You have to admit gold has kind of stolen the show in the metals sector this year. The traditional safe haven investment raced to settle at a record price of $1,218.30 an ounce in early December. Now prices have fallen off somewhat since then, but the gold bulls and the gold bears are still arguing it out over when we might see $1500.

In all this gold rush though, you may have overlooked the significant gains in other metals. Here are a few to watch in 2010.

Platinum: Platinum prices have made solid gains this year, but some analysts say the precious metal could have more room to grow. Used both for jewelry and industrial purposes, constrained supply is an issue.

Copper: Prices for this industrial metal more than doubled in 2009 after a difficult 2008. Copper watchers expect demand for the metal will continue rising as global economies pick up in 2010. Copper is a key component for building projects, autos and electrical wiring, so it is an essential resource for quickly growing countries like China.

Steel: More, more and more seems to be China's attitude towards steel at the moment. Still the outlook for this essential building material is far from certain. Fitch Ratings predicts in a recent report that demand will recover at a "modest pace" over the 12-18 months, but says high stocks and excess capacity should limit price increases.  Morgan Stanley believes such overproduction should recede though and higher prices are on the horizon, driven by rising raw materials costs and China's booming property sector.

How have the housing markets held up in three major cities at the end of a tumultuous year?

Bond traders may not be considered the life of the party, but the bond market has been among the best buys in 2009 investing.

In this Web exclusive, a closer look at how bond trading works for you.

My wife invested a tidy sum more than a decade ago in five Chinese companies – and then forgot about it. When going through some paperwork, she rediscovered her investments and learned they had grown five-fold in value by November, 2007.

Our awareness of the investment, however, weighed on us during the calamitous events of 2008 as we watched, month-after-month, the value of the stock slide until we couldn’t take it anymore – in January this year, with the value just 20 percent up from her original investment, we cashed out.

From my previous reporting on behavioral finance, I knew that in the long run the smarter move would be to keep the cash in the market. But an surprise pregnancy and the unplanned expenses (to counter the unplanned joy) made it a straightforward decision for us. At least, we were getting out while we were ahead.

And then I’ve watched the Chinese stock market roar back to life, with year-to-date gains on the Shanghai index alone reaching 90 percent in August.

Doh!

What can I say – we’re human. And as humans we have a nagging propensity to sell low and buy high.

According to behavioral economist, our natural “fight or flight” impulses that kept us alive in the jungle often make our investment portfolios dead meat.

A buy and sell of a stock on a single day is a virtual coin toss: investors have a 50.2 percent chance of making money, investment counselor Philippa Huckle once told me. The longer investors hold, however, the chances of profit expand exponentially: there is a 70 percent likelihood of earning a profit holding for 18 months. Hold for five years, odds increase to a 95 percent probability of positive return, she said.

Yet despite this knowledge, our patience for investment is slipping: from 1984 to 2000 the average stock buy was held for two years and seven months; by 2004, the average slid to two years and two months.

According to Dalbar Inc., a financial research company, a $10,000 mutual fund investment in 1985 left to sit without withdrawal would be worth $95,000 in 20 years, despite losses suffered during the 1987 market crash, the 1997-98 Asian currency crisis and the technology implosion of 2000.

One interesting fact from behavioral finance research helps explain why we dropped that forgotten Chinese stock once we became aware of it – loss aversion. Research shows that investors “feel” the loss twice as much as a similar gain: In other words, the experience to lose $1 ,000 twice as intense as the pleasure of a $1000 gain.

Watching the stock drop month-after-month became too much to take, and we – like a lot of other investors – wanted that pain to go away. And it cost us.

Now I’m trying to forget that, too.

We’ve all heard the old tale that if you invested $10,000 in Microsoft when the company went public in 1986, today you’d be a multi-millionaire. We think back to when oil was trading at $30 a barrel, and ask ourselves why we didn’t get into the action. Or, look at the price of gold. Why didn’t I invest a bit just a few weeks back? We kick ourselves.

But actually making these investments is of course easier said than done. Because when we’re faced with investment decisions, it’s not that simple. People are comfortable with different levels of risk. And finding out where you stand within that spectrum can be challenging.

