Title: Mart Wolbert: Uranium at Key Point, US$150 Price is "Inevitable" (YouTube page title: "Mart Wolbert: Uranium Supply Tight, Demand Strong — What's Next for Prices, Stocks?") Show: Investing News Network (host Charlotte McLeod) — annual uranium catch-up Guest: Mart Wolbert (analyst, Contrarian Codex; X: @YellowBull11) Date: 2026-09-19 (YouTube publishDate); recorded shortly after the London WNA symposium URL: https://youtu.be/wra8nkriSxo Length: 44:23 Note: YouTube auto-transcript pasted by Stephen; fillers (um/uh, "you know" interjections, contentless "like") and stutters/false starts removed; wording otherwise verbatim; (mm:ss) cues kept in place. ">>" marks a speaker change. Auto-transcript garbles fixed: "Charlotte Mloud"=Charlotte McLeod, "Mark Wahlbert/Walbert"=Mart Wolbert, "contrarianc/Contran Codeex/Australian Codex"=Contrarian Codex, "yellow bull 11"=@YellowBull11, "K&HP"=KHNP, "SU"=SWU, "Juke"=Duke, "Kamako/chemical"=Cameco, "Cassad"=Kazatomprom, "Peninsula Lotus"=Peninsula, Lotus, "boss ... honeymoon"=Boss Energy's Honeymoon, "Genovas"=GE Vernova, "Terap Power"=TerraPower, "USPakistan"=as spoken (likely "Kazakhstan"; unconfirmed), "shake a nuclear fuel rod at"=as spoken. Figures such as "2.1 billion pounds" (US production) and "£400,000"/"£300" (Duke RFP, meaning pounds U3O8) are as spoken.
00:05 I'm Charlotte McLeod with investingnews.com and here today with me is Mart Wolbert. He's analyst at Contrarian Codex and you can also find him on X at Yellow Bull 11. Thank you so much for being here. Always great to catch up with you. >> Charlie, thank you. I always like our annual catching ups on the uranium and nuclear power sector.
00:24 So yeah, happy to be here as well and I hope that all the listeners are doing well, particularly those invested in uranium, which is probably why you clicked on this video. It has been very volatile but still I hope you're weathering the storm. >> Yes, I think great words to start with and excited to catch up with you on what's happening in the sector.
00:43 You're just back from the recent WNA event, so we want to start there and get your key takeaways and sense of sentiment on the show floor. What can you share? >> I will say that the sentiment was really positive, really constructive, and that it reminded me a little bit of two years ago when the sentiment on the floor was again as well positive, maybe less positive and constructive compared to now because in two years we've had so many catalysts.
01:11 But why it reminds me of two years ago is that investor sentiment on the other side of the equation. And I track this stuff for my bi-weekly newsletter to kind of see, okay, where can we get a good entry into the space, when maybe do we need to trade out if sentiment is at euphoric levels and nobody can get any pounds and everybody's panicking — you know the deal.
01:31 Right now the sentiment is really, really low, but at the conference it was, again as I said, really constructive, and I think that the sentiment in one line was really well summed up by a contact of mine who noted that years and years of building up to the point where we are now.
01:53 It feels like we are at a crucial juncture, like a crucial gate where we're now going through, and I think that will translate into even higher price. Of course, as you and the listeners will have seen, term price and now spot price as well have been continuously perking up and up and up, stair-stepping our way up. And I remember at the start of the year talking to a fuel buyer at one of the larger US utilities who noted that he wouldn't at all be surprised if we see a stair-step upwards. So then of course I shared
02:24 that with the people and he was completely right, and this guy does a lot of work. I really respect him for it. And I think that kind of seeped into the conference as well. So that made sure that there were a lot of dialogues happening at the conference, really constructive dialogues. And I think that one of the most interesting things that I heard was from a really valued contact of mine, a real industry participant who is involved with various parts of the fuel cycle, who noted that after speaking to a fuel buyer — and this
02:58 was I think the best quote from the conference — they noted that fuel buyers up until two years ago were mostly focused on, okay, we're having this conversation about supply, what is the price, what are the terms. And those were basically some of the most important things, combined with of course a few other things, but it was mostly price and terms. But why I mention it right now is that has kind of ebbed away. Of course they will still look at the price, they will still look at the terms, but right now the most important
03:31 thing, for the first time in some time, we are now looking at fuel buyers basically giving massive priority to: can you actually deliver the pounds? Because they have been severely disappointed by the lack of supply response at the $97 term, $90 spot that we are at right now. They expected a lot more from it, and of course we've seen — we can get into this later as well.
