The Conversation (0)
Golden Deeps Ltd (“Golden Deeps” or “the Company”) is pleased to announce further strongly copper-gold- zinc anomalous soil sampling and high-grade copper rockchip results from the Company’s 100% owned Havilah1 Project in the highly-prospective Lachlan Fold Belt copper-gold province in central NSW (Figure 1).
- Soil and rockchip sampling has identified three strongly copper mineralised target zones at the Havilah Project in the world-class Lachlan Fold Belt copper-gold province in NSW.
- High-grade rockchip results of up to 1.2% copper are associated with highly-altered and brecciated Ordovician Sofala Volcanics on the margin of the mineralised Aarons Pass Granite.
- Extensive mineralisation indicates the top of a high-level porphyry copper-gold system, with magnetics indicating the mineralisation continues under shallow Permian cover.
- Induced Polarisation (IP) geophysics is planned to target copper-gold sulphide mineralisation below the soil and rockchip anomalies and under the Permian cover. Drilling will then test key porphyry copper-gold targets analogous to the major Cadia-Ridgeway deposits to the west.
The extensive copper with gold and zinc anomalies are associated with strongly altered and mineralised Sofala Volcanics (SfV) within the magnetic aureole of the Aarons Pass Granite, which is associated with porphyry Mo-W-Cu mineralisation west of the Havilah tenement at Minrex Resources’ Mt Pleasant Project2.
The Company is targeting porphyry/volcanic hosted copper-gold mineralisation of similar style to the major Cadia-Ridgeway2 deposits in the Lachlan Fold Belt to the west of the Havilah Project (see Figure 2).
The soil and rockchip sampling (Appendix 1) has identified three highly copper anomalous zones within the Hazelbrook Prospect at the Havilah Project (see soil and rockchip results on magnetics, Figure 1, below):
i)Hazelbrook anomaly:
Infill sampling of the Hazelbrook Prospect has defined a strong, 1km x 400m, northeast-trending anomaly (Figure 1) which has also produced high-grade rockchip sample grades of up to 1.1% copper (Cu) with elevated gold (Au) and zinc (Zn). The highest grades are associated with malachite after sulphides in the altered and fractured volcanics (Image 1a) with aplitic felsic porphyry dykes.
ii)Hazelbrook North anomaly:
A very strong 400m x 200m north-south trending copper-gold-zinc anomaly (Figure 1) has been defined, which is associated with silicified and brecciated volcanics in outcrop (Image 1b). Rockchip grades of up to 0.2% Cu, 0.3% Zn and 0.15 g/t Au have been recorded, with elevated mercury - indicating a high (shallow) level in the mineralised system.
iii)Milfor anomaly:
Strong soil anomalism in altered and mineralised Sofala Volcanics has been identified, extending under Permian cover to the south (Figure 1). Chalcopyrite (copper-sulphides) in rockchips yielded grades of up to 1.2% copper (Image 1c).
Image 1a: Hazelbrook - Cu in SfV 1b: Hazelbrook North - brecciated SfV 1c: Milfor - chalcopyrite in SfV
Figure 1: Total Magnetic Intensity image with soil sampling completed and key copper anomalies / targets
Interpretation of detailed magnetics (Figure 1) indicates that the extensive copper anomalies at the Hazelbrook prospect are associated with northeast-southwest and north-south oriented faults that link to the Aarons Park Granite to the west and at depth. Aplitic porphyry dykes are also associated with these mineralised zones.
Outcropping chalcopyrite (copper-sulphide) at the Milfor prospect, in altered and brecciated Sofala Volcanics grading 1.2% Cu, indicates potential for an extensive copper sulphide system, which is partially obscured by post-mineralisation Permian sediment cover. Detailed magnetics imagery indicates that the mineralised Sofala Volcanics continue under the Permian cover to the south (Figure 1).
The Hazelbrook North anomaly, which is at a higher level topographically (see Image 2 below), appears to be the top of the porphyry system, characterised by elevated Zn-Hg-Sb in association with the Cu and Au.
Image 1: Havilah EL8936 looking south across Hazelbrook North silicified breccia. Permian plateau in background.
IP geophysics will be carried out over the strongest soil and rockchip anomalies to detect buried porphyry/volcanic hosted copper-gold sulphide mineralisation. The IP geophysics will extend to areas where magnetics indicate a veneer of Permian sedimentary cover obscures the potentially mineralised Sofala Volcanics (Figure 1).
Following the IP geophysical survey, drilling is planned to test below the key soil and rockchip anomalies and the IP chargeability copper-gold sulphide targets.
The drilling will target copper-gold mineralisation associated with porphyry intrusives and the Ordovician Sofala Volcanics. These targets are analogous to the major Cadia-Ridgeway and North Parkes deposits, which are also hosted by Ordovician volcanics and related intrusives in parallel volcanic arcs of the Lachlan Fold Belt (LFB) that lie to the west of the Havilah Project (see location of Cadia-Ridgeway, North Parkes and the Havilah Project shown on Figure 2 below).
Click here for the full ASX Release
This article includes content from Golden Deeps Limited, licensed for the purpose of publishing on Investing News Australia. This article does not constitute financial product advice. It is your responsibility to perform proper due diligence before acting upon any information provided here. Please refer to our full disclaimer here.
