is a condition, and conditions do not end on a schedule; they change or they persist. That is why, for gold, the correction-or-thesis question matters more than the size of any single drop.
What changed in 2020?The direction of interest rates. The 10-year Treasury yield fell from 15.82% in September 1981 to 0.50% in March 2020, then rose to 4.48% by July 2026[1]. Most of this chart was drawn while rates were falling, and the fall was not a straight line: yields pushed up to 3.74% in early 2011, 3.01% in the 2013 taper episode, and 3.23% in late 2018, and each push reversed to a lower low: 1.39% in 2012, 1.37% in 2016, then 0.50% in 2020.[1] The climb since 2020 is different so far: six years without a new low. The years since 2020 are the first extended look at the same assets with rates rising instead of falling.
Has volatility actually changed?Yes, in gold; the S&P 500 does not show the same shift. On daily closes, gold moved at a 32.4% annualized pace over the last 26½ weeks, about double its 26½-year average of 17.2%; the rolling six-month reading sits at the 98th percentile of all windows since 2000, a level last seen in April 2009.[1] The S&P 500 over the identical weeks ran 14.0%, below its 15.5% pace during the climb from its 2022 low.[9] The option markets read it the same way: the Cboe GVZ index (gold) closed at 46.02 on January 29, its highest daily close since March 2020, and sits at 26.0, the 92nd percentile of its daily closes since late 2018, while the VIX (S&P 500) sits at 16.14, the 32nd percentile, below its own median of 18.1.[8][10] The moves got bigger where the correction is; the questions we ask did not change.
Why look at 26½ years instead of 26 weeks?Because the week-to-week tape is close to a coin flip even inside a strong move: gold’s last 27 weeks split 14 up and 13 down inside a fall of about 24% from the January record[1]. Each line here had stretches that felt like a verdict in the moment and read as a chapter later. A sharp fall raises a question the fall itself cannot answer: is this a correction inside the trend, or are the reasons behind the trend changing?
Source: all drawdowns computed from the same series as the chart, measured on month-end closes[1][2][3]; realized volatility from LSEG and TradingView daily closes[1][9]; implied volatility from Cboe GVZ and VIX daily closes[8][10]; the same episodes are deeper on daily closes. The events-versus-condition read is our interpretation of the sourced data: descriptive, not predictive.

The two exhibits below apply that same measurement to both climbs from the autumn 2022 lows: first gold, then the S&P 500.

The climb from the 2022 low, and the six months since: gold from the September 2022 low of $1,621.57 to the January 2026 record of $5,399.29 and about 24% lower by July 2; weekly moves showing both of the journey's biggest weeks in 2026; and a hypothetical $100,000 position placed at the 2022 low, worth $332,967 at the record and $253,853 on July 2.
A position in gold held since the September 2022 low rode the climb, and the climb was the quiet part: 16.3% realized volatility per year from the low to the January record. A newer position has a different starting point, and the right panel’s dollar figures change with it, but the volatility shift does not depend on the starting date: the last 26½ weeks ran at 32.4%, roughly double the climb, and both of the journey’s biggest weekly moves - +8.4% and −10.6% - happened in 2026[1][8]. The right panel is the arithmetic at these levels: the same 2% day that moved a $100,000 position by about $2,000 in 2022 moves it by about $5,100 at the July 2 value. A hypothetical illustration, price only, not any investor’s return and not a recommendation; details baked into the exhibit.
The same two climbs, measured the same way: the S&P 500 price index from its October 12, 2022 daily low of 3,577.04, up 112.7% to the June 2, 2026 peak of 7,609.77 and about 1.7% below it on July 2; weekly moves for the whole journey with the last 26 and a half weeks shaded; and a hypothetical $100,000 position placed at the 2022 low, worth $212,739 at the peak with $3,537 given back by July 2.
The same analysis applied to a position in the S&P 500, on the same daily and weekly basis as the gold exhibit: +112.7% from the October 12, 2022 daily low to the June 2 peak, about 1.7% below that peak on July 2, and the last 26½ weeks at 14.0% realized volatility, below its 15.5% pace during the climb, while gold over the identical weeks ran 32.4%[1][9]. The 2026 volatility shift is concentrated in gold, not the stock market. The panel is price only; with dividends reinvested, the climb measured on month-end closes was +122.5%[2][3]. A hypothetical illustration, not any investor’s return and not a recommendation. History for context, not a prediction.

