Investment Insights. Stay Ahead.
China lifts export ban gallium, germanium, antimony
- China suspends export ban on three critical minerals — gallium, germanium and antimony
- Beijing frames controls as national-security licensing, not a permanent ban, signalling strategic flexibility rather than supply-chain guarantee
China has suspended the export ban on gallium, germanium and antimony to US until November 27, 2026. Exports will now be managed under licensing until 27 November 2026, but the clause banning exports to military end-users remains in effect.
The move comes after a wider trade truce between China and the US after a meeting between US President Donald Trump and President Xi on November 1.
Chinese state-media commentary emphasises that export controls are normal regulatory practice for dual-use items and the re-opening is aligned with international norms.
In December 2024, China’s Ministry of Commerce of the People’s Republic of China (MOFCOM) announced that “in principle” exports of gallium, germanium, antimony and super-hard materials to the US would not be permitted. The ban was a direct retaliation to US semiconductor export restrictions and a signal of Beijing’s willingness to use critical‐mineral control as leverage.
China dominates the production and processing the gallium, germanium and antimony:
- total global antimony mine production in 2023 was approximately 83,000 tonnes. The largest producer, by far, is China
- and, China enjoys a near monopoly on global supply of both gallium and germanium: gallium: 94%, germanium: 83%
Why it matters for critical-minerals supply chains
A report, released in November, by the US Geological Survey, warned there could be a US$3.4 to 9 billion decrease in US GDP if China implements a total ban on exports of gallium and germanium, minerals used in some semiconductors and other high-tech manufacturing:
- gallium is used in high-frequency semiconductors, 5G, LEDs and photovoltaics
- germanium is critical for fibre optics, infrared sensors and advanced chips
- antimony is deployed in flame retardants, batteries, aerospace, and defence alloys
While the ban is suspended, export licensing remains, and the military‐end-use ban stays active. That means Beijing retains the ability to re-activate stricter controls. Chinese media explicitly say export controls are lawful regulatory tools, not ad-hoc trade weapons.
What remains unresolved and what to watch
- licensing volumes and destinations: How many shipments are approved under the new regime, and to which end-users? Transparent data is limited
- duration and durability: the suspension runs until 27 Nov 2026, after which Beijing can flip the switch again. Markets should price for optionality, not certainty
- broader export-control architecture: China’s rare-earth export mechanism (eg, heavy rare earths, downstream alloys) remains only partly eased; full liberalisation has not occurred
- sSmuggling/enforcement risk: as noted by Chinese authorities, trans-shipment and third-country routing are expanding — enforcement and licensing transparency will matter
This decision marks a tactical thaw in one of the most acute chokepoints of global critical-minerals supply chains. However, the strategic dependency remains: China still retains the upstream leverage.
In conclusion: the ban’s suspension is meaningful — but it isn’t a guarantee of open supply. The upstream remains tilted toward China; investors and policymakers should view the move as a reprieve, not a resolution.
US adds copper, silver, uranium to 2025 critical minerals list
- US adds copper and silver to its 2025 critical minerals list, joining uranium among top national-security priorities
- the list now covers 60 minerals, up from 50 in 2022, signalling a broader definition of “strategic” materials
- policy support for copper, silver and uranium is likely to accelerate permitting, investment incentives, and new midstream infrastructure
- move aligns resource policy with industrial re-shoring, electrification, and nuclear revival goals
The US government has expanded its 2025 list of critical minerals, officially adding copper and silver and long-standing strategic elements such as uranium — a move that redraws the map for mining investment and supply-chain security.
The updated list, published this week by the US Geological Survey (USGS), raises the total number of designated critical minerals to 60, up from 50 in 2022.
The Trump administration framed the update as a “supply-chain sovereignty” push: extending national-security status beyond EV metals to the backbone materials of the energy system — copper for electrification, silver for solar, and uranium for baseload power.
Copper: from base metal to strategic backbone
Copper’s inclusion marks a turning point. The world’s most versatile conductor is now officially recognised as critical to US economic and national security.
Demand is surging: global copper consumption is expected to rise 35% by 2035, driven by EVs, grid expansion, data centres and renewable infrastructure. Yet new mine supply is tightening. Wood Mackenzie estimates the global copper shortfall could hit 6 million tonnes annually by 2030, even before factoring in US re-shoring targets.
