Lithium, a vital elemental metal, also dubbed as “white gold”, has gained significant attention as a sought-after commodity. This is particularly due to its crucial role in battery manufacturing for electric vehicles (EVs).
The surge in EV sales has fueled optimism among investors regarding companies involved in lithium production and refinement. Despite being a common substance, lithium prices experienced an astounding 1,000% increase from 2021 to the end of 2022. This exceeds the previous highs set in 2017.
However, the landscape changed in 2023.
An increasing supply of lithium from mines in Africa and Australia is putting downward pressure on prices. Plus, reports of lower consumer demand for EVs in the U.S. and China may further contribute to a decline in lithium prices.
Lithium Carbonate (CNY) Price
Following the unprecedented boom of 2021/2022, stocks of lithium producers have faced significant declines due to a continued plunge in lithium prices.
As with all commodity stocks, lithium stocks are intricately tied to supply and demand dynamics in the underlying materials they deal with. The future trajectory of lithium prices and associated stock values will likely be influenced by the continued demand for EVs.
Investing in top lithium stocks follows a similar process to investing in any other type of stock.
Here are our top picks for lithium stocks that are worth each penny of consideration.
Albemarle Corporation (ALB)
Market cap: US$15.1 billion
Enterprise value: US$17.1 billion
Albemarle Corp. stands prominently among the largest lithium stocks and is a key player in lithium mining. With a market value comparable to other major commodities such as Barrick Gold Corporation (GOLD).
The company’s substantial scale and the optimistic long-term forecasts for EV demand position Albemarle as one of the top lithium stocks in the current market. Albemarle has embarked on a significant production expansion initiative in South Carolina, projecting an annual capacity of about 225,000 metric tons of lithium.
-
The American lithium giant anticipates this capacity to triple by the 2030, aligning its growth plans and expectations for the growing EV sector.
But recently, it redirected efforts towards its Kings Mountain lithium-spodumene mine resource in North Carolina, in response to softer market conditions.
Albemarle had warned of potential market share loss to Chinese producers after its unsuccessful takeover bid for Australian lithium producer Liontown Resources. The $4.2 billion merger was abandoned.
The largest producer of lithium for EV batteries has also revised its annual forecast downwards at the end of last year. They further reported a lower-than-expected quarterly profit due to declining prices for lithium.
Still, Albemarle now anticipates a 30% increase in lithium sales volume for the year. But with prices expected to rise only 15%, falling short of market expectations for robust growth.
The reduction in demand from consumers has led major EV manufacturers like Tesla, Ford Motor, General Motors, and Rivian to scale back production. Additionally, Toyota Motor has cut its EV sales forecast by 40% in 2024 due to lower demand in China. This reduced demand is impacting the lithium market and related stocks.
Albemarle’s peers have experienced similar declines. For instance, shares of Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.A. are down -39.4% YTD.
Sociedad Química y Minera S.A. (SQM)
Market cap: US$15.1 billion
Enterprise value: US$16.1 billion
Chile, globally recognized for its mineral wealth, features Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile (SQM) at the core of its mining industry. While SQM engages in the production of various minerals, its significance in lithium extraction is paramount.
Alongside diversified mining counterparts like Albemarle and Ganfeng, SQM maintains robust double-digit operating profit margins, substantial cash reserves for expansion, and minimal debt.
In 2022, SQM achieved its highest-ever corporate revenues, surpassing $10.7 billion in sales. A substantial 76% of this revenue was derived from lithium and related products.
SQM’s pivotal role goes beyond its economic contributions, as it stands as the largest taxpayer in Chile. Recent discussions about the government potentially increasing its stake in the company have emerged and raised eyebrows.
Such a move introduces the inherent risks associated with government ownership, including the possibility of political interference. Some investors don’t find it a favorable development.
The trajectory of SQM’s shares showed positive momentum until late 2022, when a decline followed. This is largely due to weakened lithium prices and concerns about the company receiving a fair valuation for the anticipated increased government stake.
The impending nationalization raises uncertainties about state control of lithium. Once this pushes through, it may impact SQM’s profitability.
Looking forward to a long-term demand for lithium to exceed supply, SQM has strategically invested in expanding its production capacity. These developments position the company to augment its market share in the lithium supply chain, particularly for EV batteries.
Li-FT Power (LIFT; LIFFF)
Market cap: US$168.5 million
Enterprise value: US$163.4 million
Given the insufficient domestic lithium reserves to meet demand, the U.S. is in a challenging position. With the need for a domestic supply, Canada is positioned to contribute to meeting U.S. lithium requirements. This is where a junior lithium company, Li-FT Power (LIFT: LIFFF), based in Vancouver, British Columbia, perfectly comes into the picture.