03:57 We've seen brownfield after brownfield and greenfield after greenfield face timing issues, face pricing issues, with prices rising continuously. So I think that's very important. Some of these projects haven't delivered at all like what we would have expected in 2021. So I think that's very interesting.
04:19 And that makes sure that a lot of these utilities are now kind of accepting terms, or at least coming to the table for the terms, that they would have waved away two or three years ago. So that combined with a few other interesting topics, and then we'll get into more specifics. We of course saw the KHNP — that's the Koreans' — enrichment tender for 800,000 SWU a year, which is about 26 to 31 million pounds across the life of the contract, which is three times the size of their previous tender.
04:50 We saw a US government RFI for 1,500 tons of UF6, or 4 million pounds a year, of unobligated US-origin uranium for the coming 10 years. We have not seen that for some time. I mean the US just produced 2.1 billion pounds last year and it produced way under a million pounds a year before. This is not the 1980s anymore.
05:16 We're not producing 43.7 million a year in production. So I think that that was a massive signal of intent, the fact that we see some competition for US utilities from their own, if you will. You had Duke's RFP, speaking of US utilities, at 400,000 pounds a year for five years into the 2030s, with an option for another 300,000 a year for three more.
05:41 And I think the RFP, less so than the context around it, was important. The reason I say that is because a few years ago this RFP would have been filled like that, within a few weeks, maybe within the week. Right now it was seen as relatively large; a few years ago it wouldn't have been the case. So I think there were a lot of very, very interesting developments. What I will say is I don't want to sound like a cheerleader here. I'm not here to pump up the stocks and do everything else. I'm
06:14 just here to — I went to the conference to get an objective view. There are people from all sides: there are buyers, there's sellers, there's traders, there is producers, everybody. So what I will also say is that I've been pretty disappointed with the lack of construction starts. Last year, for example, we saw 11 construction starts: nine in China, two in Russia, zero in the West.
06:39 The build side is still slow even as the fuel side tightens. I think that will be remedied, but I will say that they're still very constructive on it, and we still have that tripling of nuclear power capacity by 2050 target, or 2047. But I will say that right now things are very constructive. But I have been a little bit disappointed with the buildout.
07:05 But to that, again, I will say we don't need a massive buildout to get the price higher. Everything that we're seeing right now, combined with all the life extensions and combined with the fact that there are already several reactors under construction, that is more than enough to warrant triple-digit uranium pricing.
07:23 Everything that comes with it, in my opinion, in my modeling, is just cherry on top. >> Well, really good to start with the high-level thoughts, and now of course we have many different directions that we can go in. I wonder if we can talk a little bit more about that mindset shift among the utilities, because of course this is one of the notoriously opaque parts of the market.
07:46 What can you say about that, and maybe we can talk also about any differences between the West and the East in trends that you're seeing there? >> Absolutely. I think the mindset in utilities is basically what I just mentioned as well: they're more focused on security of supply rather than the terms that they want to get for it.
08:04 And I think that one of the things that has really woken them up, that has really set that mindset into gear — last year it already clicked into gear a little bit with the biannual fuel report from WNA, and it feels like we're just building on that this year, and it is really like a snowball running down a hill.
08:21 It is gathering real momentum. I've spoken to several fuel buyers that are really recognizing the situation. That's not every fuel buyer. When people say, "Oh, the fuel buyers are saying this or the fuel buyers are saying that," and they treat them like a massive cohort, I think that's wrong to do.
08:38 I think that every fuel buyer is — they're all different. They're all very smart. They're all very plugged in, but they're all different in the way that they go about their risk tolerance. I remember talking to a fuel manager last year who basically used my own naming of it, saying that the pounds that you have on your balance sheet are not the same as the pounds that you will have in your reactor core when you need them, and that they were also more focused on security.
09:07 So you hear that from a fuel manager at one of the largest US utilities. That was really eye-opening, and I discussed that in the Contrarian Codex WNA report as well. It's over 30 pages. If we were to discuss the entire thing, we would be here for six hours and I don't want to bore everybody to death.
