The global PV industry has officially entered the deep-water zone of high-quality development, with market competition moving completely beyond mere "power parameter comparisons" and shifting toward comprehensive value competition encompassing full life cycle power generation revenue, system reliability, scenario adaptability, and low levelized cost of electricity. Against this backdrop of industry transformation, N-type quarter-cell modules—which combine advantages of high efficiency, high stability, and high adaptability—have become the core selection direction for distributed PV projects and large-scale ground-mounted power plants worldwide. Leveraging forward-looking technology planning and sustained product iteration capabilities, Suntech's latest generation Ultra T 3.0 high-efficiency quarter-cell modules have achieved mass production breakthroughs and recently realized large-volume shipments of fully assembled products, which are being dispatched successively to multiple key markets outside China, including Europe, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan. Having dominated the headlines at top PV exhibitions in China and overseas this year, this product has officially completed a leapfrog upgrade from technology demonstrations and small-batch trial orders to global, large-scale commercial deployment, continuously winning over customers worldwide with its proven strengths.

August 4, 2026 Silver trades at around USD 58, roughly 52 per cent below its January record. At the same time, the market is heading for its sixth consecutive supply deficit. Two facts that appear not to fit together – and one deficit figure currently circulating through the financial press in two entirely different versions. Time for a sober stocktake. The silver market has been through one of the sharpest moves in its recent history in 2026. On 29 January the price reached an unprecedented USD 121.62 per ounce. Since then the metal has given back a good half of that and now hovers around USD 58. To many investors, that looks like a rally that failed. In parallel, a series of reports has appeared over recent weeks attesting to a widening supply deficit – but with markedly different numbers attached. Some cite 67 million ounces, others 46.3 million. Anyone wanting to know what an investment case can actually be built on first has to establish which figure applies. What the World Silver Survey Actually Shows The authoritative source is the World Silver Survey , produced by the Silver Institute together with the London research house Metals Focus. The 2026 edition was published on 15 April – and it puts this year's deficit at 46.3 million ounces. That represents an increase of around 15 per cent on the 40.3 million ounce shortfall recorded in 2025, and it marks the sixth consecutive deficit year. The number is indeed growing – but it is growing from a lower base than recent headlines suggest. The frequently quoted 67 million ounces comes from an earlier Silver Institute projection published ahead of the full survey. More recent data on mine production, recycling and end-use have since superseded that estimate. Anyone arguing on the basis of 67 million ounces today is simply working with an outdated figure. This is not pedantry. The gap between the two numbers amounts to roughly a third of the deficit itself. Building the silver case on the higher figure substantially overstates the scarcity. The Genuinely Relevant Number Lies Elsewhere The annual deficit is not, in any case, the most meaningful metric. Set against global annual demand of around 1.11 billion ounces, 46.3 million ounces amounts to roughly four per cent – hardly a dramatic gap in isolation. The cumulative figure is more instructive. Since the market flipped from surplus to deficit in 2021, it has drawn a total of around 762 million ounces from above-ground stocks to cover the gap between supply and demand. That is close to a full year of global mine production. This is where the supply story really sits. It is not the individual annual shortfall that strains the market, but the fact that available inventories have been steadily eroding for six years. The consequences have already shown themselves repeatedly in the form of thin liquidity, elevated lease rates and unusually violent price swings. The Composition of Demand Is Shifting Markedly What is notable is that the 2026 deficit widens even though total demand is falling. Metals Focus expects a decline of around two per cent to 1,112.6 million ounces, alongside supply falling by roughly two per cent to 1,066.4 million ounces. Within demand, a clear reallocation is under way: Industrial demand: down three per cent to 639.6 million ounces, a second consecutive annual decline. At around 57 per cent of the total, the segment nonetheless remains by far the largest demand pillar and stays historically elevated. Jewellery fabrication: falling to 159.4 million ounces, a five-year low. The drop is particularly pronounced in India at around 18 per cent, where high prices are driving lighter pieces and subdued rural demand. Coins and bars: up 18 per cent, the strongest level since 2022. The pattern is unambiguous. Manufacturers are designing silver out of their processes wherever high prices make that viable, while private investors take up physical metal. The