⬇️ My Thoughts ⬇️
Copper Is A Great Investment In 2026 - Technicals & Fundamentals Explained
*A big part of this analysis also applies to copper miners, but I prefer to cover that in a separate article
From a technical standpoint, copper is currently flipping a ≈20 year old resistance for support. On a monthly chart, copper is in a multi-year upwards channel, and it’s now close to the upper trend line of that channel. Copper is also at record lows when priced in terms of gold and silver.
From a fundamental, supply/demand perspective, copper is required for electrification, data centers, new buildings, electric vehicles, and electric appliances in general.
International Copper Study Group (ICSG) expects refined copper’s demand to surpass the available supply/production in 2026. Given that new copper mines are slow to build, increasing the supply of copper requires great investments of capital and time, and in case of continued increase of global copper demand, it may take decades for the production to meet that demand fully.
This creates a setup for a significant upwards price pressure on copper from current levels.
It's also important to be aware of the metal's general price action. Copper is not gold - copper is significantly more volatile, but post 2021, the volatility has been more compressed to the upwards channel structure described above and shown in the chart.
Regarding the maximum drawdown from the current price levels (≈$5.90/lb), I don’t believe that copper will correct more than ≈15%, as there it will find a strong support area, and soon after the bottom support trend line from the monthly upwards channel, both of which will exert strong buying pressure. Within 6 months from now, I expect copper’s price to be above the current levels. This a risk-adjusted timeframe in which you should frame the current thesis - so it means that, for the same amount of capital, your investments in copper from today will be yield significantly more than they would in at the prevailing rate in money market funds. Realistically, I think it will happen much sooner than 6 months.
In addition to everything above there is also monetary debasement, debt refinancing walls and negative pressures on USD dominance as a reserve currency. These 3, alongside the geopolitical tensions present an additional source of positive price pressure on the whole commodity sector. My copper price thesis is positioned within this liquidity flow into commodities. I’ve covered these points in detail in my previous posts.
Copper is another great buy for 2026 at current prices
I'll write an article explaining why in more detail soon, so stay tuned!
Silver miners are up another ≈4% today, and more than 10% in the last 5 days 😄
But this is unsurprising to you if you read my articles from a few days ago on miner/producer equity prices and why they present a great investing opportunity for this year
Yesterday, I explained why silver mining stocks are undervalued in 2026
Today, silver miners are up almost 6% across major FX currencies 😄
Of course, it's to early to tell whether my thesis is correct, but I'll throw in another prediction: this upward price movement in miners to continue.
Yesterday I wrote an article explaining why US tariffs on Europe mean more expensive gold and cheaper US dollar
Today, gold hit a new all time high & you should expect this trend to continue
If you haven't read the article yet, you can do it here: https://illya.sh/threads/good-for-gold-bad-for-usd-us-tariffs-on-europe
8 months later, Japan's 30 year bond yield is now ≈32% higher
The yields on the 30Y Japanese bonds is approaching 4%. The yields are up across the whole tenor curve.
Soon, BoJ will have little options left but to resume QE and lower interest rates, and thus expand the Yen monetary base in an effort to reduce government refinancing costs (A.K.A. government bond yields).
I first wrote about this almost a year ago. The thesis for 2026 and onwards remains the same.
A month ago me and Gemini 2.5 Pro Deep Research had a disagreement
🇯🇵 Gemini said Japan will continue with QT, while I think they will be back to QE soon
With Japanese bond yields at ATHs - which one of the scenarios do you find more likely? 😁
First European pension fund - the Danish pension fund AkademikerPension, started selling US Treasuries. Eurozone countries may start doing the same soon. I've been writing for a long time about how swapping USD-denominated reserves for gold would've been the best response to the tariffs.
Maybe, just maybe the EU will start swapping their USD-denominated reserves for gold and (at least eventually) renminbi 😉
Good For Gold, Bad For USD: US Tariffs on Europe
The tariffs imposed by the U.S. on the European countries are detrimental to USD's position as a reserve currency. A capital outflow out of the U.S. dollar creates positive price pressure on gold via increased demand.