09:23 But if you want to read that, it's on my side. I hope you enjoy it. But basically, to sum up the question that you asked, I think it's really massive that they are recognizing the fact that term price is moving up on relatively minor volumes. We've seen a relatively large rise on — what was it — 110 million being reported in 2024, 116 million being reported last year, but I did hear that that included part of a large deal announced with India that was booked in the last calendar
09:54 year. In 2023 we came the closest with a little over 160 million pounds, but that was remarkably flattered by a one-off Energoatom deal worth roughly 40 million between Ukraine and Cameco. But what we're seeing right now is we are at 38 million pounds so far being reported — it's very important, being reported — so far this year.
10:16 That does not include 40 to 45 million pounds from the Indian deal, of which again part of it was last year. But to be moving up the way that we have on relatively little volume, I think is remarkable, and I think that that is what they are recognizing right now.
10:40 So if you look at coverage, the EIA has 186 million pounds of unfilled US requirements for 2025 through 2035 against maximum anticipated requirements of 360 million. That is 52% uncovered. Deliveries cover only 174 million of that, and that is without accounting for a bunch of extra demand triggers. So I think that was really interesting, and I think that there is a broader recognition, and I think that will just continue to translate into further upward pressure for uranium price action. Again, for everybody listening to
11:14 this and being like, okay, Mark or Yellow Bull or however you want to call me, it's like, yeah, but that doesn't really matter, does it, because the screen is red. Why are my equities going down? And to that I will say I completely get the frustration. We've seen a lot of good news.
11:30 It hasn't really translated into real positive price action in the near term. But to that I will also say this is a sector of extreme volatility, and that sector is extremely small. It can be thrown around like it's almost nothing in the grand scheme of things. I mean, we got way over our skis back in January, when we got everybody saying, okay, we're getting into $150 a pound because uranium is at $84 and change and we're going to a million.
11:56 And at that point — again, I write my own sentiment data analysis for every newsletter — at that point we sold some of our holdings, because it was just way too bullish. And a month later I had the exact same thing with gold and silver getting way too bullish. Silver was going to a thousand.
12:15 I'm sure you heard it as well, Charlotte. And we sold a bunch there as well. I think it's important to be flexible, but I do completely respect that people are frustrated with the apparent lack of positive price action. And regarding your second question — and my apologies to you and everybody listening for all the rambling, but I hope I'm answering it —
12:37 for the western versus eastern buyers, what you see is that the eastern buyers have been a lot more active. You've seen India in particular being super, super motivated to get the most out of this market. And what you're seeing is that they were at the conference as well. I included a four-page analysis on the Indian nuclear power sector, present and future, with basically a conclusion that they are going to be a China/US light over the coming few years when it comes to procurement of uranium.
13:12 Then you have — well, we just talked about China light — China themselves. It's super, super significant. They keep on stacking pounds. They have a multi-decade fuel and energy security. I spoke to some Chinese representatives. They said none of the strategic reserve is going to see the light of day again, and we are going to be buying a lot more, which I'm not surprised at all given their reactor buildout plans.
13:35 You see the Japanese being a little more active again. You see the South Koreans, as I just discussed, with a tender. You see them all being very active, and I think a few more will join them in the eastern hemisphere, and I think that is really well encapsulated by Kazatomprom, probably, because I spoke to them as well at the conference.
13:52 Basically what they noted as well at the conference, but also recently at the quarterly call, was that they have two divisions. They have an eastern division and a western division. And if you treat these things like call centers, the eastern division was — they were short on phones. They were getting calls and it was red hot.
14:12 While the western division for a few years has been relatively quiet, or at least quieter than you would normally expect. But now they're starting to get the phone ringing again. And I think that is really indicative of where we are in the market, and now that the West is starting to wake up, starting to ring their phone, starting to see, okay, all right guys, we just want security of supply.