By designating copper as critical, the US opens access to Defense Production Act funding, tax incentives, and faster permitting — effectively elevating the metal into the same strategic tier as lithium and rare earths.
Silver: from precious metal to industry workhorse
Silver’s addition reflects its growing role in solar panels, EV electronics, and semiconductors. Photovoltaic demand alone accounts for nearly 30% of global silver consumption and is rising fast.
The Silver Institute expects a fourth consecutive annual market deficit in 2025, driven by record solar installations in China, India and the US. US domestic output is modest — under 1,000 tonnes a year, concentrated in Nevada and Alaska — leaving over 70% of supply dependent on imports.
Policy recognition could stimulate domestic exploration and refining capacity, particularly for polymetallic mines where silver is a by-product of gold or base-metal operations.
Uranium: reinforced as strategic power fuel
While copper and silver are the newcomers, uranium remains the cornerstone of US energy security. Its continued inclusion underscores the administration’s commitment to nuclear expansion.
The Department of Energy (DOE) has called for tripling domestic uranium production by 2030 to feed new small modular reactors (SMRs) and replenish national reserves. Spot prices have surged above $90/lb, the highest since 2007, as US utilities rush to lock in contracts.
Washington has already launched a Strategic Uranium Reserve, backed by a $1.4 billion budget, and secured domestic supply deals with companies like Energy Fuels, Cameco, and Uranium Energy Corp.
A broader industrial strategy
The new list signals that Washington is redefining “criticality”, from a narrow focus on green tech to a wider industrial-security framework.
USGS says the updated list “reflects both economic vulnerability and the expanding scope of essential technologies.”
For investors, it’s a clear policy signal: the next wave of US resource investment will not just be about batteries, but about the entire energy ecosystem.
Conclusion
Copper, silver, and uranium now sit at the heart of US critical-minerals policy. The 2025 list cements their status as cornerstones of a secure, electrified, and nuclear-powered economy.
For miners and investors, the opportunity is structural: Washington has tied industrial strategy to resource policy. Projects producing these three metals are now riding the same wave — national security meets the energy transition.
International Copper Study Group warns of 150,000t deficit in 2026
Subscribe for Investment Insights. Stay Ahead.
Investment market and industry insights delivered to you in real-time.
- ICSG forecasts mine-supply growth of just 1.4 % in 2025, down from 2.3 % earlier
- the surplus expected for 2025 has been trimmed to ~178,000 t, and the market is projected to swing into a 150,000 t deficit in 2026
The latest forecast from the International Copper Study Group expects global mine production growth of just 1.4 % in 2025 — a sharp downshift from its earlier 2.3 % forecast. The modest rate comes alongside a refined-production growth forecast of 3.4 % for 2025, which then collapses to 0.9 % in 2026 as concentrate availability becomes a bottleneck.
The market is shifting from surplus to shortage with a surplus of 178,000 t for 2025 is expected to flip to a 150,000 t deficit in 2026.
At the same time, copper prices are nearing record highs. LME contracts recently hit US$11,094/t as supply concerns collided with hopes of a US–China trade deal unlocking demand. For investors, this signals the old “plenty of copper” narrative is giving way to one of structural constraint.
Why growth is stumbling
Several factors are conspiring to slow supply growth:
• Mine disruptions: A series of accidents at tier-1 copper mines — including the mud-inflow at Indonesia’s Grasberg Mine — have knocked concentrate feed and pushed the ICSG to cut its growth forecast
• Concentrate vs smelter imbalance: Even when mine output rises, refined production is constrained because smelters lack concentrates. The ICSG notes this gap as the key brake
• Demand-side softness masking structural tightness: Although usage growth is modest (2.1 % in 2026) and demand from regions outside Asia remains weak, the lack of new supply projects means that a small bump in demand or additional disruption could trigger tightness quickly
Demand: steady, but not spectacular
Global refined-usage growth is forecast at 2.1 % in 2026, down from faster growth in prior years. China, which accounts for approx 58 % of global copper usage, is forecast to see demand growth decelerate markedly. On the surface this demand number appears modest, but the key implication is that supply must now carry the burden of tightness rather than demand spikes driving the story.
In short: demand remains supportive but unexceptional. The upside for copper now resides in supply constraints, not a demand explosion.
