Uranium at record prices: The supply crunch that refuses to go away

When I first wrote that uranium was “The bull market nobody’s talking about” more than eight years ago, spot U3O8 was sitting around US$26.30/lb, with long term contract prices at US$31.25. Spot prices were already up ~40% from their lows in November 2016, but honestly, I felt like I was going out on a limb a bit with that call at the time.

But history has been kind to me.

Eight years later, both spot and contract prices are roughly triple where they were, numerous products have been launched offering exposure to physical uranium and uranium equities, mines have been restarted, and some of the small caps I mentioned in that article are sitting on the precipice of the S&P/ASX 100, with market caps in excess of $5 billion.

A lot has been written about the market and the stocks in that time (often by me), and the story has evolved significantly. What was once simply a supply-side story, is now being driven on both sides as nuclear energy is experiencing somewhat of a renaissance.

In June, long-term contract prices hit a new all-time high, passing the high watermark set in 2007, but I don’t think I saw a single article covering the topic. In fact, it was only while researching this article that I even noticed it. Perhaps readers have gotten sick of hearing about uranium?

But uranium markets don’t really care if finance writers like me are paying attention though. Spot prices get most of the attention in the media, but the vast majority of uranium delivered to US nuclear utilities – 87% in 2025, according to the EIA – was purchased under long-term contracts. These prices are far more representative of underlying supply and demand as they mostly involve miners and regulated utilities, along with a few other parties like conversion and enrichment facilities, and government buyers.

So, what is the outlook for uranium today? And what options do investors have to gain exposure on the ASX? Keep reading to find out.

The supply and demand situation – 2026 and beyond

While preparing this article, I found this chart in a presentation by Boss Energy (ASX: BOE) (then Boss Resources) from 2018.

Of the 17 different development projects in this chart, only four are producing today – Shirley Basin, Honeymoon, Alta Mesa, and Kayelekera.

But even within those producing, many are far below their expectations were at the time. After restarting in 2024, Boss’ Honeymoon project produced just 1.41Mlb in FY26. Kayelekera restarted in 2025, but produced just 0.33Mlb in FY26. Alta Mesa produced 0.131Mlb in H1 26 after restarting in 2024. Shirley Basin only commenced initial operations in April 2026, capturing around 0.011Mlb during the quarter before receiving full production authorisation in late June.

Salamanca, which was the most advanced project at the time, has been stuck in legal limbo for years following disputes over construction authorisation that date back to 2021.

Why is this relevant? Well, look at any uranium producer, or hopeful producer’s investor presentation and you’ll likely see a chart that looks something like this: 

A key part of the supply/demand balance in the coming years is ‘Planned Production’, and history has shown that plans are subject to change.

This oft-quoted chart is almost always derived from a quarterly report by UxC, a uranium market analyst. These reports are expensive to access, and UxC is careful not to let them leak out. But we can infer a lot from information quoted by producers, and the limited information UxC allows to come out publicly.

A May 2026 Deep Yellow (ASX: DYL) presentation says UxC’s Q1 2026 High Case would see uranium demand reach 429 Mlb U₃O₈ by 2045, equivalent to average annual growth of around 3.5% from 2026.

Conveniently, UxC provided a rare glimpse under the bonnet of its framework earlier this year, publishing a study prepared for the Nuclear Energy Institute.

The study shows how UxC constructs its nuclear capacity scenarios. Excluding markets dominated by Chinese and Russian suppliers, its Base Case assumes around 131 GWe of new nuclear capacity is added by 2050 and 62 GWe retires. Its High Case assumes roughly 250 GWe is added, while only 37 GWe retires.

Excluding China and Russia, you ask? Yep. Markets captured by China and Russia are excluded from this analysis altogether. UxC specifically says much of the world's near- and medium-term reactor growth is coming from those two countries, but removes them because the study is about markets accessible to US suppliers.

The High Case isn't based on every ambitious government nuclear target being met. It requires roughly twice as much new capacity to be built as the Base Case, along with more life extensions for the existing fleet.

Nor is the near-term forecast predicated on an SMR revolution. UxC expects conventional large reactors and life extensions to dominate initially, with small and advanced reactors becoming increasingly important after 2030.

Of course, reactor construction is hardly renowned for meeting schedules either. Both future supply and future demand are forecasts, and both are vulnerable to delays. But critically, a greater proportion of near-term uranium demand is attached to reactors that already exist or are already under construction, whereas a significant proportion of projected future supply depends on mines that have yet to be financed, permitted or built.

Options for Australian uranium investors

For investors looking for uranium exposure, there are essentially three broad options:

1. ETFs providing exposure to a basket of uranium/nuclear stocks.
2. Direct exposure to the price of physical uranium.
3. Individual uranium companies.

The three are not mutually exclusive, and may even be complementary, as long as the overall exposure remains within a range you’re comfortable with.

One thing I would be cautious about though is going ‘all-in’ on a single producer, developer, or explorer. Uranium mining is a difficult business to be in. Even developing a uranium project is very difficult.