market is therefore increasingly driven by investment flows rather than by fabrication demand. The Gold-Silver Ratio as a Valuation Anchor A further perspective comes from the relationship between the two precious metals. With gold at around USD 4,050 and silver at roughly USD 58, the gold-silver ratio currently stands at just under 70. For comparison: in December the ratio briefly fell below 55:1, its lowest reading since 2013. Silver has therefore given up considerably more than gold during the correction – unsurprising given the metal's stronger industrial linkage. In downturns that dual role acts as a drag; in upswings it acts as leverage. Historically, a ratio around 70 is neither extreme nor especially cheap – it sits in the middle of the range of the past two decades. As a buy signal it is therefore of little use. As an indication that silver has not kept pace with gold's recent moves, it is rather more telling. What Investors Should Take From This The supply side remains the strongest element of the silver case, and it is structurally anchored. Around 70 per cent of silver arises as a by-product of lead, zinc, copper and gold mining. Higher silver prices therefore do not automatically translate into higher output, because the production decision rests on the economics of the primary metals. Metals Focus expects mine production to remain broadly flat in 2026. At the same time, the risks should not be waved away. Metals Focus itself points out that persistent geopolitical tension and instability in the Middle East could weigh on industrial demand. Monetary headwinds compound this: the US Federal Reserve is currently debating rate increases rather than cuts, which is fundamentally unhelpful for non-yielding assets such as precious metals. And in a market carried increasingly by investment flows, sharp sell-offs remain possible at any point should financial investors withdraw in size. The sober conclusion, then, is this. The structural deficit is real, it is widening, and six years of inventory drawdown have left the market vulnerable. But it is not an argument for any particular price path over the coming months – and certainly not one that benefits from being reinforced with inflated deficit figures. Anyone investing in silver should treat the volatility as a permanent feature rather than an aberration. Source： https://goldinvest.de/en/the-silver-deficit-is-widening-but-it-is-smaller-than-many-believe

July 24, 2026 On Wednesday, 29 July, at 2:00 p.m. ET, the US Federal Reserve announces its rate decision. Futures markets see almost no chance of a change to the target range. For the gold market , the real event comes thirty minutes later – when Fed Chair Kevin Warsh steps up to the microphone. The starting point: four holds in a row The target range for the fed funds rate has stood at 3.50 to 3.75 percent since December 2025. The FOMC has now held steady at four consecutive meetings – most recently on 17 June, unanimously and for the first time under new Chair Kevin Warsh. What stood out at the June meeting was not the decision but the accompanying dot plot. For the first time since the easing cycle began, the median projection pointed toward a hike rather than a cut: nine of the eighteen participants saw at least one increase before year-end, eight saw no change, and only one projected a cut. Warsh submitted no dot of his own – a deliberate signal that the new Chair does not intend to be pinned to a path. At the same time, the Fed raised its 2026 inflation projection significantly and lowered its growth forecast. For gold, that was unwelcome news. The metal peaked at a record of roughly $5,600 an ounce in January and has since given back somewhere between a quarter and nearly thirty percent. It is currently trading around the $4,100 mark; on Wednesday of this week it reached roughly $4,130 intraday, a two-week high. Real yields are the lever – not the headline Gold does not respond to headline inflation. It responds to real yields, meaning what Treasuries pay after subtracting expected inflation. When real yields rise, so does the opportunity cost of holding an asset that produces no income. That mechanism explains gold's weakness this year: it was not inflation that hurt the metal, but the expectation that the Fed would answer that inflation with higher rates. This is precisely why the 28–29 July meeting is, for gold, a communications event above all. There is no updated Summary of Economic Projections and no new dot plot this time – the next projection meeting is 15–16 September. What remains is the statement and the press conference. And Warsh has made clear in the past that he wants less forward guidance and more data dependence. For investors, that means less advance signalling, more room for interpretation, and potentially higher volatility around the announcement. The data: disinflation on shaky ground Recent inflation prints have taken the sharpest edge off market expectations. After US consumer prices hit 4.2 percent in May, a three-year high, the annual rate fell to 3.5 percent in June and the core rate eased from 2.9 to 2.6 percent. Both came in below expectations. The catch: the decline was almost entirely energy-driven. Following the Middle East ceasefire in mid-June, oil and gasoline prices dropped sharply, with the energy index