This is true regardless of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision on whether President Trump can lawfully impose unilateral broad tariffs via executive order using the the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEAP).
At the high level, there's two moves for gold here:
➖ If the tariffs are deemed illegal and the collected tariff revenue must to refunded - which would lead to an increase of USD supply accessible to the wider economy. The refund would come either from existing reserves, thus directly increasing broad money or from newly issued debt, which may reduce broad money in the short-term, but the newly issued bonds will eventually be rehypothecated, thus effectively increasing USD credit/effective supply. This is positive price pressure on gold, at the very least due to the increase in liquidity. This is negative price pressure on USD, due to increased supply & public debt of the issuer.
➖If the tariffs are deemed legal, and/or do not need to be refunded, the geopolitical and liquidity risk remains, which materializes in a lower incencitve to own USD. After all, why would you want to hold a currency, whose purchasing power/liqudity may be reduced every other week after the markets close on a Friday? Gold is the natural outflow path from USD, especially at sovereign/central bank level.
If the Eurozone wants to reduce their USD exposure in the next 5 years, what can they do? The European countries may not want to start significantly increasing the share of renminbi in their FX reserves just yet. Additionally, EU could position Euro as an alternative to USD for settlements, as EUR is already the second most used currency for international trade & FX turnover, second only to USD. Gold presents itself as an attractive alternative to USD, even if the focus on increasing its tonnage in the reserves is transitory. At the very least, increasing the share of gold relative to the balance sheet size in the Eurozone, would increase foreign exchange rate value of Euro and/or would provide basis for monetary expansion in the future.
Many forget that the "gold and foreign exchange reserves" are a single asset-side item in central banks balance sheets. "Gold" is explicitly discriminated among all other assets/commodities, while all currencies and their derivatives (e.g. sovereign bonds) are clustered under the generic "FX reserves" name. Across all currencies, renminbi is best positioned to increase its share in reserve assets and international settlement. Unlike renminbi, gold is nobody's liability and has no counterparty risk (assuming no jurisdiction risk, which can be greatly mitigated by storing the gold bullion domestically).
Given this, I expect the European countries to increase their gold holdings, via a combination of swaps from USD-denominated assets for gold and other FX currencies like the Chinese Yen.
Every day it becomes more obvious how US tariffs, unilateral sanctions & multi-faceted geopolitical aggression including towards its allies and major trade partners is a strategic mistake
Expect this trend to continue throughout 2026
Yesterday, I explained why silver mining stocks are undervalued in 2026
Today, silver miners are up almost 6% across major FX currencies 😄
Of course, it's to early to tell whether my thesis is correct, but I'll throw in another prediction: this upward price movement in miners to continue.
Even As Central Banks Bought Gold, The Market Analysts Remained Bearish
* This goes to the list of "things that are obvious in hindsight"
In 2014 Forbes published an opinion saying that increased gold buying by Central Bank of Russia (CBR) isn't an indicator of positive price pressures for gold.
Gold's price has more than quadrupled since then, going from ≈$1600/oz in November 2014 to ≈$4600/oz as of January 19th 2026.
The article frames the purchase as "forced", when commenting the fact that CBR decided to increase the share of gold in the "gold and foreign exchange reserve assets" item in their balance sheet. It is not by chance that this central bank accounting item explicitly includes "gold" in its name.
The Forbes article also seems to assume that miner profit margins don't spread cross-border.
Another thing that the article omits is that a central bank can buy gold without expanding the base monetary base (i.e. "printing" new currency), for example by swapping FX reserves for gold via a single or multi-leg sale.
