Energy Transition Materials ETF Report | July 2024

Energy Transition Materials ETF Key Takeaways

The Energy Transition Materials ETF fell sharply, returning -12.20% in June. The year-to-date return is -5.69% through June. After three straight months of impressive gains, all energy transition equity groups had a sharp correction in June. A combination of poor market depth, hyper-concentrated flows to select mega-tech names (mainly AI-related), more signs of slowing growth, slowing inflation, and a higher U.S. dollar collided with the technically overbought energy transition materials complex. Energy transition materials equities remain in a consolidation trend.

While the Bloomberg Commodity Index reported a modest -1.94% loss, the dispersion of commodity returns was broad. Crude oil rose 5.91%, while base metals copper and nickel fell -4.61% and -12.41%, respectively. Grains fell -11.26% on average. Throughout the month, there was a wide dispersion of returns across most assets and equity sectors.

The S&P 500 Index closed at an all-time monthly high, led by the technology group. An improved earnings outlook from the AI complex and falling bond yields expanded P/E multiples further. The concentration of market returns was notable as most non-technology-weighted indices (for example, equal-weighted, value, small-cap, cyclicals, etc.) declined in June.

The lithium spot price fell -13.57% in June, hitting its lowest level in 39 months and completely wiping out the 2021-2022 boom. Mining stocks performed similarly, declining -22.28%. With lithium destocking relenting and mines cutting production, current prices are unsustainable to incentivize investment in required future production. As such, we believe this may form the new bottom.

Macro Outlook

We believe the post-pandemic era marks the beginning of a new supercycle for commodities, especially for the critical minerals covered in this report. The clean energy transition is just one trend driving demand higher. Geopolitical tensions and conflict are prompting global powers to reshore their supply chains and production to ensure industrial security—an about-face after many decades of offshoring.

These trends are commodity- and capital-intensive, creating a demand shock for commodities. They are also inflationary in nature. We expect a steady increase in demand to drive commodities in the medium term. Meanwhile, the commodity demand shock is colliding with a supply situation that is woefully inadequate. Miners and production facilities have faced a decade of underinvestment caused by the low commodity prices that prevailed during an era of record-low interest rates and the long lead times required—often a decade or longer— to bring new production online. Sanctions on Russia, the world’s largest producers of many commodities, only aggravate the situation—while also fanning the flames of rising “resource nationalism.”

The commodity supercycles of the past arose from varied conditions. In the 1970s, an energy supply shock drove the distress, rooted in OPEC embargoes. In the early 2000s, it was demand shock from an aggressively growing China that underpinned commodity inflation. The emerging supercycle has both supply and demand shocks, prompting heated global competition to secure commodities.

Please remember that when you invest in ETFs, your capital is at risk.

Energy Transition Materials ETF Performance
As of 30/06/2024

1M3M6MYTD12M3YSI
Sprott Energy Transition Materials UCITS ETF-12.20%-1.28%-5.69%-5.69%-21.06%N/A-24.06%
The Nasdaq Sprott Energy Transition Materials Ex Uranium Index-12.07%-0.49%-4.82%-4.82%-20.29%-34.29%-23.17%


Please note that all performance figures are showing net data.
Source: Bloomberg / HANetf. Data as of 30/06/2024

Performance before inception is based on back-tested data. Backtesting is the process of evaluating an investment strategy by applying it to historical data to simulate what the performance of such a strategy would have been. Back-tested data does not represent actual performance and should not be interpreted as an indication of actual or future performance. Past performance for the index is in USD. Past performance is not an indicator for future results and should not be the sole factor of consideration when selecting a product. Investors should read the prospectus of the Issuer (“Prospectus”) before investing and should refer to the section of the Prospectus entitled ‘Risk Factors’ for further details of risks associated with an investment in this product. When you invest in ETFs and ETCs, your capital is at risk.