falling 5.7 percent month-over-month. That is not structural relief – it is a base effect with an expiry date. Energy quotes were already firming again in early July, and the geopolitical situation around Iran remains fragile, with reports of a possible temporary truce alternating with fresh escalation headlines. The labour market, meanwhile, is cooling. June nonfarm payrolls came in at roughly 57,000, well short of the roughly 110,000 expected, and the two prior months were revised down by a combined 74,000. The Fed therefore faces the classic dilemma: tighten too late and inflation expectations risk becoming unanchored; tighten too early and an already softening labour market may tip over. What the market is pricing Following the June inflation report, the implied probability of no change at the end of July has risen above 85 percent. A hike on 29 July would be a genuine surprise – and for exactly that reason it would land hard on gold. September is the more interesting question. Implied hike probabilities there have swung between roughly 50 and just under 70 percent depending on the trading day. That is the real variable: any phrasing in Warsh's press conference that opens or closes the door to September will translate straight into real yields, and from there into the gold price. Four scenarios for 29 July Scenario Probability Expected gold reaction Hawkish hold – rates unchanged, statement stresses inflation risks, September explicitly live high Pressure toward $4,000, support level tested Neutral hold – rates unchanged, emphasis on data dependence without directional signal high Sideways to slightly firmer, volatility around the press conference Dovish hold – rates unchanged, focus on the soft labour market and falling inflation medium Recovery toward $4,300 to $4,400 possible Rate hike – 25 basis point increase low Sharp setback, a move toward $3,900 conceivable For context: the World Gold Council's valuation framework currently puts fair value at around $4,100 an ounce, with a band of roughly five percent – and that calculation already assumes a hike by October. If that move fails to materialise, there is upside relative to the model value. The other side of the scale: structural demand Amid the rate-driven weakness, it is easy to overlook that physical demand has held up. Central banks bought a net 244 tonnes of gold in the first quarter of 2026 – the strongest quarter in more than a year and above the five-year average. The People's Bank of China extended its buying streak to 19 consecutive months. These buyers do not act on FedWatch probabilities but on reserve diversification, and that demand floor will be entirely unaffected by what happens on 29 July. ETF flows point the other way, with net outflows in recent months. Put simply: the Western financial investor is currently the seller, the central bank the buyer. On the forecast side, the major houses remain constructive – JP Morgan sees around $4,500 in the fourth quarter, while Goldman Sachs targets $4,900 by year-end. What this means for gold equities and junior explorers For our readers, the second derivative matters more than the first. Producers are still working with historically wide margins at $4,100 gold; the sector's operating cash flow position remains solid despite the price decline. For explorers and developers, the picture is different. They have no revenues, only capital requirements. The rate path reaches them through two channels: the discounting of future cash flows in NPV models, and the financing window. A hawkish signal on 29 July makes risk capital more expensive and narrows the window for private placements; a neutral or dovish tone widens it. This is why junior names typically react to Fed dates with a higher beta than the metal itself – to the downside as well as the upside. Anyone invested in the junior space should therefore treat 29 July less as a forecasting event and more as a volatility event. The structural case – a thin pipeline of development-ready ounces, resilient central bank demand, and reviving M&A appetite among producers – does not hinge on any single meeting. Conclusion The rate decision itself is likely to be a non-event. What counts is how Kevin Warsh characterises the balance of risks between sticky inflation and a weakening labour market, and whether he leaves the door to September open or pulls it shut. After that, attention turns to the next inflation report on 12 August and the projection meeting on 15–16 September. Source: https://goldinvest.de/en/the-upcoming-fed-decision-why-this-meeting-matters-more-to-gold-than-the-rate-call-itself

[SMM Silver Weekly Review: Silver V-Shaped Rebound This Week with 8.47% Weekly Gain; Double Bottom Pattern Emerges, Awaiting Breakout] Silver prices fell first and then rose this week, recording a weekly gain of 8.47%. The US Fed's hawkish remarks and geopolitical conflicts once weighed on silver prices, before ceasefire expectations and technical repair drove a rebound. Spot premiums held steady at parity, with thin trading. On the inventory front, total social inventory destocked by 84 mt, and ETF open interest edged up. Technically, a double bottom pattern initially emerges, with attention on a neckline breakout at $63/oz. For next week, the SGE range is seen at 13,300-15,800 yuan/kg, and LBMA at $55-65/oz.

