It is hardly surprising that copper is considered the most promising base metal for 2026 in analyst circles. The “red” industrial metal classic plays a major role in two major narratives: the energy transition and digitalization – all the way to data centers and the expansion of AI infrastructure. At the same time, the copper market is considered structurally strained because the supply from mines and the demand along the processing chain can hardly keep pace with each other. Many market observers cite similar arguments for tin and aluminum – the two other metals viewed particularly positively in a recent Reuters survey of analysts.
At the same time, a clear message runs through the survey: The extreme price movements at the beginning of the year are considered unsustainable. In January, LME copper marked an all-time high of $14,527.50 per tonne, while tin also reached a record of $59,040 per tonne. However, the consensus of the survey is that such jumps were more an expression of a short-term overheating moment than a stable new normal. While analysts are generally positive for 2026, confidence for 2027 decreases significantly.
Winners in 2026: Copper, tin, and aluminum with clear drivers – and bottlenecks
The Reuters survey expects noticeable price increases for copper, tin, and aluminum in 2026 compared to the average values of 2025. Median estimates see increases of 20% for copper, 16% for tin, and 12% for aluminum. It is noticeable that these three metals provide arguments on both the demand side and the supply side that can support the market.
On the demand side, analysts point to megatrends: Copper remains the preferred electrical conductor, tin is a key material as solder that connects the “physical and digital world,” and aluminum is considered a cross-sectional metal for lightweight construction – wherever weight needs to be reduced. This role in the industrial base explains why copper, tin, and aluminum occupy a special position in many forecasts.
On the supply side, the survey sees restrictions for all three metals. For copper, it is emphasized that the mine supply is already having difficulty keeping pace with the demand from smelters. For tin, the strong concentration of supply is cited as a problem, coupled with a dependence on extraction regions that are considered challenging – such as the Democratic Republic of Congo and Myanmar. For aluminum, in turn, a structural cap comes into focus: In China, the largest producer, expansion is hitting a politically determined capacity limit of 45 million tonnes per year. This is leading to a race for new smelting capacities outside of China because the country is no longer available as a “buffer” for further growth.
For 2026, analysts in the survey expect supply deficits for copper and tin. Aluminum, on the other hand, is still seen with a small surplus of 80,000 tonnes for this year, which could turn into a deficit in 2027. Thus, the survey shows: Even with the “winners,” the perspective is not exclusively demand-driven – rather, much depends on the question of how quickly new supply can be created.
Losers in 2026: Nickel, lead, and zinc with subdued expectations
The forecasts for nickel, lead, and zinc are significantly more restrained. Here, the median estimates for 2026 are only at a 4 – 5% price increase compared to 2025. The justifications differ depending on the metal, but amount to a similar picture: weaker demand narratives or a relatively comfortable supply.
For lead and zinc, analysts see less tailwind from energy transition and digitalization trends. For lead, it is also argued that the switch from combustion engines to new vehicle types can mean a structural headwind because smaller lead-acid batteries are used there. In addition, the lead market is described as well-supplied – visible in high inventory levels in LME warehouses. According to the survey, lead is also the only metal that analysts have revised downwards since the previous survey in October.
Zinc had defied bearish expectations in 2025, but the survey suggests that analysts in 2026 are more likely to expect that a higher mine supply will finally translate more strongly into refined metal. For nickel, in turn, a loss of importance in the e-mobility narrative is mentioned: Chinese automakers are reportedly increasingly switching to battery technologies without nickel. At the same time, Indonesia is struggling to curb strong production growth – a point that indicates supply pressure and thus limited price potential.
January rally as context: Forecasts significantly below the extreme values
A central result of the Reuters survey is the classification of the “speculative charging” in January. Despite a bullish undertone, analysts’ forecasts are significantly below the record levels that were reached in the short term. This is particularly visible for copper: The highest value among 31 analysts is therefore at a 2026 average of $13,250 per tonne – roughly where the price is currently trading ($13,283). The median is $11,975, a record high within the survey history, but far from the peaks above $14,000 in January.
For tin, the gap is even more striking: The highest average value among 16 forecasts is $47,000, a level that has already been exceeded by the January peak. Similar patterns are also shown in the survey for nickel and zinc; aluminum and lead at least came close to the highest forecasts in January. The common denominator: The survey suggests that the rally at the beginning of the year can burden physical demand – because industrial buyers react in price-sensitive markets when prices rise too quickly.
This caution increases further in 2027. For this year, survey participants expect hardly any price increases overall: Only lead is seen with a plus of 3%. Aluminum, copper, and nickel are expected to stagnate year-on-year, while declines of 4% compared to 2026 are forecast for tin and zinc.
The bottom line is that the Reuters survey paints a picture of growing tension between the financial and real economies: Investment flows can trigger strong movements in finite physical markets in the short term. But if prices rise too sharply, manufacturers typically react with purchasing restraint, material savings, or the search for alternatives. It is precisely this reaction mechanism that limits, from the perspective of many analysts, how “linearly” the metal bull market can continue after the January fireworks.