Silver Mining Stocks Are Undervalued In 2026
*Below is my 5-minute analysis on silver miners equity prices for 2026
The price ratio of silver miners to silver is at some of its lowest levels in history, roughly at the same values as it was in the 2000’s. The ratio is currently sitting on a support from 2014-2015 inside of a multi-year upward price channel. Alongside the macroeconomic and geopolitical fundamentals, this setup’s potential upside gain justifies the limited downside risk. Unless silver experiences a large medium-to-longterm pullback, silver mining equity prices are set to increase against the price of silver. For this to happen, there are 3 high-level scenarios:
1️⃣ Silver price remains above ≈$88: silver miners appreciate more than silver
2️⃣ Silver price remains above ≈$83: silver falls in price, miners fall less or increase
3️⃣ Silver price remains above ≈$70: silver falls in price, miners fall less (more likely) or increase
Given the increasing demand for physical silver combined with currency debasement driven by refinancing needs, I don’t believe silver’s spot price will experience a pullback to lower than the ≈$70 level in 2026. Pullbacks below ≈$70 are more likely to trigger a larger sell-off in silver miners, potentially even pushing the ratio further down, meaning that silver mining stocks fall in price more than silver.
Silver producers/miners, royalty and streamers can be a great source of diversification and even "hedging" of your silver investments without ever leaving the commodities sector. You can further diversify your exposure to other metals by acquiring fund units and/or equities in producers, royalty and streamers that focus on more than two metals (e.g. there are companies mining gold, silver and copper).
A few days ago, I wrote a post about how gold miner prices are set to breakout. But silver is not gold. Silver miners will be more volatile than gold miners, but given a positive correlation between gold and silver prices, they will tend to follow the gold miner’s direction. After all, most gold mining companies mine silver and vice-versa (silver is often mined as a byproduct of other metals like gold, copper, lead and zinc). The attached chart shows the ratio between the price of Hecla Mining and Pan American Silver, so it doesn’t include all silver miners, but you’ll find a similar structure in silver equity-based indices against the spot/futures price of the metal.
In the longer timespan (e.g. 3+ years), miners may underperform the underlying metal. This analysis is written with a focus on the current price levels with a timeframe of 1 year from now. Given that this article was written in January 2026, you can consider this as a guide for the remainder of 2026. Physical silver is not the same as silver miners. The mining sector is exposed to an array of risks distinct from the metal, with the highest one currently being the geopolitical risk in the form of armed conflict (destruction, supply chain disruption) and legal changes (sanctions, tariffs, export/import limits). Thus, even if the price of the physical metal goes up, miners price can collapse. The same risks can put upwards pressure on the metal and downward pressure on the miners simultaneously. I don't believe these risks will materialize sufficiently for miners by the end of 2026, and given the upside price pressure on commodities, miners will also ride that price wave up.
Why wouldn't markets be able to react to Trump's new tariffs on Europe until Monday night?
Markets may be closed in the U.S. on Monday, but they're open in Europe and Asia.
The market isn't going to wait for the U.S. to react 😂
Gold miners are about to breakout
It looks like gold miners are about to appreciate relative to gold, as you can see on the multi-year ascending triangle on the chart. Given that I don't expect gold to have any significant medium-to-longterm pullbacks, this means that gold mining stocks are setup to appreciate more than gold.
The next significant medium to long-term resistance zone is ≈60% higher, meaning that miners have room to appreciate significantly more relative to the price of gold.
The chart is on a monthly level and it shows the ratio between the price of gold miners index and gold futures.
Putin Instructed Central Bank of Russia To Buy Gold In 2005
In 20 years, Russia's share of gold in their central bank's international reserves account increased by a factor of ≈12.1 times.
At the start of 2026, gold represents ≈43% of Bank of Russia's (BoR) international reserves. Back in 2005, gold accounted for a mere ≈3.5% of the same reserves account.
The move to gold was mainly motivated by the desire to diversify away from the U.S. Dollar and the explicit goal of increasing BoR's holdings of gold relative to foreign exchange assets. On November 22nd 2005 Putin stated:
➖ "I believe it's necessary for the Central Bank to pay more attention to precious metals within the territory of the Russian Federation when forming gold and foreign-currency reserves. Those reserves are even called 'gold and foreign-currency' reserves. There's nothing to be shy about here."