July 22, 2026 On 22 July 2026, silver trades at around $59 per ounce – barely half of its all-time high of $121.62 set in January. To many investors, that looks like a failed rally. A closer look at the structural deficit, the gold-silver ratio and analyst targets suggests a very different reading. The silver market has just been through one of the wildest rides in its recent history. In January, the price surged to an unprecedented $121.62, carried by the euphoria of the broader precious-metals bull market. A sharp correction of roughly 52% followed. Today the price hovers around the $59 mark – while gold simultaneously breaks out above $4,100. The decisive question for the second half of the year is this: was the run to more than $120 a speculative overshoot that is now normalising? Or is the consolidation at $59 the base from which the next leg higher begins? The fundamentals speak a remarkably clear language. From $121 to $59 – what actually happened To put the current situation in context, it is worth revisiting what triggered the correction. Three factors worked together: a deeply divided U.S. central-bank committee that put further rate hikes back on the table; a hot May inflation print of 4.2%, which reinforced that restrictive expectation; and silver's high industrial share, which makes the metal more sensitive to growth worries than gold. One point is easily obscured by short-term price action: none of these three triggers changed the underlying supply-and-demand picture. The correction was largely price- and sentiment-driven – not the result of a deteriorating fundamental backdrop. A signal of how resilient this thesis is came with the June inflation report, which showed the largest monthly decline since April 2020. Silver responded with a jump on the very same day. It is exactly this mechanism – easing rate pressure meeting a tight physical market – that is likely to shape the rest of the year. The structural deficit: sixth consecutive year The most important reason not to mistake this correction for the end of the bull market lies on the supply side. 2026 is on track to become the sixth consecutive year of a global silver deficit. The projected shortfall of around 46.3 million ounces exceeds the 40.3-million-ounce gap recorded in 2025. In other words, the deficit is widening, not closing. This scarcity is structural and cannot be fixed quickly. Roughly 70% of silver is produced as a byproduct of lead, zinc, copper and gold mining. That means even materially higher silver prices do not automatically translate into more output, because production hinges on the economics of the base-metal mines. Add to that declining ore grades at established primary silver mines. Every additional deficit year draws down above-ground stockpiles – and those are finite. The demand story: solar, AI and electrification While supply remains sluggish, demand keeps growing from the industrial side. More than half of silver demand comes from industrial applications – a share that makes silver both a precious and an industrial metal at the same time. The drivers are well known and structural: photovoltaics remains a key consumer, even as some solar segments have softened recently. Increasingly stepping in are data centres for artificial intelligence, electronics for electric vehicles and other electrification applications. This demand base is largely decoupled from day-to-day headlines – it keeps running regardless of what central banks decide in the short term. The gold-silver ratio as a signal A classic valuation tool underscores silver's relative appeal versus gold. The gold-silver ratio – the number of silver ounces needed to buy one ounce of gold – currently sits at around 69:1. The 50-year long-term average ranges between 60:1 and 70:1. At roughly 69:1, the ratio sits at the upper, historically favourable end of that range for silver. In the past, such a level has repeatedly preceded a phase in which silver outperformed gold. If gold keeps breaking out – as it is now, above $4,100 – history often shows silver following with a lag, but frequently with greater leverage. What the analysts expect Notably, despite the 52% correction, none of the major institutions has cut its full-year average forecast below the current price level. The market is treating the pullback as a cyclical pause, not a break in the thesis. J.P. Morgan expects an average price of around $81 per ounce in 2026 – more than double the previous year's average. HSBC recently upgraded its outlook and sees a yearly average near $75. Goldman Sachs points to silver's proximity to electrification and renewable energy; some analysts see prices in the $85 to $100 range, provided industrial demand stays robust. All of these targets sit well above today's $59 – an indication of just how wide the gap is between the current quote and mid-term expectations. The risks – a realistic view For all its structural strength, silver remains one of the most volatile precious metals of all. Its high industrial share is both an opportunity and a risk: if worries about a global slowdown intensify, silver gets hit harder than gold. Monetary policy is another wildcard. Should the U.S. central bank strike a more restrictive tone at its 29 July meeting – or even signal a rate hike – that would likely weigh on prices in the short term. Technically, the zone between $56 and $58 is seen as important support. On the upside, the $65 mark and then the hurdles at $68 and $76 need to be cleared before one can speak of a sustained recovery. Bottom line: consolidation, not a broken trend Anyone looking only at the price chart sees a failed rally in silver. Anyone who adds the fundamentals sees the opposite: a widening supply deficit in its sixth consecutive year, a broad industrial demand base around solar, AI and electrification, a gold-silver ratio at historically favourable levels for silver, and analyst targets that consistently sit above today's price. That does not make $59 a guarantee of rising prices – silver stays prone to sharp swings. But it shifts the perspective: the correction from $121 to $59 looks less like the end of a story than the starting point for its next chapter. Gold's breakout above $4,100 could well be the spark that turns attention back to the smaller, higher-beta precious metal. Source: https://goldinvest.de/en/silver-price-2026-correction-setup

July 16, 2026 Silver is not behaving like a cleaner version of gold. It fell hard this week even as the Iran story worsened, and that tells you the real trade is now split between fear, rates and industrial demand. You can see the tension in the tape. The Wall Street Journal reported that silver futures fell 2.83% on July 15 to $57.11 a troy ounce, their lowest close since Dec. 4, 2025, even as the US-Iran conflict kept pressure on energy markets. That is not what a simple haven story should look like. It is what happens when a metal has two buyers in the market and several reasons to sell at once. President Trump reversed his proposed 20% Strait of Hormuz toll on July 14 and the US reimposed a naval blockade on Iranian ports, according to The Wall Street Journal. The Guardian reported the next day that Iran threatened to halt Middle East energy exports after renewed US strikes and attacks around the Strait. Oil moved higher on that risk. Gold failed to take full advantage of it. Silver did worse. That matters. If you are buying silver only because missiles are flying near a shipping chokepoint, you are buying the wrong story. The squeeze is still real The stronger case for silver sits away from the war headlines. The Financial Times, citing the World Silver Survey from Metals Focus and the Silver Institute, reported that the market is heading for a sixth straight annual deficit of roughly 46 million ounces. Solar demand is no longer climbing in a straight line, either. The same report said industrial demand is expected to decline as solar manufacturers use less silver and substitute cheaper materials, with solar demand forecast to fall 19% in 2026. Normally, that would be enough to cool the story. It hasn't. The problem is that silver's industrial demand is not just a solar panel chart anymore. Electronics, grid equipment, electric vehicles and data centers all pull on the same physical market. You do not need to dress that up. Silver conducts electricity better than any other metal, and in a world trying to move more power through more machines, that property has a price. The AI buildout keeps adding weight. AP reported this week that artificial intelligence investment by major technology companies is projected to exceed $700 billion in 2026, with Alphabet, Amazon, Meta and Microsoft spending heavily on data centers. Tom's Hardware, citing Financial Times first-quarter data, put combined 2026 capital