Conclusion
The ICSG’s latest outlook highlights the pivot for copper: from surplus to structural tightness. With mine-growth trimmed and concentrate bottlenecks looming, the industry faces a 150,000-ton deficit in 2026. That tightness is already pricing in, as reflected in near-record prices. For investors in critical minerals and mining, the signal is clear: supply reliability matters more than ever. Companies that navigate the bottlenecks, not just dig more rock, will capture the value in the immediate-term.
Our report on the expected demand for copper from Artificial Intelligence and data centers:
Subscribe for Investment Insights. Stay Ahead.
Investment market and industry insights delivered to you in real-time.
US and Australia sign $8.5 billion rare earths deal
Subscribe for Investment Insights. Stay Ahead.
Investment market and industry insights delivered to you in real-time.
- US and Australia agreed to provide at least US $1 billion each within six months for raw-and‐processed critical-minerals projects
- the joint framework explicitly targets mining, separation and processing of critical minerals and rare earths, not just raw extraction
- includes new mechanisms: price-floors, permitting streamlining, strategic asset-sale review, recycling mandates as part of securing supply chains
On 20 October 2025, Donald Trump and Anthony Albanese signed the United States–Australia Framework for Securing of Supply in the Mining and Processing of Critical Minerals and Rare Earths at the White House. The framework commits both countries to accelerate supply-chain resilience through coordinated investment and policy instruments.
- US and Australia to invest more than US$3 billion together in critical mineral projects in the next six months, with recoverable resources in the projects estimated to be worth $53 billion
- the Export-Import Bank of the United States is issuing seven Letters of Interest for more than US$2.2 billion in financing, unlocking up to $5 billion of total investment, to advance critical minerals and supply-chain security projects between our two countries
- the US Department of War will invest in the construction of a 100 metric ton-per-year advanced gallium refinery in Western Australia, further advancing self-reliance in critical minerals processing
“This is an $8.5 billion pipeline that we have ready to go” — Anthony Albanese, Australia Prime Minister
“We’re doing a real job on rare earth and many other things” — Donald Trump, US President
Under Section I of the agreement, the two governments pledged to mobilize government and private support via guarantees, loans or equity; jointly identify projects of interest; and provide at least US$1 billion in financing in each country within six months to projects expected to deliver end-products to US and Australian buyers.
The move is described by The White House as a model for global supply-chain cooperation, placing critical minerals and rare earths firmly in the national-security/infrastructure category.
Key policy instruments in the deal include:
- permitting acceleration: streamlining domestic regulatory approvals for mining, separation and processing
- price-mechanism guardrails: exploring price-floors and standards-based trading systems to protect domestic markets from unfair practices
- asset-sale controls: strengthening authorities to review or deter strategic sales of critical-minerals assets on national-security grounds
- recycling support and geological mapping: commitments to invest in mineral-scrap processing and map resource bases in both countries
Why it matters: strategic supply-chain pivot
China’s dominance remains the benchmark
China processes roughly 90% of rare-earth oxides and most finished magnets used in defence and high-tech manufacturing. With Beijing tightening rare earth export controls in 2025, the US-Australia pact is a direct response to a shifting risk-landscape.
From raw mining to processing-value capture
Historically, many Western players stopped at raw ore export. This framework makes clear the next phase is downstream: separation, refining, magnet-making and recycling. That shift expands the investor opportunity beyond traditional mining.
Policy tools join the cap-ex
This is not just about raising capital. The framework integrates regulatory reforms, strategic stockpiling (Australia’s reserve), and trade-defence tools. That signals critical minerals are now treated as infrastructure.
Key risks to monitor
- execution time-lag: projects take years to build; the window of risk remains high
- policy drift: the deal hinges on actual follow-through (financing, permitting, offtakes) not just signaling
- China’s counter-moves: Beijing may respond with further export controls or trade pressure, offsetting part of the benefit of diversification
- commodity price and cost risk: as new entrants emerge, margins may compress and high-cost producers may struggle
Conclusion
The US–Australia critical-minerals framework marks a structural realignment. It elevates rare earths from niche mining assets to strategic infrastructure. The pipeline is not just about new mines — it’s about processing, manufacturing and resilient allied supply-chain ecosystems.
The deal signals that critical minerals are now treated like defence assets. The real value likely comes with processing and manufacturing, not simply digging the ore out of the ground.
It’s part of a strategic pivot by Australia we highlighted back in 2023
Subscribe for Investment Insights. Stay Ahead.
Investment market and industry insights delivered to you in real-time.