Since Vladimir Putin instructed Bank of Russia to start buying more gold, gold is up ≈840%, i.e. almost 10 times. In the same period, S&P 500 TR increased ≈726%, or almost 9 times. This means that Putin's strategy outperformed the U.S. stock market index by ≈14%. Perhaps the president of Russia should start his own investment fund?
You can read the full article on gold revaluation, its low-level mechanics and impact on the U.S. here ⬇️
https://illya.sh/threads/gold-revaluation-will-not-solve-the-us-debt-problem
If you want to invest in copper miners, just go with the Global X Copper Miners ETF
This is especially true if your main goal is getting exposure to the price action in the copper mining segment without spending too much time on it.
Not saying that you shouldn't invest in individual equities, but don't invest in a company just because someone mentioned their ticker on the internet.
Diversifying makes all of the sense in these cases in terms of risk/reward.
This exchange-traded fund is domiciled in the U.S., but also available to retail EU investors via an equivalent UCITS product, so you should be able to find it listed by your preferred broker.
Fund information:
➖ Ticker: COPX
➖ U.S. ISIN: US37954Y8306
➖ EU ISIN: IE0003Z9E2Y3
So silver didn't top for the cycle, 2011 didn't repeat and instead less than 2 weeks later it hit another all time high
Imagine my surprise 😄
More all time highs are coming and, as I've written before, you can safely ignore any calls for long-term top.
You can't find a top on chart without understanding what drives the price on that chart in the first place. Luckily for you - I've written a lot of explanations on that when it comes to gold and silver
Silver didn't even break its 4 hour trend support on the pullback and many are already calling that it has topped for the cycle 😂
Congratulations to Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae in their first steps at becoming a central bank
Looks like it's not just the Fed doing MBS-targeted QE now. Why control the Fed, when you can just move the Fed? 😆
Venezuela's Central Bank Monetary Gold Holdings Constitute ≈20% of Their Balance Sheet
Gold is also ≈47% of Venezuela's international reserve assets.
This comes directly from Banco Central de Venezuela (BCV), which reports a total of ≈53 tonnes of gold worth ≈0.6 Trillion VES (Venezuelan Bolívar, also known as Bs), or ≈5.58 billion USD.
In 2021, Reuters reported that ≈31 tonnes of Venezuela's Centeal Bank gold was stored in the UK, under the custody of Bank of England (BoE). A quick search didn't yield precise figures for 2026, as it appears that that information is not reported publicly in detail. The access to that gold at BoE is currently blocked, over a legal dispute regarding who has the authority/control over that gold - Maduro-appointed BCV board or Guaidó-appointed board. Thus, a significant portion of Venezuela's gold is abroad and frozen, which matters in terms of geopolitical risk.
BNV's 20% are relatively high gold amounts against the central bank's total balance sheet size, surpassing U.S.'s Fed (≈16%), China's PBoC (≈5%) and just above European Union's ECB + Eurosystem (≈19.1%), but well behind Russia's BoR (≈36%).
Bulgraria has been pegged to Euro since 1999 🇧🇬
Bulgaria has adopted Euro as its official currency and legal tender on January 1st 2026.
As you may have expected, there is now a lot of discourse about how this is bad for Bulgaria, because Euro is bad and Bulgaria has now given up their "monetary sovereignty".
What the ones pushing that narrative have not expected is for the Bulgarian lev (BGN) to be a proxy for Euro for almost 3 decades now. So it's not very clear which sovereignty Bulgaria gave up on January 1st 2026, when it became a full Eurozone member.
Since 1997 Bulgaria has operated under a currency board arrangement (CBA), which is an exchange rate regime where a country commits to keep its local currency to a fixed exchange rate against an anchor currency.
Under CBA, the adhering country fixes the exchange rate of its local currency to an anchor currency, its national central bank fully backs its monetary liabilities with foreign reserves (to create local currency the national central bank must have foreign currency assets to back it up, thus ensuring stable convertibility), and the country foregoes its right to adapt discretionary monetary policy (e.g. inflation rate targeting).