14:36 Now you're seeing them become more active. And I think that the combination of the two, west and east, is just going to again underpin a continuous price rise. If I had to guess, if I was a betting man — which again, if you're invested in uranium equities, you are a betting man or even a little bit of a gambler, I will admit that —
14:56 what I will say is that I think $150 uranium is inevitable. We can get into why. We can get into contracting terms as well. And maybe — what we say in the Netherlands — maybe I'm mowing the grass in front of your feet before you can walk over it. But speaking of term contracts, the terms that we're seeing is floors rising into the 80s, ceilings rising into 150 and beyond, with some contracts even seeing no ceilings, and roughly 70% of the contracts — according to my contacts, my own read — roughly 70% of the contracts are market
15:32 referenced. All these producers, they want to make sure that they have exposure to higher price, because they see where the price bucket is going. And I think that it is pretty inevitable that we get to, and very likely beyond, $150. Do I think we see a crazy price spike scenario? Not unless either the US government says, "Okay, we're going to build 50 reactors and we're going to backstop all of the fuel and we're going to build a giant strategic reserve," or we see the Indians doing the same thing, or we see another major mine flood
16:06 or whatever it may be. No, I do not think we see a — how would you call it — a spike. I think we see more of a stair-step approach upwards. I think a spike is possible, but I think a stair-step approach upwards is more healthy for uranium, for equities as well. So yes, I do think we're heading upwards. I think everything that I heard at the conference and everything my own research points to is going to move everything up.
16:31 Does that mean things won't be volatile and it will be a straight line up from here? Absolutely not. Because what we're seeing right now with the equities, they are volatile and they don't really care for fundamentals in the near term, depending on the prevailing fundamentals of course. But no, I think it's very significant where we are right now.
16:52 I think we are seeing a lot more opportunities right now, and I think that, as we've seen at several spikes over the past few years, you need to be flexible. And as we've seen during those spikes, we can run hard when all of a sudden all of these fundamentals are going to start to matter. And I think all the fundamentals that we have seen over the past year, over the past two years, they're going to start to matter.
17:14 >> This is a great direction to go in with the contracts. And just a quick follow-up there: I think we can see that the companies have the upper hand here now with the utilities. What is your sense among the companies? Do they want to do deals right now, or is there some reluctance? Maybe they want to wait and see if the market gets even better than it is right now before they start signing things.
17:35 >> I think developers and producers are really seeing the writing on the wall with regard to higher prices. So I think they're also learning from a few of the greenfield and brownfield producers, or would-be producers I think is a better way to put it, that just signed less favorable contracts given the current environment where we are.
17:57 So when the price was 40 or 50, they started signing contracts for 60 or 70, and in the end that turned out to be a mistake. Of course, nobody has a — I want to say glass bowl; I don't know what the English saying for that is — where they can see into the future. Of course they couldn't do that, but a lot of people in the industry were seeing that the price was likely going to be rising.
18:24 And I think a lot of the uncontracted production capacity, from especially some of the smaller players and the smaller potential players, they learned from those mistakes. And I think they are slowly but surely — at $97 some of them are coming in. But you need to remember that a lot of these guys, they were taken to the woodshed year after year during the bear market.
18:50 They are not going to sell their production right now for $5 above C1 cash cost. They want a healthy margin. They want to be able to reinvest in projects. They want to have their own little reward for sticking around. They want to return shareholder value. That's a lot of things that they are focused on right now.
19:10 So yeah, I do think they are becoming more active, but I also do think that we will not see another tsunami of supply being contracted. I think it will be done piecemeal, and I think that will keep moving the term price upwards. But yeah, the terms are improving. I could ramble on on this for about an hour more, but it's a seller's market, and we're going to see that in price, and we're going to continue to see that in price.
19:39 >> I think that's a good way to sum it up. I want to connect a couple of ideas that you mentioned earlier in the conversation. So you mentioned that utilities, they're concerned now about security of supply, and also talking about company efforts to be ramping up. You said you're disappointed in the lack of construction starts that you're seeing right now.
19:59 So can we talk about companies' efforts to bring supply online? I think we all know that mining is hard. What operations are you watching most closely right now? >> I think it's a very interesting question because of course a lot of people, including the fuel buyers as I said at the start — a lot of fuel buyers have been severely disappointed by the apparent lack of real, good supply response, because a few years ago all these guys were promising x million pounds of production annually by 2024, 2025, 2026, whatever it may be, and all of them
20:32 have just not delivered. There are a few examples of that. I don't want to rain on anybody's parade here, and I'm not here to be the bad guy or whatever, but Peninsula, Lotus, even Boss recently with the Honeymoon feasibility study at the end of the year — they have really not delivered the way that they perhaps had hoped to, and perhaps fuel buyers had hoped to.