The EU has followed the U.S. and announced tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles (EVs) that range from 17% to 38% on top of an existing 10% duty. The EU found that China’s EV value chain is benefiting from unfair subsidization and causing a threat to EU EV producers. This follows the increase in U.S. tariffs from 25% to 100% on passenger EVs and from 7.5% to 25% on lithium-ion batteries announced in May. However, the U.S. tariffs were mostly symbolic, as the country currently imports almost no Chinese EVs. Europe, on the other hand, imports a significant amount of Chinese EVs, with the value surging from $1.6 billion in 2020 to $11.5 billion in 2023.  The new tariffs will likely not close the EU market to Chinese EVs, as analysis shows tariffs would have to be 45%-55% to render them uncompetitive.  However, they should mitigate against excessive Chinese dominance.

Ultimately, the EU and U.S. actions will help to reshore supply chains and create new opportunities for increasing investment in other regions. Notably, these moves exacerbate the upcoming lithium supply deficit as EVs hit record sales, with 3.2 million sold globally in Q1 2024, representing 18.3% of passenger vehicle sales and a 24% increase from the same period last year. In the long term, the sources of demand for lithium may shift, but ultimately, demand will still be significant.

We believe that there may be limited price downside in lithium. This is due to the severe drop already priced in and the fact that much of the increase in lithium production has been from Chinese lepidolite (higher cost and lower grade), which may be priced out at these unsustainably low levels. As time passes and lithium destocking winds down, potential Chinese stimulus, interest rate cuts and the U.S. election remain elements to watch.

There is tension in the current lithium environment between the short-term impact of negative sentiment and longer-term positive fundamentals that may come to light. Exxon and lithium miners came to the industry’s defense at the Fastmarkets Lithium Supply and Raw Battery Materials Conference in June, stating that they are continuing to back EV-demand growth and are committed to lithium investment.

Nickel began June with an 18.81% gain year-to-date, but as June brought challenges for all commodities, nickel lost -12.41% during the month.  At the end of June, nickel was up 4.06% year-to-date and nickel miners were down -6.54%, despite the previous strong gains in April and May. Nickel’s June downtrend was the result of significant selling of long positions by investment funds rattled by the stronger U.S. dollar and China’s weakened economy.

Although continued unrest in New Caledonia has put pressure on nickel supply, overall the market remains in surplus, driven by overproduction in Indonesia and softening demand from China. Falling nickel prices have put pressure on producers outside Indonesia. For example, BASF, the chemical company, and French miner Eramet canceled a joint nickel-cobalt refining project in Indonesia due to falling prices and the oversupplied market.

As mentioned in last month’s report, nickel miners in the West will likely get a boost from new U.S. guidance starting in 2025 that incentivizes car manufacturers to avoid using critical materials owned or controlled by a Foreign Entity of Concern (FEOC), which includes China, Russia, Iran and North Korea. Ultimately, the world’s shift to policies that impede globalization is inflationary for nickel prices.

ESG Copper Miners ETF Key Takeaways

The copper spot price fell -4.61% to $4.29 per pound in June. Copper prices retraced some of their gains but remain on their upward trajectory with a year-to-date gain of 11.72%. Copper miners and junior copper miners have performed similarly but with additional leverage to the underlying copper price. Year-to-date, they are up 25.41% and 17.93%, respectively. This action is occurring amid a broader metals market sell-off that occurred in June (which is reversing in early July) and a decline in investment fund buying, even though longs remain near record highs.

One key development is that China’s Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) has hit its highest level since May 2021. This is positive for copper because a higher PMI indicates stronger industrial activity and manufacturing growth in China, which is the world’s largest consumer of copper, accounting for 56% of the global total in 2023.

Despite the short-term consolidation, the overall trend for copper remains upward and several factors contribute to a bullish outlook. Chinese smelters are cutting production due to plummeting treatment costs. Additionally, the U.S. and UK have sanctioned Russian copper, fragmenting global supply. BHP’s bid to acquire Anglo American has ignited investor interest, highlighting potential mergers and acquisitions (M&A) activity that may suggest the industry continues to prefer buying existing assets over developing new ones.

While M&A may benefit pure-play copper miners, it does not create additional copper supply. As a result, the long-term fundamentals for copper remain strong, driven by escalating supply deficits. The world still relies on decades-old copper discoveries, as demand is increasing due to advancements in AI and efforts to electrify the global economy.

Source of all performance data: Bloomberg / HANetf as of 30.06.2024. All performance figures are showing net data. Past performance is not indicative of future performance and when you invest in ETFs your capital is at risk.

How to Buy