Why these seven lines? The trust question

Modern money is not backed by anything physical; it works because people trust it will hold its value. Monetary historians describe that as the standing challenge of paper money: inside a country the government works to maintain the trust, between countries no single authority does, and the country whose money the world uses collects what a French finance minister called an “exorbitant privilege.”[4][5]

And the rules have not stayed settled: once currencies lost their link to gold in the early 1970s, the value of each paper claim became a matter of policy rather than a physical constraint, and shifts in those policies sit behind many of the era’s big turning points.[5]

That is the common thread in everything above. Gold is the one line that is “nobody’s liability,” as one monetary historian puts it: its value does not rest on any government’s promise[5]. The other six lines rest on somebody’s promise or performance: a government’s, a central bank’s, or the earnings of businesses. The spread between them is how differently those claims compounded over 26½ years: the top line, gold, turned $1,000,000 into $14.32M; the bottom line, the yen, shrank it to $630K. And it is why the correction-or-thesis question above is really a trust question. As we read it, what would change gold’s trend is not a price level but the conditions underneath it: whether cash out-pays inflation, whether the dollar holds firm, whether confidence in paper claims stays settled. The chart reports the history of those conditions; it does not predict the next chapter. Keaney Financial Services Corp does not produce forecasts.[1][4][5]

Models diagnose. Advisors decide. Portfolios implement.

Methodology

All series are indexed to $1,000,000 at the December 31, 1999 close and sampled at month-end through July 2, 2026 (a partial month). Gold, the Swiss franc, the Japanese yen, the U.S. Dollar Index, and 10-year Treasury yields are LSEG daily data[1]. The franc and yen lines show the value of each currency in dollars (inverted USD quotes: the franc moved from 1.5902 to 0.8031 per dollar, the yen from 102.21 to 161.10). The 10-year Treasury line is a computed constant-maturity total-return approximation, not a published index: each month earns the prior month’s yield as interest plus the price change of a 10-year par bond repriced at the new yield. The S&P 500 price path is TradingView monthly closes[2]; the total-return line reinvests dividends by calibrating that path so each calendar year matches the published S&P 500 total return (2026 is year-to-date through July 2)[3]. Annualized figures use actual elapsed time of 26.5 years. Drops and recovery waits are measured on month-end values and are shallower and can be shorter than the same episodes measured on daily closes; gold’s January–June 2026 decline, for example, reached about 26% on daily closes at the June 24 low and stood at about 24% below the record at the July 2 close. Weekly figures use the closing value of the last trading day of each calendar week. Realized volatility is the annualized standard deviation of daily log price changes on a 252-trading-day basis; the rolling six-month measure uses 132 trading days. The S&P 500 daily price series used for volatility begins April 9, 2018, and the daily implied-volatility series (GVZ, VIX) begin in December 2018 and January 2019; averages and percentiles for those series are stated for their available spans. Different start or end dates may produce different results. All figures are point-in-time, move daily, and may be revised by the data providers.

Sources

This commentary was prepared on July 3, 2026 and updated on July 5, 2026 by Keaney Financial Services Corp. Figures reflect the sources below as reported through the July 2, 2026 close. Keaney Financial Services Corp does not produce forecasts.
  1. LSEG. (2026). Daily closes: XAU=, US10YT=RR, CHF=, JPY=, .DXY [Data set]. LSEG Workspace. The underlying series extend back to 1968–1971; the chart window is December 31, 1999 to July 2, 2026. Cited for: the gold, franc, yen, dollar-index, and Treasury lines and all figures derived from them, and the longer 10-year-yield path (15.82% on September 30, 1981; 0.50% on March 9, 2020; 4.48% on July 2, 2026).
  2. TradingView. (2026). S&P 500 Index, monthly closes (SPCFD:SPX) [Data set]. https://www.tradingview.com. Cited for: the S&P 500 price path.
  3. S&P Dow Jones Indices. (2026). S&P 500 total returns by year [Data set]. Retrieved July 3, 2026, from https://www.slickcharts.com/sp500/returns. Cited for: the annual total-return figures used to build the dividend-reinvested line; 2026 is year-to-date.
  4. Pittaluga, G. B., & Seghezza, E. (2021). Building trust in the international monetary system: The different cases of commodity money and fiat money. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78491-1. Cited for: the framing that money rests on trust in the stability of its value; that producing this trust carries costs a state bears within a country while no supranational authority bears them between countries; and that issuing the dominant currency yields seigniorage revenue, the “exorbitant privilege” remark attributed to Valéry Giscard d’Estaing.
  5. Pringle, R. (2019). The power of money: How ideas about money shaped the modern world. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25894-8. Cited for: money as a trust relationship; the 1971 end of the dollar’s gold link and the interest-rate freedom central banks gained once unshackled from gold; and the description of gold as “nobody’s liability,” whose use as a fulcrum does not rely on any one nation’s promises. Cited for that framing only; the author states that a return to gold is not the solution and does not advocate one.
  6. World Gold Council. (2026). Gold demand trends: Q1 2026 (data by Metals Focus and Refinitiv GFMS) [Report]. As cited in the Keaney Financial Services Corp commentary of July 2, 2026. Cited for: the qualitative shift of central banks from net sellers of gold in the 1980s–1990s and 2000s to net buyers from about 2010 onward. Figures are not restated here.
  7. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2026). Consumer Price Index, core, year-over-year, monthly, 1958–2026 [Data set]. Retrieved July 3, 2026, via GuruFocus. Cited for: core inflation of 13.59% in June 1980 and 1.95% in December 1999, and the 1982–1999 comparison of the 10-year Treasury yield against core inflation.
  8. Cboe Global Markets. (2026). Cboe Gold ETF Volatility Index (GVZ), daily closes, December 2018–July 2026 [Data set]. Retrieved July 5, 2026, via TradingView. Cited for: gold implied-volatility levels, the January 29, 2026 close of 46.02 and its rank since March 2020, the July 2 reading of 26.0 and its percentile, and the 26½-week average of 30.2.
  9. TradingView. (2026). S&P 500 Index, daily closes (SPCFD:SPX), April 9, 2018–July 2, 2026 [Data set]. https://www.tradingview.com. Cited for: the S&P 500 daily price path from the October 12, 2022 low, weekly moves derived from it, and daily-basis realized volatility.
  10. Cboe Global Markets. (2026). Cboe Volatility Index (VIX), daily closes, January 2019–July 2026 [Data set]. Retrieved July 5, 2026, via TradingView. Cited for: the July 2, 2026 VIX close of 16.14 and its percentile and median comparison.

1. Compliance Disclosures and Risk Warnings

This commentary is published by Keaney Financial Services Corp for educational and informational purposes only. It is a historical read of seven long-run price and index series and the monetary backdrop around them. It is not investment advice, a recommendation to buy or sell any security, an offer or solicitation, or a guarantee of any outcome. Past performance is not indicative of future results and does not guarantee future returns. All investments involve risk, including the possible loss of principal. Markets can be volatile and values can fluctuate due to economic, geopolitical, regulatory, and other factors. Readers should consult their own financial, legal, and tax advisors before making investment decisions. Keaney Financial Services Corp and its representatives do not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of any third-party data referenced herein.

2. Framework and Risk Management Disclosure

The KFSC Institutional Intelligence System, including its KFSC Macro Regime Model and four diagnostic frameworks (the Monetary Integrity Framework, the Liquidity Transmission Framework, the Strategic Scarcity Framework, and the Market Structure Framework), provides analytical tools used to support advisor decision-making. These tools are not automated systems, do not predict future market outcomes, and do not dictate trades or portfolio actions. All portfolio decisions are made at the sole discretion of the advisor based on their interpretation of available data, client objectives, and prevailing market conditions. Investing involves risk, including political and geopolitical instability, economic and monetary system changes, currency fluctuations, market liquidity conditions, and rapid price volatility. Asset allocation, diversification, and risk management strategies are designed to manage risk but do not guarantee profits or protect against losses.

3. Forward-Looking Statements Disclosure

This commentary contains interpretive analysis of long-run market history written in clear, everyday language for a general reader. These statements are based on current observations, publicly-reported information, and analytical interpretation. There is no assurance current conditions will continue or follow any particular path. Keaney Financial Services Corp does not produce forecasts. Where this commentary references forward-looking expectations, those references are interpretive context drawn from publicly-reported third-party sources. Forecasting future market data is not part of the firm’s analytical methodology.

4. Hypothetical Illustration and Index Disclosure

The growth of $1,000,000 shown in this commentary is a hypothetical illustration calculated directly from the price and index series identified in the Sources. It does not represent the experience of any investor or any KFSC Risk Managed Strategy, and no such amount was invested. The illustration excludes dealer spreads, fund and account fees, advisory fees, transaction costs, storage and insurance costs for physical metal, and taxes, all of which would reduce results. The S&P 500 total-return series assumes reinvestment of all dividends without cost, which is not possible in practice. Indexes and exchange rates are unmanaged and are not available for direct investment. The currency and dollar-index lines are exchange-rate and index movements: currency-value signals, not investment returns and not measures of domestic purchasing power. The 10-year Treasury total-return series is a computed approximation, not a published index, and actual bond portfolios would have behaved differently. The starting point of December 31, 1999 precedes the 2000–2002 equity decline; different start or end dates may produce different results.

5. Methodology and Data Disclosure

All series are indexed to $1,000,000 at the December 31, 1999 close and sampled at month-end through the July 2, 2026 close. Gold, currency, dollar-index, and Treasury-yield data are from LSEG Workspace; the S&P 500 price path is from TradingView, with the total-return line calibrated to the published annual total returns of S&P Dow Jones Indices retrieved via Slickcharts. LSEG Workspace, TradingView, and Slickcharts are data platforms; the body names the underlying producer where applicable. Annualized figures use actual elapsed time of 26.5 years. Worst drops and recovery waits are measured on month-end values and are shallower, and can be shorter, than the same episodes measured on daily closes. Keaney Financial Services Corp does not originate underlying market data and contextualizes third-party data within the KFSC Macro Regime Model. All data is believed to be reliable but is not guaranteed and may be revised, restated, delayed, or estimated. Produced by Keaney Financial Services Corp. Prepared July 3, 2026; updated July 5, 2026.

6. Historical Event Selection and Dataset Disclosure

The seven series shown were selected as widely-followed measures of growth and of assets often viewed as safe havens: gold, the Swiss franc, the Japanese yen, the U.S. dollar, and U.S. Treasury debt, alongside the S&P 500 with and without dividends. The drops and recovery waits shown are read directly from the continuous month-end series; they are descriptive periods within each series, not discrete events selected for backtesting or trend extrapolation. Past patterns are not a reliable predictor of future patterns. All figures are as of the dates and reference periods specified and are subject to revision as new information becomes available.

7. Statistical Interpretation and Non-Predictive Use Disclosure

All figures presented, including ending values, annualized growth rates, peak-to-trough drops, and recovery waits, are drawn directly from the data identified in the Sources and are provided for descriptive and contextual purposes only. These measures do not represent expected outcomes, do not imply probability of recurrence, and do not constitute forecasts or projections. Keaney Financial Services Corp does not claim that any condition described will continue, reverse, strengthen, or weaken. All forward-looking interpretations remain subject to uncertainty and advisor discretion.

8. Advisor Discretion Statement

All investment decisions are advisor-led and implemented through the applicable KFSC Risk Managed Strategy risk option. Clients select a risk option before investing, and asset amounts are determined at the strategy/model level. Advisors may review whether a client’s selected risk option remains appropriate based on risk tolerance, objectives, time horizon, liquidity needs, and changes in financial circumstances. Models diagnose. Advisors decide. Portfolios implement.

9. Business Entity Disclosure

Keaney Financial Services Corp. provides insurance and financial services. Ameritas Investment Company, LLC (AIC), Member FINRA / SIPC, provides securities and investments. Ameritas Advisory Services, LLC (AAS) provides investment advisory services. AIC and AAS are not affiliated with Keaney Financial Services Corp. Ernesto Keaney and Emmelis Keaney are Investment Adviser Representatives of Ameritas Advisory Services, LLC. Accounts are managed on the Ameritas Wealth Platform.

KFSC MACRO INTELLIGENCE COMMENTARY  ·  JULY 2026  ·  THE S&P 500 WITH DIVIDENDS VS. GOLD AND TRADITIONAL HAVENS  ·  KEANEY FINANCIAL SERVICES CORP
Prepared July 3, 2026; updated July 5, 2026  ·  Data as noted in Sources