21:02 You have a few other examples in the US of production not being as high as they perhaps would want it to be. Of course, Energy Fuels has been a great example of how you can deliver, but that is an exception and not a rule, in my experience. So what you basically see is that the prices are going up. You've seen the WNA themselves rightly note that development timelines have gone up from 8 to 15 years to 10 to 20 years.
21:30 That's a massive rise, and it is even going beyond that. And I think that it is very interesting that we've seen so many supply disappointments, and that has been kind of cushioned, if you will, by inventory drawdowns, by buying more material forward from Russia for example, by flexing up legacy contracts, by buying up available mobile inventory.
21:55 But as I said last year, each one of these levers, either you can only pull them once or you pull them part way, but the moment they're pulled part of the way or all at once, doesn't matter, they remain pulled. You cannot stack them up at that point. And I think that that was very interesting.
22:13 I discussed that with a few fuel cycle participants, let's call them that, as well. And I think that right now that has built up a scenario where we are almost out of real shock absorbers, which means if we get more shocks it will have an outsized effect on price. And I think, given that — you ask me what kind of projects am I watching — a lot of these projects have disappointed.
22:39 I think the big one that everybody is watching, and I do mean literally everybody, is Arrow. So NexGen's Arrow, because we need Arrow to have any hope of making the supply-demand modeling into the 2030s and beyond not look like an absolute train wreck. So I discussed this with a big trader as well, and we kind of discussed the possibility of, okay, what is this market going to look like if Arrow either gets bought up and the mine gets pushed back — say the new owner has a new mine plan —
23:15 or if development timelines slip again. A lot of these projects are not on time, not on budget; a lot of them running over that time, running over that budget. If Arrow doesn't come online in 2030 with 29 to 29.5 million pounds, but they come online in 2033 or 2034 and it's going to be 16 million a year —
23:36 that's still a massive mine, that's still going to print a lot of money for the company, but that is a massive, massive difference, and if that moment comes and if the market starts to sniff that out, it will have a major impact on the market. So I think that is the one to watch. And other than that, of course we're seeing a supply response.
23:56 We've seen a big supply response from USPakistan. But all in all, we need more. And I think that even at these high prices, I think we've not seen the last of these supply-side disappointments. >> I definitely want to look a little more closely at price. But before we do that, just a couple more notes on the demand side.
24:21 I wanted to bring up SMRs, because I think for years we were hearing that, well, this demand is a little bit difficult to quantify. Now we've hit the point where they're starting to come online, so hopefully that is looking easier. And then also we continue to have these AI data centers, and that's an emerging source of demand as well that I think we need to keep an eye on.
24:40 So when you're looking at the market, how are you factoring those elements in right now? >> Well, right now I am very enthusiastic. I think that the market is severely underestimating the potential impact of SMRs on the demand side and the sector as a whole. I spoke to the big players — your Westinghouse with their AP300, your GE Vernova with the BWRX-300, your Rolls-Royce with their own design, and a few others.
25:09 And basically what they said — I thought Rolls-Royce had the best quotes, the most clickbaity quotes if you will, but I double-checked and they held it to be true, which was pretty remarkable to hear — but once they start rolling out and you get this snowball rolling down a hill effect — I know I've used that reference twice now but it holds true —
25:32 a lot of potential demand has said, "We will buy them as fast as you can produce them." And at the same time they are having — and I'm not kidding — they're having daily conversations with hyperscalers as well, who are very enthusiastic about the prospect of a quicker buildout for green and reliable nuclear power in a smaller package that you can park next to data centers, which will have a major impact. So do I think we will see any major impact of that before 2035? No, I do not.
26:03 I think it kind of starts in 2035. GE Vernova and one US utility that they spoke with noted that their Darlington plans — once it's commissioned and once they show a good cost structure and we get an idea of what it looks like — I think that has a major impact, and that's when things really start moving. And I asked them for an estimate and they really wouldn't give me one at that point.
26:29 So I asked again until they got tired of me. For GE Vernova they said, okay, maybe we get 10 units running, which is 3 gigawatt, by 2035. But they also said that they could likely quadruple that number by 2040. And if they quadruple that number, that probably means the economics are good, that probably means there is a lot of demand, and that very likely means that beyond that there are a lot of new SMRs that will be built.