spending by Google, Microsoft, Meta and Amazon at $725 billion, up 77% from the previous year. Those figures are not silver demand numbers by themselves. But they do tell you why the industrial floor under the metal is harder to dismiss than it was in the last cycle. Here is the blunt version: gold has the cleaner fear trade, but silver has the messier and more interesting one. It gets pulled by wars and interest rates, then pulled again by factories and server farms. That makes it more volatile. It also gives it more ways to surprise you. Price targets need some humility There is no need to pretend silver is a sure thing. It just proved the opposite. The metal fell even while Middle East risk was live because higher oil can also mean stickier inflation, higher bond yields and a stronger case for central banks to stay tight. Non-yielding metals hate that setup. Silver hates it more because speculative money tends to leave quickly when the chart breaks. Forecasts should be read with that in mind. J.P. Morgan Global Research has been bullish on silver in its published commodities work, and Kitco has covered the bank's view that prices can average far above recent levels if deficits persist and investment demand returns. That's a serious argument. But it has a ceiling: if prices run too far, solar manufacturers thrift harder, switch pastes faster, or delay purchases. The FT's reporting on falling solar demand is the warning label on every bullish silver note. So the next test is not whether silver can react to another Iran headline. Of course it can. The better test is whether the metal can hold support when the war premium fades and buyers have to justify the price with physical demand, inventories and real industrial orders. Gold is easier to understand. Silver is easier to underestimate. If you are watching the metal now, do not watch only Tehran, Hormuz, oil or the next central bank speech. Watch the deficit numbers from the Silver Institute. Watch Big Tech capital spending, and watch whether solar thrifting starts to bite harder than AI infrastructure adds demand. That is where this trade will be decided, not in one dramatic move above or below $60. Source: https://startupfortune.com/silver-is-being-pulled-two-directions-at-once-and-that-is-exactly-why-it-could-outrun-gold/

[SMM Tin Midday Review: US-Iran Conflict Escalation Intensified Sentiment Divergence, the Most-Traded SHFE Tin Contract Consolidated at Highs in the Morning]

China Steel Export: [Flat products] Raw-material news lifts HRC export deals up 1 USD On July 14 China's HRC and other flat-product export prices rose 1 USD/tonne day on day, with HRC export deals at 486-492 USD/tonne FOB. Futures climbed quickly in the afternoon on raw-material headlines, but market feedback showed no clear pickup in actual enquiries or deals, with overseas markets still needing time to react. Some northern mills said heavy rainstorms kept them from issuing offers today, which may affect subsequent shipments. [Billet] Billet export FOB steady, Jiangyin at 456-459 USD On July 14 China's billet export FOB prices were largely steady, with Jiangyin port quoted at 456-459 USD/tonne. Market feedback indicated shipment slots generally booked into September, with a few orders pushed to October. China's price advantage versus Southeast Asia, India and Iran has narrowed, making high-priced Chinese export cargoes hard to sell, while mills showed limited appetite to take new orders, saying prices were unattractive. [Rebar] Rebar export offers steady, afternoon enquiries improve On July 14 China's rebar export offers held steady, with workable FOB prices at 480-485 USD/tonne. Market participants said futures rose in the afternoon, enquiries improved somewhat, and some traders concluded small volumes.

News Release, July 9, 2026，China’s high-carbon ferrochrome prices saw distinct phased volatility in H1 2026. After surging to a high of RMB 8,650 per 50-base-tonne in Q1, prices gradually retreated to RMB 8,100 per 50-base-tonne in Q2, driven primarily by supply-demand mismatch.

Every major aluminum player made a rational bet in H1 2026, Indonesia's smelter wave, the US's Inola project, India's Adani-IHC deal, Alcoa's South32 buy, the Gulf's post-strike rebuild, none of it needing the Middle East war to justify itself, though the war's price spike (LME to $3,546, premiums to multi-year highs) accelerated all of it at once.