On this week’s Biz Clinic, we sampled a series of these tests designed to gauge your stomach for risk.

The following are some from a test put together by professor at Rutgers University:

In general, how would your best friend describe you as a risk taker?

1. A real gambler
2. Willing to take risks after completing adequate research
3. Cautious
4. A real risk avoider

You are on a TV game show and can choose one of the following. Which would you take?

1. $1,000 in cash
2. A 50% chance at winning $5,000
3. A 25% chance at winning $10,000
4. A 5% chance at winning $100,000

When you think of the word "risk" which of the following words comes to mind first?

1. Loss
2. Uncertainty
3. Opportunity
4. Thrill.

Take the full test if you want to get a clear picture of your appetite for risk.

While I was skeptical, the tests can be helpful. One independent consumer survey broke down a possible investment strategy for me. Another suggested a mix of aggressive mutual funds, with bonds. I was told I had a “moderate risk tolerance.”

They helped put my level of risk in perspective. And they got me thinking of another question you might ponder:

A Harvard-dropout has started a relatively new company that could revolutionize the way people use personal computers. You could make millions in the long run. But right now, he needs $10,000. Would you fork over the cash?

How do you find the right financial advice? First find the right financial adviser. CNN's Andrew Steven's reports.

In an special Web exclusive, an extended chat with John Gannon of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority on sussing out the best financial adviser.

We've all heard financial experts talk about "shorting" the market, and the role that "short-selling" arguably played in the global financial collapse. But is it really such an awful financial tool? And are U.S. regulators correct in cracking down on the industry?

And in a Web exclusive, Stephen Figlewski of New York University take a long look at the world of short-selling.

Hong Kong, China - As long as there are free markets and humans remain emotional creatures, there will always be financial crises.

So says renowned British historian Niall Ferguson. The Harvard University professor and I had a chance to meet in Hong Kong at a recent investors' conference. He shared his observations on the current economic crisis.

CNN: Is there anything unique about this recession?

Ferguson: This isn't a recession is the first point to make. It's a near depression. In fact, I am calling it the Slight Depression to distinguish it from the Great Depression of 1929 to 1933. And the unique thing is that we nearly repeated history. In other words we nearly repeated the Great Depression, but we avoided it with massive monetary and fiscal stimulus. So we are in new territory.

CNN: When does government intervention work?

Ferguson: We need to be very careful when we talk about government intervention. That covers a multitude of sins. There was a lot of government intervention in the Soviet Union and we know how that story ended. So we are talking very specifically here about two policies: one is the use of central bank money creating power to avoid a liquidity crisis that crunches the entire banking system. So intervention by the (U.S.) Federal Reserve beginning in 2007 and escalating in September of 2008 was primarily designed to avoid massive bank failures of the sort that made the Depression so serious in the early 1930s. And I think there is no question that we have learned from history and Ben Bernanke, as chairman of the Fed, has learned from history, that it's a good idea to avoid a generalized collapse of the banking system.

CNN: When does government intervention not work?

Ferguson: The other kind of government intervention, which is slightly more problematic, is the sort in which the government runs a large deficit in order to stimulate the economy by building roads and building bridges in order to get people back to work in the hope that in doing that, it will generate a recovery. This is the model developed by John Maynard Keynes back in the 1930s and it's been used by countries around the world to varying degrees. And to some extent, this has been effective. But the problem is, in the United States, you are adding a stimulus on top of an already huge structural deficit in the public finances, and the prospect of a trillion dollars of new borrowing every year for the decade ahead, that scares me and it should scare everybody.

CNN: There's been a backlash against the financial world, especially Wall Street. Have we seen the same level of fury after past crises and where does that vitriol lead?