26:53 Same for Rolls-Royce, for the reasons that I just mentioned. Same where we have companies like TerraPower, of course Westinghouse with the AP300. So there is a lot of demand. And for those listening right now saying, "Okay Mart, you're talking about a growth window in 2035 to 2040 and then beyond that.
27:12 Is that really relevant?" I would say yeah, absolutely it is relevant, because they're already busy stacking their fuel cycle options. Of course we need to really invest in the fuel cycle to power all this, but it is going to be powered by uranium, and we need to prepare for that literally right now for all this demand that is going to come online in 2035 to 2040. That will be discussed over the coming years, but I don't think that we are [prepared] for the sort of potential that SMRs could bring to the table.
27:48 Again, if they are economically competitive, if the designs are good — and if that is the case, there is more demand than they can shake a nuclear fuel rod at. And again, I think the market is severely underestimating it. I think that before this bull cycle is over, it will have had a notable impact on the way that we view supply-demand modeling, as well as just generally where the nuclear industry is going as a whole.
28:17 >> On that note, I'll let us move over to prices now. So you talked about stair-stepping higher and the inevitability of that $150 per pound level. We should probably talk about if you've got a timeline in mind for that. But the other point on prices I wanted to bring up:
28:35 earlier this year I was hearing a lot about this disconnect between spot and term prices. So I wonder if you can comment on that and any of the other points that I mentioned there. Sorry, I know there was a lot. >> No worries. I think starting from back to front on those questions: the disconnect between term and spot, we've seen that a lot of the time over the past few years. Sometimes spot gets way over its skis and there is a lot of financial interest and we see a — 30 or $40 might be a little bit
29:02 aggressive — a 10 to 20 to $30 gap. But sometimes we also see it pull back a little bit. But when it pulls back — so when term was moving up into the 90s and spot was really being held in the $85 range for a myriad of reasons, if you really want to get into the details, I describe it in a lot of detail in the WNA report that I hope you all check out,
29:28 where I kind of go over why that is important and why that is driving the market. But right now what you've seen is that, due to carry trades picking up again, due to the discrepancy in price between term and spot, you saw term kind of yanking spot upwards again. Regarding your other question of what is the timeline for $150: I could not tell you. It is dependent on a bunch of varied circumstances, but I am pretty confident that we will get there within 2 years.
30:01 So before — not our next conversation, but our second annual conversation from here — I think between now and then we will have seen $150, the way that things are building up right now. Again, equities will remain volatile, but it will keep dragging them up, in my opinion.
30:23 In the meantime, I was really, really encouraged by the way that spot held in there even though the broad equities market was kind of risk-off. Again, I go into that in great detail, and I think anybody invested in uranium would benefit from reading through that framework. But yeah, I think that the way that things are right now, I think we're going to see a continuous stair-stepping upwards.
30:47 I think we're going to see a continuous example of price reacting with an outsized reaction to relative volume profiles. And I hope I answered everyone. Maybe I missed something. Help me out there, Charlotte. >> No, I think that covered everything. And I want to — yeah, that was great. And of course we need to look at the investor angle as well.
31:12 I think you've done a great job of highlighting and understanding how people might be frustrated when they see all of these positive catalysts. They hear about the very strong long-term outlook for uranium, and they look at the stocks and they wonder what is going on. So I wanted to bring up — of course every person is different;
31:29 they have to make their own decisions — but in this market, is there a case for being a more active trader versus doing the long-term buy-and-hold approach? And I think you mentioned earlier in the conversation you've done some selling at some points during this past year. So any thoughts there? >> No, I think it's absolutely correct that we need to be flexible in this sector, because it is so small, because it's so volatile.
31:54 Of course, I run a portfolio at the Codex. It is essentially a buy-and-hold portfolio. I try to get some value equities. Of course I've made some mistakes. There have been some equities that have completely underperformed, but I think that the large holdings have outperformed and more than made up for it. But yeah, I think that we need to be very, very active.
32:13 So again, at the start of the year, when uranium — the commodity itself — got up 17.3% in January, then gave that all the way back, and then it just started grinding downwards from that peak. At that point everybody got way over their skis on sentiment data. At that point I noted that in the community Discord server as well.
32:32 Everybody's way too enthusiastic. I am seeing about 50 too many rocket emojis on my feed. It is time to take some profits. But at the same time, it's not just selling that you need to time. Of course it's also buying. And an example of that is — it was two years ago and also a little bit last year, but mostly two years ago — where we said, okay, we are getting killed here.