On July 1st 1997, Bulgaria introduced the currency board, pegging lev (BGL) to the Deutsche Mark (DM). On January 1st 1999, Bulgaria switched the anchor currency from Deutsche Mark to Euro, with the exchange rate fixed at €1 = 1.95583 BGN (≈0.5 BGN/EUR).
So the Bulgarian National Bank (BNB) neither had the sovereignty to manage the broad and base supplies of its local currency (Bulgarian lev/BGL/BGN), nor to freely pursue monetary policies since July 1st 1997.
Given this, any discourse about how Bulgaria's entry into the Eurozone implies a dramatic change to its monetary sovereignty is likely unfounded. It didn't happen overnight - it's been an almost 30 year long process. Joining the Eurozone does, however, remove the pegging frictions for Bulgaria, and allows them to fully integrate into the monetary union.
The U.S. Violated International Law By Attacking Venezuela and Capturing Maduro
Both the U.S. and Venezuela are signees & parties of the UN Charter, making it a legally binding treaty for both countries. This means that both of the countries are forbidden from using force against sovereign states, as per Article 2(4), which states:
➖ "All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations."
Crossing the border with military force to seize someone is clearly a "use of force" against that state, meaning it's a violation of the provision.
There are some exceptions to Article 2(4), such as self-defense in responding to an armed attack (Article 51), prior authorization for force by the UN Security Council and . United State's actions do not fall under those exceptions. As such, USA is in violation of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, making their actions illegal under the international law.
Even if the U.S. that they are not in violation of their national laws, they would still be violating the international law. Vienna Convention on The Law of Treaties (VCLT) is the "treaty about treaties", by outlining base rules for how treaties are made, interpreted, applied and ended. Article 27 of VCLT states:
➖ "A party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty."
Regarding VCLT, the U.S. signed it in April 1970, but they didn't ratify it/they're not a party in it, meaning it's not a directly legally binding treaty for the U.S. However, U.S. courts often treat VCLT as an authoritative guide to customary international law of treaties.
Additionally, Article 103 of the UN Charter puts the obligations outlined in the UN Charter above any other treaty obligations, meaning that Article 2(4) must be respected:
➖"In the event of a conflict between the obligations of the Members of the United Nations under the present Charter and their obligations under any other international agreement, their obligations under the present Charter shall prevail."
If the U.S. takes military action against Cuba, Cambodia, Denmark (Greenland) or any other sovereign in a similar manner, it would equally be a violation of the international law.
Interestingly enough, in 1945 the U.S. helped to draft the same UN Charter that it is now violating.
It's NOT about paying the debt, but BEING ABLE to pay the debt
This is true for corporations, individuals and governments:
➖ For corporations, debt provides a tax shield (interest payments is an accounting expense)
➖ For individuals, it allows to front-run price increase in a monetary debasement/inflationary economy
➖For governments, it allows for more flexibility in pursuing their macroeconomic, social, geopolitical and monetary policy goals.
Why do you think central banks have gold and foreign currencies in their balance sheet backing up their local currency? It's about having enough assets and liquidity to cover your liabilities.
Misinformation About Venezuela's Gold Reserves Is Spreading 🇻🇪
It appears that once a large finance account on X posts misinformation about Venezuela's gold reserves, many other large-following X accounts repost it without even bothering to verify the information.
Banco Central de Venezuela (BCV) doesn't have anywhere close to 161 tonnes of gold - those are numbers from 2017. BCV's balance sheet report, alongside the auxiliary notes released with it (specifically Note 7) from June 30th 2025 point at ≈53 tonnes of gold, which is less than a third of the claimed 161 tonnes of gold figure. I know this for a fact, because I checked that balance sheet statement myself.
On my feed, the incorrect 161 tonnes figure started with @KobeissiLetter post earlier today, from there, it continues to spread throughout numerous accounts, many of which have followings in the millions.
My goal is not to criticize or attack the accounts spreading this incorrect information, but to incentivize checking the information yourself before reposting/spreading it.
In a follow-up post I'll do a more detailed breakdown of BCV's balance sheet, especially in terms of gold, so stay tuned.
