Gold’s recent move above $900 has analysts scrambling to increase their price targets.

The last time I looked at gold price targets from analysts was in early December, when a similar flurry of activity took place. Morgan Stanley got the ball rolling by saying that gold could reach $1,000 in three years, Merrill Lynch followed with a price of $1,500 at an unspecified date, and Citigroup topped them all by mentioning $2,000.

This time around started in the same way with Morgan Stanley making a timid call for $1,075 gold in three years. From their report: “A globally synchronous and aggressive fiscal and monetary stimulus may be needed to re-inflate the global economy, and we think this continues to present significant upside to gold prices.” For their rhetoric, their target price is ridiculous, unless you consider “significant upside” to be a 6% annual gain for three years.

Merrill Lynch chimed in next with their Chief Investment Officer reiterating their prediction of $1,500 gold, but this time with a time frame of 12 to 15 months. Quote from the CIO: “With confidence in currencies shaken to the core, the yellow metal is increasingly assuming the role of “the most trusted currency. We have never seen such a rush to buy gold. It’s bringing in security and it’s still affordable.”

A few days following, both UBS and Goldman Sachs updated their previously underwater gold price targets. UBS raised their 2009 price target from $700 to $1,000. Goldman Sachs raised its forecast of $700 to $1,000 within a three month time frame.

As expressed before, I do not think we have reached the point where these periodic analyst pile ons can be used as a contrary indicator for gold. Analysts are still showing restraint, and for the most part raising their targets simply to keep up with the rising price of gold.