Li-FT has acquired promising lithium assets in Canada, starting drilling on their flagship project in June last year. The company’s investment thesis revolves around the aggressive exploration and expansion of high-grade lithium pegmatites to define world-scale resources in a proven mining jurisdiction.
The company’s strategy focuses on consolidating and advancing hard rock lithium pegmatite projects in Canada, particularly in known lithium districts. Li-FT Power aims to apply modern systematic exploration techniques to unveil value in these projects that historical work hasn’t fully realized.
The project portfolio includes assets in the Northwest Territories and Quebec, with flagship projects like the Yellowknife Lithium Project and the Pontax Project, which has revealed an 8km long lithium anomaly.
The company is well-financed to progress its projects, cementing its commitment to advancing the exploration and development of high-quality lithium assets in Canada.
LIFT strategically positions itself to take advantage of weak industry sentiment, allowing for the acquisition of shares at discounted valuations.
The Lithium Deficit Looms
While those top lithium stocks are making waves in 2024, projections indicate that lithium prices will further decline due to:
- increasing supplies of the battery metal, and
- subdued demand from China.
In China, lithium carbonate prices have plummeted from an all-time high of $81,360 per tonne in November 2022. This is the lowest level in two years at $20,782 per tonne in the current month. As lithium carbonate prices have fallen by 67% year-on-year, Chinese refining companies are responding by cutting production or suspending operations.
This represents a nearly 75% correction due to a series of negative catalysts that have suppressed lithium prices. The situation is even more challenging for lithium hydroxide markets, primarily due to the sluggish performance of the nickel cobalt manganese battery sector compared to the lithium iron phosphate battery sector.
-
Australia, which contributes 40% of global lithium production, expects a decline in the spot price of spodumene from around $3,840 per tonne in 2022 to $2,200 per tonne in 2025.
Lithium miners are adjusting to the sharp drop in demand for EVs in China by reducing costs and scaling back production expansion plans.
This response aligns with the challenges faced by lithium producers globally as the market grapples with oversupply and weakening demand for EVs.
The inability of China to meet its own demand for lithium, despite being the world’s 3rd-largest producer, has significant implications for other countries that rely on Chinese lithium. This is why the US aims to develop its own lithium supply chain that doesn’t depend on China.
- RELATED: Lithium-Ion Wars: US Battery Imports Soar by 66%, Setting New Record as Domestic Production Ramps Up
The Inflation Reduction Act, in particular, specifically promotes onshoring of clean energy manufacturing, including EVs, within the U.S. And that also means to reduce or cut off import of lithium from China.
Corinne Blanchard, Deutsche Bank’s director of lithium and clean tech equity research, is among the analysts predicting a future shortage in the lithium industry. Despite forecasting supply growth, she believes that demand will outpace it at a much faster pace.
Blanchard anticipates a “modest deficit” of around 40,000 to 60,000 tonnes of lithium carbonate equivalent by the end of 2025, but she foresees a much larger deficit of 768,000 tonnes by the end of 2030. This forecast aligns with the broader industry expectations of increasing demand for lithium, particularly driven by the growing EV market.
2024 unfolds with challenges for the lithium market, witnessing stock declines post 2023’s meteoric rise. Despite the setback, top players like Albemarle, SQM, and Li-FT Power strategically position themselves. As global trends hint at a Chinese lithium market decline, industry experts see a future lithium deficit, driven by the relentless growth in the EV market.
The post Top Lithium Stocks Making Waves in 2024 appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Most businesses that decide to act on their net-zero targets reach the same point of friction. Buying carbon credits has meant tracking down brokers, sitting through sales calls, and requesting a quote just to learn a price, sometimes with limited proof of what you are buying.
The earnings calls that quietly reframed climate from sustainability question to operating risk.
Three earnings calls in the last 18 months tell the story without any help from a press release.
Hershey, May 2024: cocoa price exposure compresses margin, and the company attributes part of the cost shock to West African weather. Olam, July 2024: coffee climate exposure quantified in the annual report. JBS, January 2025: supply chain climate disclosures expanded materially in response to investor pressure and regulatory expectation. None of these companies issued the announcement as climate news. They issued it as financial news. The climate-linked supply chain risk did not arrive with a sustainability framing; it arrived as a P&L line.
You are probably reading this article because you suspect the same thing is happening to your business. This piece walks through what is showing up on which earnings calls, how procurement and finance leaders are quantifying the exposure, and what serious corporates are doing about it before the regulator asks.