As mentioned earlier, Berkeley Energia (ASX: BKY) has been stuck in a legal dispute since 2021 over its Salamanca project in Spain. Lotus Resources (ASX: LOT) is down more than 80% so far in 2026 following ramp-up difficulties and a huge capital raise. Peninsula Energy (ASX: PEN) is down over 50% YTD, and its share price remains well below where it traded in the depths of the 2010s uranium bear market – similarly to Lotus, it has faced ramp up difficulties and production delays, leading to large, discounted capital raises.

Even the relatively successful companies in the sector have faced significant challenges, leading to wild share price swings.

ETFs

For exposure to the broader thematic, without taking on individual company risks, ETFs can be an attractive option.

There are three uranium and nuclear-focused ETFs available on the ASX:

• Betashares Global Uranium ETF (ASX: URNM)
• Global X Uranium ETF (ASX: ATOM)
• Vaneck Uranium and Energy Innovation ETF (ASX: URAN)

While they all offer exposure to the same theme, the holdings of each are surprisingly different. Enough that I’d expect a divergence in their performance over time – though I wouldn’t hazard a guess as to which will lead.

URNM offers the ‘purest’ exposure to uranium of the three. Its holdings are overwhelmingly in uranium producers, developers, and trusts or companies holding physical uranium. Its largest holdings, which account for almost 45% of the portfolio, are Kazatomprom (15.7%), Cameco (14.6%), and Sprott Physical Uranium Trust (13.4%).

Kazatomprom is worth addressing specifically. It’s the world’s largest producer, accounting for 20% of global primary uranium production. So the fact that it’s the largest holding makes sense. However, its primary listing is on the Astana International Exchange (AIX) – the national stock exchange of Kazakhstan. For western investors though, it’s usually traded via London-listed GDRs, which are effectively a proxy for the Kazakh listing. It’s also a state-controlled entity, with 75% of the company owned by the Kazakh sovereign wealth fund and the Ministry of Finance. Which explains why its weighting in the other two ETFs is significantly different.

ATOM still has the majority of its holdings in uranium companies, but it’s a much more mixed bag, with holdings in nuclear energy hardware, utilities, technology, and oddly, even BHP. BHP does indeed produce a large amount of uranium from its Olympic Dam project, but it’s absolutely dwarfed by copper, iron ore, potash, and its broader portfolio generally. BHP matters for global uranium production, but uranium production doesn’t matter for BHP. ATOM also has a much smaller exposure to Kazatomprom, at just 4.6%.

URAN offers easily the most mixed exposure, with just over half the portfolio in uranium companies, and a very notable exposure to capital goods – for example, manufacturers of equipment for the nuclear industry. Its exposure to Kazatomprom is tiny, at just 1.6%. URAN does, however, have the lowest fee of the group at 0.59% p.a. vs 0.69% p.a. for ATOM and URNM.

The other thing worth flagging is that with less than a year in operation, and just $15m in AUM, I’d call URAN ‘sub-scale’ at this point. ATOM and URNM, by contrast, have $144m and $363m in AUM, which puts them comfortably above the level where fund closure due to insufficient scale would normally be a concern.

Uranium price exposure

For most investors, the main two options here are Sprott Physical Uranium Trust (SPUT), listed on the TSX, and Yellow Cake (YCA), listed on the LSE. There is no comparable listed product in Australia.

SPUT is structured in a rather unusual way, allowing it to issue new units when the price is above NAV per unit, and use the funds to purchase more physical uranium. No equivalent mechanism exists on the downside. As a result, it can trade at a persistent discount to NAV, meaning movements in NAV may not directly translate to movements in prices.

Yellow Cake is closer to what we’d call an LIC in Australia, and is simply a company that does nothing other than own a stockpile of physical uranium. It does not have any built-in mechanisms to create or redeem shares to grow or shrink its uranium holdings.

Uranium futures contracts are available on the CME, but with each contract being for 250/lbs of uranium (~US$25,000 of notional exposure), and limited liquidity, they’re unlikely to be suitable for most retail investors.

Uranium companies

Lastly, we have companies that either produce uranium, are developing a uranium project, or exploring for uranium deposits.

On this front, Australian investors have plenty of choice. Not quite as much as Canadian investors, but a comfortable second.

By my count, the ASX boasts five current producers, assuming we include Energy Fuels (ASX: EF2), which is both a secondary listing and a diversified miner. I have specifically excluded BHP as uranium is immaterial to its finances or strategy. We also have six advanced developers, with some caveats around NexGen Energy (ASX: NXG) and BKY, four early developers, and two explorers. I’ve imposed a minimum market capitalisation of $50m in my screen, and excluded several other companies either because their focus is not uranium, they’ve been recently delisted, or because they are not a miner, producer, or explorer.

17 companies may not sound like a lot, but considering the size of the sector globally, that’s a decent amount of choice.

I’ve created a document outlining these companies with the assistance of generative AI. I have checked it as far as reasonably possible, but it should only be treated as an initial screen/list of options, and investment decisions should not be based on the information contained within. I’ve included:

• Category (producer, advanced developer, early developer, explorer)
• ASX code and company name
• Primary asset(s)
• Current status
• Share price, market capitalisation, and last 12-month return
• For producers, trailing and forward PE ratios, where available
• For developers, project level NPV, NPV adjusted for current uranium prices, and NPV to market cap ratios.

ASX uranium companies list

I hope you find this information useful.