GED:AU
What is the January Effect? (Updated 2024)
In this article
What is the January effect?
The January effect is a theory based on a pattern that analysts have seen year after year: stocks seem to fare better during January than they do during other months of the year. Generally, small-cap companies are affected the most by the January effect, as large stocks are typically less volatile.
The first report of the January effect came in 1942 from Sidney Wachtel, an investment banker from Washington, DC.
Since then, experts have debated possible causes for this phenomenon. Many believe the January effect is triggered by tax-loss selling in the month of December. Tax-loss selling, or tax-loss harvesting as it is sometimes called, is an investment strategy in which individual investors sell stocks at a loss in order to reduce capital gains earned on investments. Because capital losses are tax deductible, they can be used to offset capital gains to reduce an investor’s tax liability on their tax return.
As an example of tax-loss selling for tax savings, imagine if an investor bought 1,000 shares of a company for US$53 each. They could sell the shares and take a loss of US$3,000 in the event that the shares declined in value to US$50 each. The US$3,000 loss from the sale could then be used to offset gains elsewhere in the investor’s portfolio during that tax year.
For more information about the strategy, plus the deadlines, check out our guide to tax-loss selling.
It’s worth noting that tax-loss selling or tax-loss harvesting is a trading strategy that generally involves investments with huge losses, and, because of this, these sales generally focus on a relatively small number of securities within the public markets. However, if a large number of sellers were to execute a sell order in tandem, the price of the security would fall.
Central to the January effect idea is that once selling season has come to a close, shares that have become largely oversold have an opportunity to bounce back. For example, investors who have sold losing stocks before the end of the year may be driven to repurchase those stocks, although they would have to wait for 30 days to pass, as required by the superficial loss rule.
Regardless of whether you’re buying or selling, Steve DiGregorio, portfolio manager at Canoe Financial, recommends that you act swiftly and aggressively during this time of year as “liquidity will dry up.” He has earmarked the second and third week of December as the ideal window to sell or buy at a low point. This is ahead of the “Santa Claus rally,” the trading days around the last week of December when stocks tend to rise ahead of a healthier market in January.
These circumstances have given rise to the alternate notion that stocks get a boost in January because many people receive holiday bonuses in December, providing them with greater investment income. Perhaps it’s one or the other — or perhaps, as with most things, a combination of drivers produces the January effect.
Is the January effect real?
While some say that the January effect was once an efficient market hypothesis that is now fading some mutual fund managers, portfolio managers and institutional investors say it isn’t real at all now. Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) first heralded the death of the January effect back in 2017, pointing to two decades worth of analysis that showed returns diminishing in the month of January compared to historical figures going back to 1974.
Those in the “not real” camp claim that while this event may have been tangible back in the 20th century, recent data looks much more random.
Illustrating this, the graphs below from US Global Investors compare the S&P 500’s (INDEXSP:.INX) average performance by month from the 30 years through 1993 and the 30 years through 2023. While January came in first during the first period with average gains of 1.85 percent, since 1993 it has averaged gains of 0.28 percent, putting it in eighth place.
Chart via US Global Investors.
Investopedia's more recent analysis continues to support the "January no-effect" position. Looking back three decades since the 1993 inception of the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (ARCA:SPY), investment advisor and global market strategist James Chen points out that in the last 31 years "there have been 18 winning January months (58%) and 13 losing January months (42%), making the odds of a gain only slightly higher than the flip of a coin."
The past two years, the markets have performed strongly in January. January 2023 saw the S&P 500 jump 5.8 percent over the course of the month after falling at the end of December. However, markets fell back down through February and March, making the rally short lived.
In January 2024, the S&P 500 dipped slightly at the start of the month but ultimately closed January up 2.12 percent higher than its open. Unlike the previous year, the index continued that upward trend through the end of March, at which point it was up 10.73 percent from the beginning of the year.
How can investors capitalize on the January effect?
It can be easy to get swept up in hearsay, and with debate still in play, the January effect is a risky business. Use your judgment, or the judgment of a professional, and don’t get sucked into chasing prices. It’s best not to base your investment strategy on the potential of a seasonal market mantra that reliable evidence shows no longer holds true.
For investors looking to capitalize on a potential rally due to the January effect, here are a few strategies to consider.
- Invest early — One approach is to invest in Q4 of the calendar year in order to essentially place your bets in anticipation of the January effect. If you’re inclined to participate in tax-loss selling, then you could time your buying period for the end of December and hope to harness both phenomena.
- Buy stocks with small market caps and micro caps — This can be a good strategy because these are the stocks that typically see the most movement during this period. As noted, larger companies are typically more stable. Still, that stability comes paired with lower risk, so risk-averse investors should stick with larger stocks.
- Buy dips in stocks you know well and feel confident will return to higher prices — It’s often a good plan to go with what you know, and it’s possible that stocks already in your portfolio will wobble due to tax-loss selling, presenting a lucrative buying opportunity. Just be sure to avoid buying stocks you sold at a capital loss during the prior 30 day period as discussed earlier, as the IRS will view that as a wash.
This is an updated version of an article first published by the Investing News Network in 2018.
Don’t forget to follow us @INN_Resource for real-time updates!
Securities Disclosure: I, Lauren Kelly, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.