Ferguson: It's not, by any means, the first time that people have felt furious of what they have seen going on in Wall Street: a financial speculative bubble that bursts and causes a recession which drives other people, ordinary folks out of jobs. The question is just how far this populous backlash is going to go in the United States and indeed around the world now. My suspicion is that it's got a ways to go. Each time an American loses his or her job, not surprisingly, he or she looks around and asks who's to blame for this. And when they see on Wall Street, the banks paying out million-dollar bonuses with what appears to be, and in some cases is, taxpayer money from the TARP fund, I am not at all surprised that people feel mad. And when they feel mad, they turn around and they say, 'How can I express this anger? Who can I vote for who is going to articulate my feelings of frustration?' And I wouldn't be at all surprised to see, as we approach the mid-term elections, more and more politicians, particularly Republicans, trying to articulate that sense of popular grievance.

What lessons have you learned from the current economic crisis? Tell us what your experiences are.

Sometimes I think if you want to be a serious investor, you shouldn't become a business journalist. Sure, you learn a lot about various industries and get insightful advice from experts at the top of their game. On the other hand, you know all too well how everything can go terribly awry.

Jim Rogers, the famed commodities investor and author of new book "A Gift to My Children: A Father's Lessons for Life and Investing," admitted to me that he is a horrible short-term investor.  However, he says you don't need to be a good trader to make money.

Here are his tips for anyone looking to invest in the current economic crisis:

1) Buy what you know. "You should only buy things that you yourself know a lot about - whether it's cars, sports, hairdressing, fashion, or whatever it is," he told me.  "Do some research, do some homework, and if you see something really dramatic changing that is cheap, buy it.  You are going to know about it long before I am, long before a broker on Wall Street is, and that is how you are going to make a lot of money. "

2) Don't be cocky. "Being overactive is usually a mistake," Rogers mused.  "It always leads to problems.  People don't like it.  They want to jump around all the time.  That's not the way to succeed as an investor."

3) Buy low, sell high. "It's as simple as that," he said.  "Nobody likes to hear it.  Now that is so simple and so easy, but you cannot believe how difficult it is to buy low and sell high.  That is the hard part."

So what is Rogers doing with his money?

He wouldn't buy stocks today - not even in emerging markets.  He is selling the U.S. dollar because "it's a flawed currency."  Today, he would put new investments into commodities or what he thinks are "sound" currencies such as the Canadian dollar and the Japanese yen.  And one of his favorites - farmland.  With food prices rising, he believes farmland "may be one of the best investments a person can make in 2010."  But get to know the farmer and the industry first, he reminded me.

In other words, be sure to do your homework.

The first thing that took me by surprise about my interview with Madhu Kannan, the CEO of the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) was the timing of our chat. “Can you be here by 8.25 am?” he asked. Sure, I replied and cameraman, Sanjiv, and I reached his plush office right on time.

It had taken around 3 months and an endless number of emails and phone calls to the BSE’s press office to confirm a date and time for our interview. It was frustrating to keep chasing them – I put it down to Indian bureaucracy and poor time management, unfortunately still typical of many large Indian companies.

“That’s one thing I am trying to change,” said Kannan when we interviewed him. “I want to start meetings on time and change the culture so no one’s late for meetings.”

It’s just one of the many, many challenges Kannan has ahead of him.

His big task: To revamp the BSE and make it relevant again.

At 37, he’s the youngest CEO of Asia’s oldest stock exchange. It’s an exchange that needs help.

While it had a virtual monopoly over stock trading in India, the entry of a rival exchange – the National Stock Exchange in the early 1990’s – changed that. The BSE now handles only a fraction of all trading done in India. To compete more efficiently, it needs to invest in better technology, says Kannan, who also has plans to make the BSE a one-stop shop for investors looking to trade across multiple platforms.

Sure, Kannan may get the BSE back on its feet. However, the real challenge for any stock exchange in India – be it the BSE or the NSE  – is to get more people to invest in stocks. Only a tiny fraction –two percent of India’s billion strong population – dabbles in the share market. Those in rural areas still prefer to invest in tangible assets like gold.

Even if Kannan is able to win back customers who’ve switched to the NSE, convincing newcomers to try their hand at trading shares, say observers, could be key to the BSE’s success. Given the robust year the Indian stock market has had, it could well attract a bunch of new investors.

Kannan has already started the process of repositioning the BSE. He’s in the process of buying a technology firm, has cut transaction fees, and – oh yes – he starts all his meetings on time.