Benzinga and Yahoo Finance LLC may earn commission or revenue on some items through the links below.
For generations, real estate has stood alongside gold as one of the primary stores of wealth. But billionaire investor Ray Dalio is challenging that conventional wisdom with a pointed critique that could reshape how investors think about property as a protective asset.
Dalio, in a June interview at the 92nd Street Y in New York City, argued that despite its historical reputation, real estate is “not a good idea” as a hedge against concerns about paper currency and its valuation. For investors who’ve traditionally viewed property as a safe haven during economic uncertainty, Dalio’s reasoning presents two structural problems that are difficult to ignore.
Don’t Miss:
The first issue Dalio said is one many real estate investors have felt acutely in recent years: property values are primarily sensitive to interest rates rather than inflation. When rates rise, real estate values typically fall in real terms, making it a poor diversifier during the exact type of negative financial environment investors hope to protect against.
This reality has played out as the Federal Reserve raised rates to combat inflation. Property values compressed while investors watched their supposed inflation hedge move in the wrong direction.
Dalio’s second critique cuts deeper and is less commonly discussed: real estate is the “easiest asset to tax.” Because property is a fixed asset that cannot be moved, governments at the federal, state, and local levels can “always get the money” through real estate taxes. This fundamental characteristic makes real estate an “ineffective diversifier,” according to Dalio.
Trending: Wall Street’s $12B Real Estate Manager Is Opening Its Doors to Individual Investors — Without the Crowdfunding Middlemen
The logic is straightforward but powerful. Unlike gold, which can be stored privately and moved across borders, or even cryptocurrency, which can be held in non-custodial wallets, real estate is literally “nailed” in place. This immobility prevents investors from easily being able to “move money from one place to another” when tax policies become unfavorable or economic conditions deteriorate in a specific jurisdiction.


