Gold Mining AISC: World Gold Council Definition and Data

All-in sustaining cost (AISC) is gold mining’s standard measure of what it actually costs a producer to keep an ounce coming out of the ground — not just labor and energy at the pit, but the sustaining capital, royalties, and closure obligations needed to keep production going. The World Gold Council (WGC) introduced the metric in 2013, and it now sits at $1,785 per ounce globally as of Q1 2026, up from an average of $1,276/oz for 2022 (WGC, 2023). That is not a stable baseline. WGC counts it as the 28th year-on-year rise in a row in its quarterly AISC series.

World Gold Council AISC Definition

The World Gold Council‘s all-in sustaining cost definition, laid out in its official guidance, calculates AISC as the sum of a mine’s direct cash operating costs plus every additional dollar needed to sustain current output at that same rate — sustaining capital, corporate G&A, royalties and production taxes, and reclamation and remediation charges. It deliberately excludes growth capital: money spent on new mines and on major projects at existing mines (WGC’s test is a rise of at least 10% in output, NPV or reserves). Exploration is split the same way, with separate lines for sustaining and non-sustaining spend.

You can read the full AISC methodology directly from the World Gold Council. It sets out each line item. WGC’s quarterly industry averages come from the Metals Focus Gold Mine Cost Service.

The WGC note sets out a fixed table, in US dollars per ounce of gold sold (WGC Guidance Note, June 2013, updated 2018). It starts with adjusted operating costs: on-site mining and on-site G&A, royalties and production taxes, hedge gains and losses tied to operating costs, community and permitting costs for current operations, third-party smelting, refining and transport, site-based non-cash pay, stockpile write-downs and operational stripping, less by-product credits. AISC then adds six more lines: corporate G&A, reclamation accretion and amortisation at operating sites, sustaining exploration (expensed and capitalised), capitalised stripping and underground development, and sustaining capital spending. Non-sustaining costs go into a separate, wider measure called all-in cost (WGC, 2026).

What’s Inside AISC: The Full Component List

• Cash costs: what it takes to run the site today — labor, materials, energy
• Sustaining capital: keeps output flat, not growing. A new haul truck replacing a worn one counts; a new pit does not
• Corporate overhead that supports the company structure, not growth projects
• Reclamation and remediation: an accounting charge for closing operating sites, not the cash paid in the year (WGC note, 2013)
• Royalties and production taxes: government and landowner take, scaled to output

Current AISC Data: Global Average and Regional Ranges

WGC’s Gold Focus article of 24 August 2026 covers Q1 2026. The global average AISC across all producers was $1,785 per ounce in Q1 2026. That was up 5% on Q4 2025 and 16% on Q1 2025. The Q4 2025 average was $1,706 per ounce, a record at that time (WGC Gold Demand Trends, April 2026).

Costs vary sharply by producer. WGC’s regional data for Q3 2024 show the range: $1,197 per ounce in South America, $1,464 in Oceania, $1,508 in North America and $1,532 in Africa (see the chart below). That gap is one reason a single “average AISC” headline number says little about any one mine: where a mine sits in that range depends on ore grade, strip ratio, labor market, and how far along it is in its mine life.

AISC vs. Cash Cost: Why the Distinction Matters

Total cash cost only covers what it takes to run the site today — labor, energy, consumables. AISC adds sustaining capital, corporate overhead, royalties, and closure provisions on top. The gap between the two numbers is exactly the sustaining spend a cash-cost figure hides, which is why a mine can report a flattering cash cost while its AISC tells a different story. When you see a company press release lead with “cash cost,” check whether an AISC figure appears in the same release; if it doesn’t, that’s worth asking about directly.

AISC is a non-GAAP measure, so it sits outside audited accounts. The WGC note asks companies that use it to reconcile it to their GAAP reporting. In the United States, SEC staff guidance asks for a quantitative reconciliation to the nearest GAAP measure. It also warns that dropping normal, recurring cash operating costs from a measure can mislead (SEC Non-GAAP Financial Measures interpretations, updated December 2022). That is why a good AISC release shows its reconciliation table.

