← Analysis page  ·  David Hay hub  ·  Research hub

Actionable insights — Friday POW!: A (Black) Diamond In The Rough

The repeatable analysis behind the coal buy-up: not what was bought, but how to trade a substitute good off its relative price, how to use physical shipping data to overrule a narrative, how to normalize a distorted valuation look-back, how to pick between two versions of one thesis, and how to accumulate a depressed cyclical when the position is deliberately lonely — written so each step can be rerun on the next name.
2026-JUL-24 · Haymaker (Substack newsletter, paid) · The Haymaker Team / David Hay · ↗ Read · full analysis · article text
How to read this page: each insight is a method — the reasoning chain that took Haymaker from a shipping chart to a buy-up in two beaten-down Australian coal miners. The boxed line shows how it played out in this post. (Written newsletter — the "read" link opens the source post; no timestamps.)

1. Trade the substitute good off its relative price, not its absolute one

The repeatable method
  1. Identify a pair of goods that compete for the same end use and therefore "trade in concert" — here thermal coal vs LNG, both burned to generate electricity.
  2. Chart the ratio, not the price. When the substitute sits near an all-time-cheap level versus the primary good, buyers switch, and the cheap one gets dragged up.
  3. Confirm the switch is physically possible at scale — name the countries and the demand mass that can actually do the substituting.
  4. Buy the equity of the substitute's producers, which get operating leverage on the price move, rather than the commodity itself.
Here: "thermal coal is about as inexpensive as it has ever been relative to LNG. With LNG prices once again ripping, that is likely to pull up thermal coal prices" — and the switchers are China, India and Japan, "the first two [with] a combined population of roughly three billion." The expression: YACAF and NHC (NHPEF).
Watch for

2. Let physical shipping data overrule the peace narrative

The repeatable method
  1. When a market re-prices on a diplomatic headline (a treaty, a memo, a "reopening"), do not argue the politics — go find the physical flow series that would have to improve if the headline were real (tanker transits, port throughput, inventory draws).
  2. Give the narrative a fair test: allow that flows may briefly confirm it (they often do, for weeks).
  3. Re-check the same series after the first bounce. If flows roll back over while prices still reflect the optimistic story, that gap is the trade.
  4. Size up when you had already publicly disputed the narrative — the position and the evidence now agree.
Here: the "Memo of (Mis)Understanding" convinced the market Hormuz was "open for business," and trapped LNG carriers did begin to leave the Persian Gulf — but per the tankermap.com visual "all product shipments have once again fallen off a cliff," while coal equities still carried the peace discount. Haymaker rushed the buy-up out "ASAP."
Watch for

3. Normalize a valuation look-back that a one-off spike has distorted

The repeatable method
  1. Before trusting a five-year Price/Sales or P/E chart, ask whether an anomalous year sits inside the window (a war, a squeeze, a stimulus surge) that inflated the denominator.
  2. Mentally excise that year: if revenues spiked and then "rapidly retreated," the historical average is pulled up, making today's multiple look less cheap than it truly is.
  3. Re-rank the candidates on the normalized view — the conclusion can change, and it always changes the size of the perceived discount.
Here: "both would look considerably more inexpensive on a trailing five-year basis had revenues not spiked in 2022 and then rapidly retreated back down after the 2022 Russian attack on Ukraine… both would appear cheaper than they do on a five-year look-back basis."
Watch for

4. When one thesis has two vehicles, buy both — and know which is the beaten-up one

The repeatable method
  1. Express a commodity thesis through two producers of different quality: the resilient name (holds up in the drawdown) and the punished name (falls hardest).
  2. Attribute the divergence to prior damage, not to a difference in thesis — the one "slammed much harder in recent months" is also the one that pops hardest on the first turn.
  3. Let the investor's own risk tolerance choose the tilt (the resilient name for the cautious), but do not force a single choice when the driver is identical.
  4. Check the valuation gap: a persistent, structural discount ("often the way they roll") is not a signal on its own.
Here: NHC (NHPEF) "hung in there admirably well" — a three-year high last month, ~12% off — and was flat on the week; YACAF "has been a dud" and popped ~10% to $4.25. "Perhaps you might lean toward NHPEF but we like both of them… a lot."
Watch for

