How Interest Rates Affect Commodities And Indices
One rate decision reaches indices through discounting and commodities through carry, currency and growth, which is why the reactions diverge.
Higher interest rates weigh on equity indices by raising the discount rate applied to future earnings and by increasing corporate borrowing costs, hitting growth-heavy indices hardest. They weigh on non-yielding commodities like gold by raising the opportunity cost of holding them, and on industrial commodities mainly through slower expected growth and a stronger dollar. Markets price the expected path of rates, not the announced level.
What to remember
- A 100 USD cash flow ten years out loses 17.5% of its present value when the discount rate goes from 3% to 5%. The same cash flow next year loses 1.9%.
- In 2022 the Nasdaq 100 fell about 33% and the S&P 500 about 19%, while gold ended roughly flat despite surging real yields.
- Markets price the expected path, not the announcement. A hike can cause a rally if the market had priced a larger one.
- Gold responds to real yields, industrial metals to growth expectations, and everything dollar-priced inherits a currency channel.
- Rate cuts are not automatically bullish for indices. Central banks cut because activity is deteriorating.
Lesson 9 of 16 in Commodities and indices
Interest rates reach equity indices through the discount rate applied to future company earnings and through the cost of corporate borrowing. They reach commodities through the opportunity cost of holding something that pays no income, through the currency the commodity is quoted in, and through the cost of financing inventory. Same policy decision, three or four separate transmission channels, which is why a rate rise can hit a technology index hard and leave copper untouched.
2022: rates up 425 basis points, the Nasdaq down a third
The clearest recent demonstration ran over a single calendar year. Through 2022 the US federal funds target moved from near zero to roughly 4.25% to 4.50%. Over the same year the Nasdaq 100 fell about 33%, the S&P 500 fell about 19%, and gold finished roughly where it started, down a fraction of a percent.
Three very different outcomes from one policy cycle. The technology index fell hardest because its valuation leans most on distant cash flows. The broad index fell less because a large part of it is companies earning money now. Gold, which the textbook says should have fallen as real yields surged, went nowhere, because central bank buying and a flight to safety offset the yield headwind. The textbook channel was real and it was not the only thing happening.
Discounting: why two points of rate takes 17% off a distant cash flow
The arithmetic behind the index reaction is a single formula. A cash flow arriving in ten years is worth its size divided by one plus the discount rate, raised to the tenth power. At a 3% discount rate, 100 USD in ten years is worth 74.40 USD today. At 5%, the same 100 USD is worth 61.40 USD. That is a 17.5% fall in present value with no change whatsoever to the business.
Now apply that unevenly. A utility earning steady cash today has most of its value in the near years, where discounting barely bites: 100 USD arriving next year falls from 97.10 to 95.20, a 1.9% haircut. A growth company whose value sits mostly a decade out takes the full 17.5%. That difference, repeated across hundreds of constituents, is what separates a technology index's drawdown from a broad index's in a tightening cycle.
There is a second, slower channel. Higher rates raise the cost of refinancing corporate debt, which shows up in earnings over the following year or two rather than on the announcement day. Highly leveraged and smaller companies feel it most.
Gold answers to real yields, copper answers to growth
Commodities do not share one rate channel. Split them by what drives demand.
- Precious metals pay no coupon, so holding them costs the real interest rate, which is the nominal yield minus expected inflation. Rising real yields raise that cost. The inflation half of that subtraction is what catches people out: rising prices help gold only while nominal yields lag them, and a central bank moving faster than inflation expectations turns the same inflation story into a headwind.
- Industrial metals and energy respond mainly to expected activity. Rates matter to them because tighter policy slows construction and manufacturing, but the link runs through growth expectations rather than through carry.
- Everything priced in dollars inherits a currency channel. Higher US rates relative to elsewhere tend to strengthen the dollar, which makes dollar-priced commodities more expensive for buyers holding other currencies, and demand adjusts.
- Inventory financing is the quiet one. Storing physical commodities is funded, so higher rates raise the cost of carry, steepen futures curves and discourage stockpiling.
12 more sections in MarketPro
Finish this lesson in MarketPro
The rest of How Interest Rates Affect Commodities And Indices, a quiz that checks it landed, and your place kept in the curriculum.
- 12 more sections of this lesson
- All 320 lessons, with no cap and no paywall
- Free on any account, including a free one
Same account as the app · No install · Free to start
Or scan with your phone camera to get the MarketPro app.
Free account, no card needed.
Not investment advice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
Run the numbers while this is fresh
Work it through on your own position size. Nothing leaves your browser and there is no sign-up: Pip value calculator, Position size calculator, Margin calculator.
How Interest Rates Affect Commodities And Indices: questions
Why do stock indices fall when interest rates rise?
Does gold always fall when interest rates rise?
Should I trade through a central bank rate decision?
The whole academy is free in MarketPro
All 320 lessons, 12 guided paths, quizzes and a daily streak. Free on every account, in the app or your browser, with vetted free signals alongside it.
Same account as the app · No install · Free to start
Not investment advice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.