⚠ More Countries Means More GovernmentsHigh threat

Operating in many countries is usually described as risk reduction. In mining it is closer to risk multiplication, because each additional country adds a government with the power to change the terms.

Barrick's experience in Mali is the working example. The Loulo-Gounkoto complex was a genuine Tier-One asset, and the company's exposure to it existed because the portfolio was diversified into West Africa. Geographic spread meant the loss did not sink the company; it also meant the company was there to lose something. Mining codes get rewritten, royalties get raised, export permits get suspended and ownership gets restructured, and none of those events is correlated with the gold price or with anything a mine manager does.

There is a version of this that works, and it is what Agnico Eagle has done: concentrate deliberately in a small number of stable jurisdictions and accept lower grade in exchange for enforceable title. The market has been paying for that choice, valuing Agnico at roughly 22 percent above the industry multiple while Barrick trades at a discount¹.

Barrick's counter is that the best geology is not always in the safest countries, and that avoiding difficult jurisdictions means avoiding the ounces.

The number to watch is the share of production and net asset value in countries with independent courts. That figure, rather than the count of countries, is what the market is actually pricing.