The pieces differ in size. In Q3 2024, WGC put royalties and mining tax at $90 per ounce and sustaining capital spending at $303 per ounce, against a global average AISC of $1,456 per ounce (WGC Gold Focus, March 2025).

What’s Pushing AISC Higher

WGC’s Q1 2026 gold focus report attributes the sustained rise — 28 straight year-on-year increases in the quarterly figure through Q1 2026 — to a combination of royalties that scale with the gold price, and higher energy and supply-chain costs, since many jurisdictions levy royalties as a percentage of revenue rather than a fixed per-ounce rate. That last mechanism means AISC has a built-in tailwind whenever the gold price runs up: higher revenue triggers higher royalty payments, which raises AISC even if physical operating costs haven’t moved. It’s a detail that’s easy to miss if you’re reading AISC purely as an inflation gauge.

WGC does publish one split. Royalties and production taxes were about 6% of AISC in Q1 2021 and about 12% in Q1 2026. For a full labour, energy and royalty split, individual miners’ quarterly reports are the place to look.

The Q1 2026 data show how large the royalty effect has become. Royalty and production-tax payments rose 24% on the quarter and 85% on the year. Their share of AISC doubled, from about 6% in Q1 2021 to about 12% in Q1 2026 (WGC Gold Focus, 24 August 2026). Energy also mattered: wholesale diesel in Perth, Australia rose 96% over the quarter, and higher natural gas and ammonia prices raised the cost of explosives and sodium cyanide. The average AISC margin reached a record $3,076 per ounce, because the average gold price rose 17% on the quarter while costs rose 5%. WGC’s supply notes expect higher energy prices linked to the Middle East conflict to weigh more on costs from Q2 2026 (WGC Gold Demand Trends, Q2 2026).

How to Check the Current Number Yourself

Because AISC moves every quarter, any figure printed here has a shelf life. Here’s how to get a number fresher than the one in this article:

• For the global average: World Gold Council publishes updated AISC metrics on its GoldHub platform each quarter. Check the Gold Focus report series for a newer release.
• For a specific producer’s AISC (Barrick, Newmont, or any other major): major gold miners report AISC in their quarterly earnings releases, usually in the results release that follows each quarter. Search the company’s investor relations page for its most recent quarterly report.
• For another view of costs: S&P Global Market Intelligence also publishes mine cost research. Its method differs from WGC’s, so keep the two series apart.

That refresh path is the durable part of this article — the dollar figures above will move, but the sources and the quarterly cadence they publish on will not.

Timing is worth knowing. The Q1 2026 Gold Focus article was published on 24 August 2026. WGC’s AISC data page, dated 6 October 2026, lists data to 30 June 2026 (WGC GoldHub AISC data). Expect the newest quarter to arrive weeks after quarter end. WGC notes that companies report costs in different ways, so compare figures within one series.

Satellite Intelligence for Lower-Cost Exploration

Exploration for new deposits sits outside AISC, because WGC treats it as non-sustaining spend. It still shapes what a project costs, so early screening matters before a mine reaches production. Farmonaut’s satellite-based mineral detection flags exploration targets before drilling (these are targets, not a resource estimate), so exploration budgets go toward ground that’s already been screened rather than blanket-covering an entire concession.

• Faster target identification, cutting early-stage exploration spend that would otherwise inflate a project’s cost base before production even begins
• Zero ground disturbance during the satellite screening stage
• Mineral intelligence reports that map target zones for field teams to check
• Better capital allocation toward the targets that screen best, before field work starts

Explore Farmonaut’s Satellite-Based Mineral Detection Service for prospectivity screening, or review the Satellite Driven 3D Mineral Prospectivity Mapping methodology for geological modeling and target analysis.

Get a Quote or Contact Us to discuss satellite-driven exploration for your project.

FAQs: All-in Sustaining Costs

All-in sustaining cost is the number that tells you whether a gold mine’s current output is actually economic once every ongoing obligation is counted — not just the headline cash cost. The figures move every quarter; the method for checking them, through WGC’s GoldHub releases and individual producers’ quarterly filings, doesn’t.