5. Dollar-cost-average into a depressed cyclical instead of timing the turn

The repeatable method
  1. When the catalyst is a developing physical shortage rather than a dated event, accept you cannot time the low — buy in tranches over weeks so further weakness improves the average.
  2. Treat the first partial rally as confirmation, not a reason to wait: publish/act immediately on the catalyst rather than after the move completes.
  3. Re-buy names you previously recommended higher — a losing entry is not a disqualification if the driver has strengthened.
Here: "we advocate dollar-cost-averaging into these two leading coal producers," and at Yancoal's "ultra-depressed current price we believed it deserves to be bought or, if you did so on our original write-up, re-bought."
Watch for

6. Prize the lonely stance — and use your own recent contrarian win as the template

The repeatable method
  1. Score how uncomfortable the position is to own. Structural exclusion (ESG mandates, "do-not-buy lists") means a whole class of buyers is absent — which is exactly why the asset is cheap and why re-entry is violent when the physics force it.
  2. Do not argue the crowd out of its objection; concede it plainly and reframe the decision as the one the end users face ("environmental considerations vs keeping the lights on").
  3. Anchor the trade to a recent, same-shaped contrarian win of your own, and check that the mechanism (not just the mood) matches.
Here: "We readily concede that many investors have a hard time buying coal stocks… We particularly love what a lonely stance this is… similar to our extremely against-the-grain aggressive buy on oil at the end of June" — the June oil call that then rallied in July.
Watch for

7. Take partial gains on the position you were never fully comfortable owning

The repeatable method
  1. Flag at entry which positions carry a qualified endorsement (ethical discomfort, weak balance sheet, pure price speculation) — these get a stricter profit-taking rule than core holdings.
  2. On a multiple (a double or triple), harvest part rather than deciding to hold or sell in full.
  3. Score the outcome afterwards, publicly, so the discipline stays honest — including the round trips you avoided.
Here: BTU was "a heavily qualified tout" near $13, tripled, and Haymaker "suggested partial gain-harvesting when it was just under $24"; it has "come down very hard, to the $22 vicinity" — "still a nice gain." HCC, the cleaner met-coal name, is the carried winner (+~51% despite a 20% correction).
Watch for

8. Track a specialist source's hit rate and follow it into its preferred name

The repeatable method
  1. Keep a named, domain-specific research source for each hard sector, and score its calls explicitly over time.
  2. When that source has both a call and a preference between two names, record the preference — it is separate information from the call itself.
  3. Weight your own tilt toward the specialist's favorite while still expressing the thesis broadly.
Here: Trader Ferg supplied the January-2025 HCC call (+~51%) and both Australian names, "shrewdly preferred NHPEF earlier this year," and supplied the coal-vs-LNG relative-price chart that is the spine of this week's argument.
Watch for

9. Confirm a demand-driven commodity call with an independent supply shock

The repeatable method
  1. After building the demand case (substitution, weather, population), check whether supply is independently tightening — an unrelated second leg makes the thesis far more robust.
  2. Prioritize the largest exporter's policy: an export restriction from the #1 supplier moves the marginal ton more than any single importer's demand.
  3. Also check the buffer: depleted emergency reserves remove the shock absorber and convert a tight market into a scramble.
Here: demand — hot weather in Europe and China, India's seasonal heat and rising import dependence; supply — "Indonesia is materially reducing its coal exports… the world's largest exporter of thermal coal"; buffer — the shortage is "worse than it was a few months ago due to how much emergency reserves have been drawn down."
Watch for

Methods distilled from the paid Haymaker newsletter (text in transcript.txt). For personal study. Not investment advice. © Haymaker / David Hay for source material.