ds - a fair comment over a longer time frame, but what about comparing market caps also? we should think of some economic 'utility' comparison of the 2 units.
i.e. not everyone has/had access to BRK shares. Assuming they did, was accessibility (aka liquidity) available to all in similar manor? vice versa gold, buying and then selling - the reality of disposing of physical gold.
However, missing is the derivative opportunity of what that gold did to a BRK-proxy composition of gold stocks. Composing a gold only BRK parcel over the same period. The composition of BRK value is sum of parts, albeit a common investment class of stocks via shareholding. Gold is a physical raw material/commodity.
Considering grossly different investment cycles of the 2 different assets, the chart does say "as a diversification". In consideration of 10 years - the chart is more than fair to those who are dynamic in the assessment of asset cycles.
It answers Buffets derision in part when taken in the context it was provided.
Put it another way - that chart shows a clear opportunity cost to those who hung onto 100% BRK instead of selling some/part/all and taking advantage of the commodity boom via gold.
How could they have known? They couldn't without historical knowledge, but neither could BRK. Will be very interesting what the comparison is in 2016 at the end of this stagnation cycle.
But ANY divestment of BRK shares by holders at/near the low would have outperformed equivalent. This would be the "diversification" mentioned in the chart perhaps.
Hence know when to hold them, and when to fold them.