Where climate risk has already appeared in earnings
The pattern is consistent across resource-intensive sectors. A weather event compresses supply, the price spikes, the cost flows through the income statement, and the analyst on the call asks whether the event is anomalous or structural. Increasingly, the honest answer is the second one.
Cocoa is the cleanest example. The 2023 to 2024 West African harvest fell sharply on the back of erratic rainfall and disease. Cocoa futures more than tripled. Companies with concentrated West African sourcing absorbed the cost; companies with diversified sourcing absorbed less. The exposure was not climate as ESG topic. It was climate as cost of goods.
Coffee follows the same pattern. Brazilian and Vietnamese harvests have moved on weather more sharply across the last several seasons. Roasters with long-tenor supplier relationships and origin diversification have managed the volatility; roasters with spot-market exposure have not. Wheat, sugar, palm oil, beef: the same dynamic in different commodities, a pattern the IPCC AR6 Working Group II report projects will intensify across agricultural systems through mid-century.
What this means: climate risk is no longer a footnote in the 10-K. It is a line item the CFO has to explain on the call.
The three commodity exposures that hit margin first
For most companies with material Scope 3 exposure, three exposures dominate the near-term P&L risk.
- Concentrated single-origin sourcing in a climate-vulnerable region. If your tier-one supply for any material commodity sits in one geography, you have a concentration risk that climate amplifies. Diversification across origins is the obvious hedge, but it takes years to build and requires relationships you cannot acquire by tender.
- Supplier financial fragility under climate stress. Smallholder farmers, who supply a large share of the global cocoa, coffee, and palm oil market, do not carry the balance sheets to absorb yield shocks. When yields collapse, they exit. When they exit, your supply base shrinks, and the surviving suppliers raise prices. The risk is structural, not cyclical.
- Logistics and storage exposure to extreme weather. Hurricane disruptions to Gulf shipping, drought-driven Panama Canal restrictions, flooding in European inland waterways: each of these has moved input costs in the last three years, a pattern documented in Munich Re’s natural catastrophe data. The exposure shows up as a one-quarter event in the financial press but accumulates over time on the cost line.
TCFD and ISSB disclosure changes
The disclosure architecture has now caught up with the risk. The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures, whose recommendations are now embedded in the ISSB’s IFRS S2 climate standard, requires companies to disclose climate-related risks across physical and transition categories, with quantification where possible.
For physical risk specifically (the climate-linked supply chain risk you are reading about), the disclosure must address both acute exposures (extreme weather events) and chronic exposures (gradual changes in temperature, precipitation, and growing seasons). The disclosure must address the time horizon over which the risk is material, the parts of the value chain exposed, and the financial impact under different scenarios.
The CSRD imposes similar requirements under European law, with double materiality (both financial and impact materiality) embedded in the assessment. The practical effect: your auditors and your investor relations team now need a defensible answer to the climate-linked supply chain risk question, and the answer needs to be quantified.
What procurement and finance can do now
Three actions matter near-term.
Map your exposure. Most companies do not have a clear view of which tier-one and tier-two suppliers sit in which climate-vulnerable geographies. Without the map, you cannot quantify the risk, and without the quantification, you cannot disclose it credibly. The map is the foundation, and World Resources Institute climate risk research provides useful public tooling to start.
Diversify and deepen, in that order. Diversification across origins reduces concentration risk, but the deeper move is to invest in the resilience of the suppliers you already have. Regenerative practices, agroforestry, soil health interventions: these reduce yield volatility under climate stress and protect your input cost trajectory.
Embed the climate spend inside procurement, not outside it. Treating climate risk as a sustainability cost line subordinates it to the ESG budget. Treating it as a procurement and resilience investment puts it in the budget that matters, which is the cost-of-goods budget that the CFO defends quarterly.
Nature-based supply chain investments are the asset class designed for exactly this purpose. They sit inside the value chain, they reduce climate-linked supply risk, they generate verifiable Scope 3 reductions, and they produce the documentation an auditor and a regulator can both test.
If you are quantifying climate-linked supply chain risk in advance of the next earnings cycle or the next disclosure period, the carbon and sustainability experts at Carbon Credit Capital can help you map your exposure and structure a Dual-Value Model response that addresses reduction, resilience, and disclosure-readiness in a single program. Schedule a consultation.
More and more small and medium-sized businesses are hearing the same question from their larger customers: What is your carbon footprint? That question now travels down entire supply chains, and it arrives next to tender requirements, certification criteria, and rising customer expectations.
-
Climate Change1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Renewable Energy11 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits