Gold Benchmark Was 27.6% Below Its January High on Oct. 30

Gold’s LBMA afternoon benchmark stood 27.6% below its Jan. 29, 2026, high on Oct. 30, while third-quarter demand gained in dollar value even as buyers took less metal.

The benchmark was $3,913 per ounce on Oct. 30, down 6.3% during October. Its Jan. 29 high was $5,405 per ounce. The 27.6% gap compares two prices from the same afternoon benchmark series.

Global demand, including over-the-counter activity, reached $188 billion in the July-to-September quarter, up 22% from a year earlier. Buyers took 1,369 metric tons, 1% less than in the third quarter of 2025. The quarterly average price rose 23% to $4,262 per ounce, lifting the value of demand even as its weight declined.

The demand figures cover activity through Sept. 30; the price reading captures Oct. 30. They measure different periods and do not establish a link between third-quarter purchases and October’s price decline.

The mix of buyers also shifted. Central banks and other official institutions recorded an estimated 321.2 metric tons of net gold buying, exceeding jewelry consumption of 312.9 metric tons. In the year-earlier quarter, official institutions bought 226.3 metric tons and jewelry consumers took 376.4 metric tons.

Country reports available through Oct. 30 showed 120 metric tons of net official-sector buying, below the 321-metric-ton overall estimate. About 63% of estimated official demand was absent from those reports. Delayed reporting and nondisclosure can contribute to the gap.

Demand for bars and coins was 267.8 metric tons, down 19% from a year earlier; jewelry consumption fell 17%. Gold-backed funds added 211.2 metric tons in the quarter after 47.3 metric tons of net withdrawals in the second quarter.

“The third quarter was a mixed bag for gold demand,” said Louise Street, World Gold Council senior markets analyst.

In October, gold-backed funds received $2.7 billion in net inflows and added 19 metric tons. Their combined assets under management nevertheless fell 6% to $542 billion as the gold price declined. The funds held more metal, but the dollar value of their combined assets was lower.