32:58 So after the WNA conference in 2024, we were getting killed on some Cameco and Energy Fuels... call options. Those did exceptionally well last year due to the tariff tantrums and due to uranium just being weak in general. We were getting killed. We bought some Energy Fuels call options.
33:14 We sold those way too early for a little over 1,000%. They ended up going to 2,955%, which was absolutely remarkable. So I will not claim to be a perfect market timer, but I have been very happy, and I hope the subscribers have been very happy, with just being a little more quick on your feet. I do think that we are in a sustained bull market that will take a few more years.
33:37 So I wouldn't blame anyone for just going with a core holding in uranium, just to ride the waves and to go generally upwards, to hold the more valuable companies, less speculation. I've spoken in the past a little bit about a pyramid approach, where the bottom of the pyramid is the largest part and it just goes upwards and upwards to get to the smallest point, and you want to build this foundation of your pyramid with the best companies, so that no matter what happens you at least have quality, and then you
34:09 can kind of layer in developers and more risky explorers on top of that. But we have been holding that core of quality, and we've kind of been trading around that core. I think that is what I personally prefer, but that is of course different for everybody. I do think we're in a sustained bull market.
34:27 I do think we see a lot more higher prices, otherwise I wouldn't be calling for $150 uranium within two years. I think that has a positive effect on equities, but this sector is volatile, and I think that people should use this to their advantage. Again, I get the frustration, Charlotte — everybody listening, I get your frustration.
34:44 I am not immune to it either, but I think that trading around it and benefiting yourself and your portfolio for holding through the volatility, and getting that profit by skimming, by buying, by selling, maybe using options if that's your thing — if it's not, completely fine as well —
35:03 but that is how I do it. Do I think it's optimal? Depends on the person. So everybody needs to consider their own risk tolerance and, importantly, also their own sleeping level. Are you happy with your portfolio? Because if you are awake at night saying, "Oh my god, I own a basket of 85% juniors and then 10% Cameco and 5% cash, and I have not slept in a week,"
35:28 maybe you want to alter that a little bit. Maybe the Codex portfolio can help with that. But in general I think it's up to everybody. But — very long answer — short: I think it's important to be flexible. >> I think that is really important, and it's good to hear how you do it, but of course we do have to remember each person is an individual who should think about it on their own.
35:55 All right. As we're starting to come to the end here, I want to take a step back. You have your stadium model that tells us how we can look at uranium in terms of where it is in the cycle right now. So I wonder if we can use that and have you tell us where we are at the moment. >> I do remember the stadium model, and I will honestly tell you I've probably not looked at it for some time now, because I've just been absolutely busy.
36:22 Also, we talked a little bit about warfare, but I also cover of course macro, gold, oil, copper over the past year, so that's taken up most of my time. But the stadium model, for the people that are unfamiliar with it: I likened this bull market to the building of a stadium, the holding of a game, and afterwards, as every bull market — especially in commodities, because they are cyclical — ends, the game ends and then the stadium gets torn down again.
36:47 That is the fate of all commodity bull markets. Last year I believe I noted that we were past the break and getting into the second half, and then we proceeded to have an amazing start of the second half, going all the way into that peak in January. So I really hope that people benefited from that.
37:11 But right now I think we are still in that second half. This is, by the way, football — so for you Americans listening right now, soccer. I didn't use a baseball stadium analysis because I don't know anything about baseball. I had to stick to football, because otherwise I might get my Dutch passport revoked.
37:29 So I think right now we are getting what you saw at the World Cup, a little bit of a water break. We are 10, 15 minutes into the second half. I think we get a lot more, and I think that we get extra time. We might get penalties, but I don't think we are anywhere near the end of this game.
37:48 And I think there is a lot more interesting stuff to happen in this game, and this game is going to be a lot more volatile, which we can again benefit from. But yeah, I think we are in the second half, but we are not at the end of the second half. We're not in extra time. We're not in penalties.
