After surging in late 2025 and passing US$101 per pound in January, the uranium spot price consolidated in Q2. The energy fuel entered the three month session at US$84.19 and stayed within the US$84 to US$87 range.
The retreat from January’s highs has prompted questions about whether the market’s momentum is fading, but analysts argue that the pullback reflects short-term market volatility rather than a deterioration in fundamentals.
For Brooke Thackray, research analyst at Global X, the key metric investors should be watching isn’t the spot price.
“This is a healthy consolidation phase that’s taking place right now, because if you take a look at the long-term fundamental drivers for the uranium price, they’re very, very good,” he told the Investing News Network.
While spot uranium traded near US$85 during the quarter, long-term contract prices continued to climb. Since June 2025, the long-term price has risen steadily from US$80, breaking past US$90 in January for the first time since 2008.
Most recently, the term price reached US$94, highlighting a widening gap between the two markets.
As Thackray explained, that divergence matters because utilities purchase the majority of their uranium through long-term contracts rather than the spot market. As utilities move to secure future supply, sellers are gaining leverage in negotiations, a dynamic Thackray believes could eventually help pull the spot price higher.
Supply disruptions reinforce deficit concerns
Uranium supply became increasingly uncertain in Q2 as producers continued to face operational challenges.
Production issues at Kazakhstan’s Kazatomprom and previous disruptions at Cameco’s (TSX:CCO,NYSE:CCJ) Saskatchewan operations underscored the fragility of global uranium supply chains. At the same time, geopolitical tensions in the Middle East introduced another potential risk factor — sulfur availability.
Sulfur is a critical feedstock for sulfuric acid, which is widely used in uranium production, particularly in Kazakhstan’s in-situ recovery operations. With roughly one-fifth of global sulfur shipments moving through the Strait of Hormuz, a prolonged disruption could create additional bottlenecks.
“We’re seeing a lot of supply being interrupted here, and that is only positive for the uranium price,” Thackray said.
While sulfuric acid shortages have not yet emerged as a major market driver, the issue remains on investors’ radar. Kazatomprom previously cited sulfuric acid availability as a constraint on production growth, highlighting the sector’s dependence on broader industrial supply chains.
AI, data centers and nuclear demand
Demand growth remained one of the most compelling themes for uranium investors during the quarter.
The rapid expansion of artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructure has continued to strengthen the case for nuclear energy as a source of reliable baseload power. Major tech companies are increasingly turning to nuclear via long-term power purchase agreements, helping drive renewed interest in reactor development and uranium supply.
Thackray noted that announcements linking hyperscale data centers and nuclear power have become increasingly common over the last two years as the AI trend has ramped up.
“We’re going to keep getting positive announcements, and they’re just going to keep layering,” he said.
However, the expert suggested that the broader investment community has yet to fully embrace the uranium story. Much of the market’s attention remains concentrated on AI itself, leaving commodities and resource equities competing for investor capital. Even so, the growing power demands associated with AI development continue to reinforce long-term projections for uranium consumption.
youtu.be
– YouTube
Providing his latest outlook on uranium, Justin Huhn of Uranium Insider discusses the factors affecting prices, supply and demand. Although he pointed to a current market correction, Huhn maintains a bullish long-term stance and suggests that uranium presents significant opportunities.
New mines unlikely to solve supply gap
While several uranium developers are advancing projects toward production, Thackray does not believe new supply will arrive quickly enough to eliminate the market’s structural deficit.
He pointed to the lengthy timelines required to build both mines and reactors.
Although projects such as Denison Mines’ (TSX:DML,NYSEAMERICAN:DNN) Wheeler River development could contribute new production later this decade, uranium demand is expected to expand significantly faster.
“Demand is going to be increasing substantially, doubling by 2040,” he said. “It’s just not enough in the bigger picture.”
The mismatch between rising demand and limited supply growth remains one of the strongest arguments supporting higher uranium prices over the long term.
Energy security drives policy support
Government policy continued to strengthen uranium’s outlook during the quarter as western nations sought to reduce their dependence on geopolitical rivals for critical materials.