US weighs price floors for critical minerals to counter China
The United States is weighing price floors and “forward-buying” for critical minerals such as rare earths and graphite to counter China’s use of below-cost exports to control global supply chains, according to statements from President Trump adviser Scott Bessent.
The policy under consideration would reportedly set minimum guaranteed prices for producers of strategically important minerals to prevent market collapses triggered by Chinese oversupply. It would mark the most direct US intervention in mineral markets since wartime stockpiling programs and comes alongside plans for expanded US government equity stakes in mining and processing companies.
The move comes after Bessent after President Trump threatened an additional 100% tariff on Chinese goods in response to Beijing tightened rare earth exports, reducing the flow of batteries, magnets and semiconductors to the US.
“I think things can de-escalate. We have things that are more powerful than the rare earth export controls that the Chinese want to put on — and to be clear, this is China versus the world… If China wants to be an unreliable partner to the world, then the world will have to decouple,” — US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent
Basically, a price floor would work something like this: if rare earth or graphite prices fall below a minimum level, the US government compensates producers for the gap or purchases material into a strategic stockpile. Variants already exist in agriculture and oil, and it appears mining may now enter into a similar system.
Trump’s planned Oct. 29 meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping remains on the schedule — despite the US president’s threat to cancel the summit.
Find out more on our analysis on why America’s critical mineral strategy threatens disaster:
US to build $1 billion critical mineral stockpile as supply risk deepens
Subscribe for Investment Insights. Stay Ahead.
Investment market and industry insights delivered to you in real-time.
- US Department of Defense plans to purchase $1 billion in critical minerals to secure supply for defense and energy systems
- move reflects rising concern over US reliance on foreign refining, where China controls 60–95% of global processing
- strategy marks a shift from “market-led” sourcing to state-directed resource security in the US
The US Department of Defense is preparing to purchase $1 billion worth of critical minerals to build a national stockpile and shield military supply chains from geopolitical disruption, according to a report by the Financial Times.
The plan would represent one of the largest US strategic mineral purchases since the Cold War, aiming to ensure secure access to metals used in fighter jets, missile systems, hypersonic weapons, electric vehicles and advanced manufacturing.
The Pentagon stockpile purchases would include buying US$500 million of cobalt, US$245 million of antimony, and US$100 million of tantalum.
The initiative is being coordinated under the Defense Production Act and will prioritise rare earth permanent magnets, battery-grade graphite, cobalt and nickel sulphates, and aerospace-grade titanium, according to officials briefed on the program.
“They [the US defence department] are incredibly focused on the stockpile… They’re definitely looking for more, and they’re doing it in a deliberate and expansive way, and looking for new sources of different ores needed for defence products” — one former defence official told the FT.
Why it matters
The US currently imports over 80% of its critical minerals and is almost entirely reliant on foreign refining capacity, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. The International Energy Agency estimates that China controls 90% of rare earth refining, 84% of nickel sulphate production, 70% of cobalt refining and 62% of graphite processing.
The Pentagon’s decision signals a structural shift in how mineral supply chains are treated in Washington — no longer as commodity markets, but as strategic assets.
Why stockpile critical minerals?
– stockpiling reduces supply risk latency during conflict or trade disruption
– a physical buffer ensures continuity of weapons and missile production
– stockpiles also anchor domestic supply chain investment
Why now?
The move follows a series of policy escalations in 2024–25:
- The U.S. added 29 minerals to its strategic materials list (US DoD, 2025)
- The National Defense Industrial Strategy made mineral independence a “priority objective”
- The Energy Act formalised U.S. government authority to fund critical mineral production
Meanwhile, global demand is surging. The IEA forecasts critical mineral demand will double by 2030, driven by electrification and defense rearmament (IEA, 2024).
Stockpiling is becoming common among major economies:
- EU Critical Raw Materials Act includes strategic reserves
- India launched a National Mineral Security Strategy in 2025
- Japan maintains rare earth reserves equivalent to several months of supply
Who supplies the US?
While the Pentagon did not name supply partners, US security policy increasingly prioritises “allied sourcing” over open-market purchasing. This means procurement will likely favour North America, Australia and select African jurisdictions aligned with Western security cooperation.
This aligns with the Minerals Security Partnership (MSP), a US-led initiative spanning the UK, EU, Japan, South Korea and Australia to co-invest in alternative supply chains.
Conclusion
The US is not waiting for market-led solutions to secure mineral supply. The $1 billion stockpile plan is a strategic hedge against a world where resource security now shapes industrial and defense policy. It is the clearest signal yet that critical minerals have moved from trade to strategy — and governments, not markets, will increasingly decide where supply flows.
Our recent analysis on whether the US match China’s critical mineral stockpiles?
International Copper Study Group warns of 150,000t deficit in 2026
US and Australia sign $8.5 billion rare earths deal
US weighs price floors for critical minerals to counter China
US to build $1 billion critical mineral stockpile as supply risk deepens
China tightens rare earth export controls
- China expands export controls over rare earth processing technologies and related materials
- Beijing’s move ahead of meeting between Xi and Trump expected this month
- G7 nations are discussing “price floors” to disincentivize Chinese dumping
China has expanded its export controls to ban rare earth processing technologies and related materials, now requiring foreign companies to get approval to export magnets that contain even trace amounts of China-sourced rare earths.
Beijing’s latest restrictions cover produced chemicals and tech related to rare earth magnets, including materials that were produced using the country’s extraction methods, refining or magnet-making technology, not just raw minerals.
The new ban comes ahead of an expected meeting between President Trump and Xi at APEC later in the month.
This is the latest restrictions in escalation follow a similar pattern: in 2022–23, China cut exports of processed rare earths, and other metals such as tungsten and antimony, causing supply crunches downstream. The two main drivers are:
- China can now leverage its dominance more directly, gaining political leverage in trade war negotiations
- export curbs provide domestic firms preferential access to raw materials and margin shields
China accounts for approx 90% of processed global rare earth supply. The minerals have an array of applications that make them vital to high-tech industries including semiconductors and autos, as well as the military.
In September 2025, sources told Reuters that G7 finance ministers are weighing price floors on rare earth metal and oxide sales to deter Chinese dumping. The move underscores how seriously Western capitals now view China’s dominance of rare earths — sometimes likened to the new “oil weapon.”
In July 2025, the US Department of Defense is investing US$400 million to become the largest shareholder in MP Materials to support domestic rare earth mining and processing
Subscribe for Investment Insights. Stay Ahead.
Investment market and industry insights delivered to you in real-time.
US Government takes 5% stake in Lithium Americas’ Nevada project
Subscribe for Investment Insights. Stay Ahead.
Investment market and industry insights delivered to you in real-time.
- US government to take 5% equity stake in Lithium Americas’ joint venture with General Motors
- move tied to $2.26 billion DOE loan and support for the Thacker Pass project in Nevada, one of the largest lithium deposits in the US
- Washington shifts from lending to direct ownership, following its 15% stake in MP Materials
- Strategy aimed at securing domestic lithium supply for EV and battery production, reducing dependence on China
The US government will take a 5% equity stake in Lithium Americas’ joint venture with General Motors, tightening its grip on strategic minerals and marking a deeper move into ownership of America’s lithium supply chain.
Why Lithium Americas?
Lithium Americas’ Thacker Pass project in Nevada is the largest known lithium resource in the US, holding an estimated 16.1 million tonnes of lithium carbonate equivalent (LCE). The project is forecast to produce 40,000 tonnes of LCE per year in Phase 1, doubling in Phase 2.
GM has already committed $650 million to develop Thacker Pass, securing lithium supply for its Ultium battery plants. The US stake, structured alongside a $2.26 billion DOE loan package, gives Washington direct leverage in ensuring the project comes online as scheduled.
What is the strategic context of the investment
The investment comes as Washington pushes to reduce reliance on China, which controls over 60% of global lithium refining capacity and dominates battery supply chains.
By taking equity stakes, the U.S. is moving from passive financier to active shareholder in critical mineral projects. The approach mirrors the July 2025 deal where the government bought a 15% stake in MP Materials, the only US rare earth miner.
Outlook
With these new investments, Washington now holds direct stakes in both a US rare earth mine and its most advanced lithium project. It signals a structural shift: the US government is not just subsidizing critical minerals — it is buying into them.
Subscribe for Investment Insights. Stay Ahead.
Investment market and industry insights delivered to you in real-time.
Three major global copper projects halt amid unrest, accidents, disruption
Subscribe for Investment Insights. Stay Ahead.
Investment market and industry insights delivered to you in real-time.
- Hudbay has temporarily shut down its Peru Constancia mill amid protests and blockades
- Freeport-McMoRan has declared force majeure at its Grasberg mine in Indonesia after a mudflow incident
- Codelco’s El Teniente mine remains suspended following an underground tunnel collapse earlier this year
- These three disruptions together highlight systemic vulnerability in copper supply chains and upward pressure on prices.
Three of the world’s largest copper projects have been knocked off balance — Grasberg (Freeport), El Teniente (Codelco), and Constancia (Hudbay) — due to a mix of geotechnical disaster and social upheaval. The cumulative effect: tens of thousands of tonnes of copper production at risk.
What’s Going On
Hudbay’s Constancia Mill Shutdown (Peru)
Hudbay Minerals announced the temporary shutdown of its Constancia mill in southern Peru after riots, blockades and protests escalated in the region. The company demobilized non-essential staff to protect safety and used the window to perform preventive maintenance. Management insists the disruption is brief and will not affect 2025 guidance.
Constancia’s role in Hudbay’s copper portfolio is significant; any sustained outage tightens supply margins, especially as other megamines face trouble.
Grasberg: Force Majeure After Mudflow
On September 8, a mudflow inundated parts of the Grasberg Block Cave underground mine in Papua (Indonesia), blocking access routes and trapping workers. Freeport declared force majeure, cut 2025 output guidance, and expects 2026 production to be ~35% below prior estimates. Parts of the mine, such as Big Gossan and DMLZ, may resume in late 2025, but full ramp-up is targeted for 2027. The incident threatens to remove ~250,000–260,000 tonnes of copper from 2025 forecasts.
El Teniente: Codelco’s Ongoing Halt
Codelco suspended operations at its El Teniente mine after a tunnel collapse killed seven miners and rendered key workings unsafe. The stoppage comes amid already strained conditions for Chilean copper output and adds to the “disruption basket” hitting the industry.
Why It Matters
The three disruptions converge at a vulnerable moment for copper markets:
- Supply squeeze intensifies. Goldman Sachs has already cut global mine forecasts after Grasberg’s collapse, estimating a supply loss of 525,000 tonnes through 2026.
- Price pressure rising. Copper prices jumped following Freeport’s announcement.
- Geopolitical/climate risk front and center. Social instability, tunnel collapses, and extreme weather all show no major peer is immune.
- Investment risk grows. Projects with tight margins may delay expansions; downstream supply chains (e.g. copper cathode, wiring, power) could see ripple effects.
Subscribe for Investment Insights. Stay Ahead.
Investment market and industry insights delivered to you in real-time.
Tokenization of commodities is the next frontier in finance
Tokenization—turning assets like gold, oil, and uranium streams into digital tokens that can be traded, fractioned, and settled in real time— is unlocking liquidity and access for investors.
Every few decades, finance reinvents itself. The 1980s gave us index funds. The 2000s brought ETFs. In the last decade, crypto has reshaped the way we think about currencies and payments. The next wave is already forming: The tokenization of real-world assets (RWAs), and nowhere will this be more disruptive than incommodities. Directors, executives and corporate finance departments inside of mining companies need to turn their attention to these developments.
I’ve spent my career in the resource sector—from royalty and streaming companies to investing across critical minerals, uranium, and carbon. Over the last five years, I’ve watched blockchain evolve from a fringe technology into a financial infrastructure that some of the world’s biggest institutions are quietly adopting. The same rails that allow investors to own fractionalized shares of real estate or fine art are now being applied to barrels of oil, ounces of gold, and royalties from uranium mines.
This isn’t theory. It’s already happening. And it’s going to change how capital flows into commodities.
WHY TOKENIZATION MATTERS NOW
Tokenization simply means representing ownership of a real asset—say, 10 ounces of gold or a stream of oil or gas production—as a digital token on a blockchain. That token can then be traded, split into fractions, and settled in real time.
Why does this matter? Three reasons stand out:
- Liquidity: Commodities and royalties are often illiquid, private, or restricted to specialist investors. Tokenization unlocks secondary markets, allowing investors to trade exposures with the ease of buying a stock.
- Access: A young investor can’t easily buy into an oil royalty or a uranium stream today. With tokens, they could own $50 worth of exposure to a producing asset—democratizing access to an asset class that was historically reserved for institutions.
- Transparency: Blockchain offers immutable records of ownership and transaction history. In a sector plagued by opaque contracts and intermediaries, transparency builds trust.
