10% Sent Gold Abroad, 9% Brought It Home

The World Gold Council asked 76 central banks where they keep their gold. The answer contradicts almost every headline you have read this year.

You have likely seen the same headline repeated: central banks are rushing to bring their gold home. It makes for a simple story — a breakdown in trust that sends bullion back across borders. The World Gold Council, however, surveyed 76 reserve managers and found a more nuanced reality.

The key finding is not a mass repatriation. More central banks added additional foreign vaulting locations last year than moved gold back to domestic vaults. The dominant trend among conservative institutions is diversification of custody, not a wholesale homecoming.

Where do central banks actually keep their gold?

Most official reserves remain stored abroad. That pattern has endured, and the survey results underline why.

Published on 16 June 2026, the World Gold Council’s Central Bank Gold Reserves Survey shows the Bank of England remains the most common vault location (57% of respondents). Domestic storage ranks second (49%), the Bank for International Settlements appears for 16%, and the Swiss National Bank is listed by 6% (down from 12% the prior year).

Those shares exceed 100% because reserve managers split holdings across multiple locations rather than choosing a single vault. Spreading storage reduces concentration risk and allows access to different markets and legal jurisdictions.

Where central banks vault their gold

Share of respondents naming each location (respondents may select more than one)

Respondents store across multiple locations, so shares exceed 100%. Source: World Gold Council, Central Bank Gold Reserves Survey 2026.

The survey collected 76 responses — the largest participation in the report’s nine-year history — and ran from February to May 2026. Many replies arrived after the Middle East conflict began, making this a current, self-reported view of how conservative reserve managers handle their metal.

Are central banks repatriating gold or not?

Some central banks are increasing domestic holdings, but a slightly larger share expanded overseas custody. In the 12 months before the survey, 9% of respondents increased domestic storage while 10% diversified into additional foreign vaults.

Looking ahead, planned moves mirror that balance: 7% intend to increase domestic storage in the next 12 months, while 9% plan to add foreign locations. Year‑on‑year the overseas diversification figure rose sharply from 2% to 10%, while domestic increases rose from 5% to 9%.

Put simply, this is not a broad repatriation trend. It is a deliberate strategy to spread custody across multiple jurisdictions, and the fastest-growing direction was outward.

Which direction did custody actually move?

Share of central banks changing vaulting arrangements in the prior 12 months

Source: World Gold Council, Central Bank Gold Reserves Survey 2026 (76 respondents).

Why would a central bank spread its gold across more countries?

Concentration is the core risk. Holding a large share of reserves in one place — whether a foreign vault or a domestic vault — exposes an institution to legal, operational and market constraints.

The freezing of roughly $300 billion of Russian reserves in early 2022 taught reserve managers an important lesson: assets held under another government’s jurisdiction can be rendered inaccessible. One reaction is to repatriate everything, but that merely shifts concentration to the domestic legal and operational environment. Domestic vaults offer sovereignty but may be slower to mobilise; international vaults provide rapid access to deep wholesale markets such as London, where gold can be lent, swapped or sold within hours.

Hence the more measured response: split custody. Reserve managers treat their gold the way any cautious allocator treats a concentrated position — by diversifying where it sits and which legal systems govern access.

What does “earmarked” gold actually mean?

Earmarked gold refers to specific, numbered bars held in custody for a named account rather than a share of a pooled balance. It is equivalent to the commercial term “allocated” and contrasts with “unallocated” holdings, which are claims against an institution rather than title to particular bars.

Earmarked: The Federal Reserve’s term for bars assigned to specific account holders; the custodian holds but does not own the metal.
Allocated: Commercial equivalent of earmarked — identified bars that are the legal property of the account holder.
Unallocated: A creditor claim against an institution rather than ownership of particular bars.
Good Delivery: The industry specification for bar weight, purity and certification that makes bars widely tradeable.

The New York Fed explicitly states that none of the gold in its vault belongs to the Federal Reserve System; it serves as custodian for governments, central banks and official organisations. As of 2024, that vault held about 507,000 bars (some 6,331 metric tons), the largest concentration of monetary gold under a single roof — and the institution does not claim ownership.

What did France actually do with its 129 tonnes?

France upgraded bar standards rather than repatriating for political reasons. The Banque de France has long aligned its holdings with the London Bullion Market Association Good Delivery standard (99.99% purity). In 2025 a residual 129 tonnes held in New York failed to meet that standard. Rather than ship old bars, France sold them in New York and purchased higher-standard bars in Europe. Its overall reserve remained unchanged at about 2,437 tonnes.

The operation produced a capital gain that the Banque de France reported belonged to French citizens. The governor emphasised technical and liquidity motives for keeping the new bars in Paris, not a political gesture. Although the move ended France’s custody at the New York Fed for the first time in roughly a century, the underlying driver was modernising bar quality, not a mass repatriation trend.

By contrast, Germany still stores a large amount at the New York Fed — roughly 1,236 tonnes — and despite frequent political debate that gold has not been moved.

What does this have to do with a private investor?

Everything. The custody question is identical at every scale: ownership is one thing, access is another. When you buy physical metal you should decide where it sits, whose records govern it, and what stands between you and physical delivery.

Three institutional principles translate directly to private investors:

Insist on allocated holdings — identified bars assigned to you rather than a claim on a pooled balance.
Choose custodians that clearly state they hold property for clients and do not treat client metal as their own.
Manage concentration by diversifying custody across jurisdictions, vaults and legal systems to reduce single‑point failure risk.

Understanding allocation, segregation and audit practices is the practical application of these principles for individuals. Knowing whether storage is allocated or pooled is the first step toward ensuring you can reach your metal when needed.

Why does any of this matter over the long run?

The long view shows why custody matters independent of price. The New York Fed’s vault held more than 12,000 tonnes of monetary gold in 1973 and about 6,331 tonnes by 2024. That halving followed the end of official dollar convertibility into gold. Gold is unique among major reserve assets because it is nobody’s liability — no government issues it and none can dilute it. That attribute explains why many central banks expect their holdings to rise: in the survey, a record 45% forecast increases.

But being nobody’s liability is only valuable if you can access the metal. Custody arrangements determine whether reserves or private holdings can be reached when needed. That is why the world’s most conservative institutions focused on where their bars sit rather than how many they hold over the past year.