38:06 We have longer to go before we need to tear down the stadium and get back to our cars. >> Okay, I like that one, because I'm not a big person who's familiar with baseball either. And I think it's important to remember just the sheer number of water breaks that they had in the World Cup. So —
38:23 >> It was ridiculous. It was all sponsored as well. [laughter] >> Yeah. So maybe we keep that in mind as we're moving forward. And all right, I was going to ask — I think now that we've been speaking for a little while, I probably know the answer to this question. I always wonder, to kick the market into the next stage, is there a particular catalyst that we should look for? It sounds more like it's going to be that continued steady build higher where all of these things keep piling on top of each other for the gradual push up. But any comments on
38:50 that note? >> I think that the most important thing right now is, as I kind of discussed in this interview and discussed way more extensively in the WNA report and the associated newsletters, that we are at a point where the catalyst picture and the fundamental picture is more than strong enough to warrant stronger equity price action and stronger physical prices.
39:18 I think right now we are mostly beholden to the general macro environment. So I'm talking fiscal uncertainty regarding the Fed, I'm talking the US dollar being volatile, I'm talking all the geopolitical uncertainty we're seeing, I'm talking supply chain fragility and everything that comes with it.
39:40 Of course, again, I do a lot of macro analysis, so I hope that helped a lot of people seeing the risk that was on the cards going over the course of this year. But given how small and how risk-on our sector is, it gets thrown around a lot depending on what side of the risk-on or risk-off cycle we are.
40:04 And right now we are still in a firmly risk-off cycle. I think there is still more volatility on the horizon, but I also feel like the fundamentals are strong enough that the moment we get a little bit more of a risk-on environment, a little bit more of a liquid environment — and I do think we will see a lot lower readings on the US dollar, let's call it like that, on DXY over the coming few months; I think they will materially weaken the US dollar, and I think that will have a positive effect on commodities, and so too uranium and
40:36 uranium equities. So I think we are more beholden to macro than we would perhaps like to be. But there is also enough fundamental backdrop that I think that the moment we see even a little bit more positivity things start to move — or if we see a massive catalyst, like some of the catalysts that I started with at the beginning, a massive demand-side catalyst regarding the building of reactors or the building of a strategic reserve, or more of a supply-side catalyst, with a big mine maybe coming online later than expected — I think that
41:08 will also have an outsized effect. So we don't need to have many more catalysts to move. But yeah, I do think that we are beholden to macro, with the fundamental case strong enough for it to move, and I think that that move is going to be pretty inevitable, especially with term just marching onwards, and at some point it's going to drag the equities up with it, and just like they overshoot on the downside all the time, they're also going to overshoot on the upside, in my opinion.
41:38 >> I think that sounds like a great place to wrap it up. I think we've got a good idea of your thoughts, but just in case, any very final thoughts that you want to leave investors with? And can you also let us know where we can find you online? And of course I'll have your links in the video description as well.
41:53 >> Oh, that's great to hear. Thank you. Well, first of all, I hope that everybody enjoyed this conversation. You can find me at patreon.com/contrariancodex, where I post interviews, company analysis, a bi-weekly newsletter, and of course the extensive WNA report as well.
42:09 You can also find me on Twitter/X at Yellow Bull 11. And basically, regarding my final thoughts on this, I think we discussed a lot already, and I think that people are getting pretty sick of my voice at this point. I won't blame them. But right now I think that we are in such a fundamentally sound position for the market.
42:29 I think we're in a very healthy, very constructive position for the entire market. And I think that right now if you can weather the storm, and if you're quick on your feet, if you're flexible, I think you can really benefit from the coming months given how everything is developing. Of course, in this sector so much is happening, and I think that is really important to take into account.
42:52 And again, I hope that if you're a subscriber, if you're going to be a subscriber, I hope I can help with that. But yeah, I think that we are in a very fundamentally good position, and I think that the coming months and years will be extremely, extremely positive when it comes to nuclear.
43:09 I think it will therefore also be positive when it comes to uranium. So yeah, I already look forward to a next chat next year, Charlotte. So again, I hope everybody enjoyed this, and I hope you all have a good rest of your day. >> Well, thank you so much. I really enjoyed it as well.
43:26 Looking forward to next year's talk, and then in two years we'll see if we get to that $150 level. And as I said, all the links will be in the video description. Thank you so much. >> So, yeah. >> Yes. Once again, I'm Charlotte McLeod with investingnews.com and this is Mart Wolbert with the Contrarian Codex. Thank you for watching.
43:44 >> [music] >> If you like this video, make sure you hit the like button and subscribe to our channel. We'd also love to hear your thoughts, so leave us a comment below. [music]