Against that backdrop, the US has taken steps to rebuild domestic nuclear fuel supply chains, expand strategic stockpiles and accelerate permitting for critical minerals projects.
Uranium’s inclusion on critical minerals lists has also improved access to financing and policy support.
Thackray said concerns about supply security have evolved significantly since the COVID-19 pandemic exposed vulnerabilities in global supply chains. “There is an overall concerted effort around the world from major countries … to say we can’t expose ourselves to this,” he explained during the interview.
Those efforts could prove particularly beneficial for Canada’s Athabasca Basin, which hosts some of the world’s highest-grade uranium deposits and remains a key source of supply for western markets.
Is US$85 enough to incentivize new supply?
One of the uranium market’s most persistent questions is whether current prices are sufficient to encourage the next generation of mine development and rejuvenate the supply pipeline.
Historically, many industry participants viewed US$65 as the level needed to support new production. With the spot price averaging closer to US$85 during Q2, that benchmark has technically been surpassed. However, years of inflation, rising labor costs and higher capital expenditures have likely pushed incentive pricing higher.
While Thackray acknowledged that determining an exact all-in sustaining cost threshold has become increasingly difficult, he argued that the market’s long-term trajectory remains more important than any single price level.
“I’m expecting the price to move higher over time,” he said, noting that while additional projects will eventually enter production, supply growth is unlikely to keep pace with rising demand.
The industry’s caution is rooted in experience. Following the uranium bull market of the mid-2000s, producers aggressively expanded output only to be hit by the aftermath of the 2011 Fukushima nuclear accident, which triggered a prolonged bear market and left the sector grappling with excess supply for years.
Today, the backdrop looks markedly different. Governments around the world increasingly recognize nuclear energy as a critical component of decarbonization strategies, while surging electricity demand from AI, data centers and electrification continues to strengthen the long-term demand outlook.
According to Thackray, that shift in sentiment is giving producers greater confidence to invest in future projects. Even as new mines move toward development, however, he believes the sector’s structural supply deficit will persist.
“We’ve got shortages going forward, we’ve got demand increasing, so we’ve got structural deficits over a long period of time,” he said. “I don’t think we’re going to be able to bring on the supply fast enough.”
youtu.be
– YouTube
John Ciampaglia, CEO of Sprott Asset Management, provides his analysis of uranium’s price action and supply/demand dynamics. Ciampaglia anticipates that the existing supply pressures in the uranium sector will escalate significantly moving into the early 2030s.
Investors remain focused on the long term
Physical uranium funds continued to influence market dynamics during Q2, providing investors with direct exposure to uranium and helping tighten available supply.
Thackray compared the growing role of physical uranium vehicles to the impact gold exchange-traded funds had on the precious metals market, arguing that easier access could attract new capital over time.
For now, however, uranium remains a relatively small corner of the investment landscape.
“Just a little bit will push up the price of uranium and uranium companies a lot,” he commented, referring to the vast amounts of capital currently concentrated in technology stocks.
Looking ahead to the rest of 2026, Thackray believes investors should closely monitor utilities contracting activity, term prices, reactor construction and supply disruptions.
At the same time, he maintained that the sector’s most important drivers are already in place.
“We’ve got shortages going forward, we’ve got demand increasing, so we’ve got structural deficits over a long period of time,” he said. “It’s just a matter of when that becomes the narrative.”
As the year’s second quarter draws to a close, uranium’s short-term price weakness appears increasingly disconnected from the industry’s long-term fundamentals. For many market participants, the period has reinforced the view that the sector’s next major move may depend less on spot market volatility and more on a widening supply/demand imbalance that continues to build beneath the surface.
Don’t forget to follow us @INN_Resource for real-time updates!
Securities Disclosure: I, Georgia Williams, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.
Editorial Disclosure: The Investing News Network does not guarantee the accuracy or thoroughness of the information reported in the interviews it conducts. The opinions expressed in these interviews do not reflect the opinions of the Investing News Network and do not constitute investment advice. All readers are encouraged to perform their own due diligence.
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.
www.nasdaq.com