Executive summary
The week ended October 16, 2026, revealed an especially striking divergence between the major equity markets and commodity-related sectors.
While the S&P 500 and STOXX 600 universes each recorded a median weekly return of +2.68%, most mining universes experienced substantial declines.
The most important distinction, however, goes beyond returns alone. Market breadth, drawdown depth, and directional volume balance reveal an increasingly pronounced structural fragmentation.
Energy maintains the highest participation above its 200-day moving average, at 65.09%, whereas lithium stands at just 3.70%, uranium at 11.11%, and junior miners at 24.37%. These contrasts describe a deeply divided market, not a synchronized recovery.
1. The divergence between markets is widening
The major equity universes are performing considerably better than mining markets.
In the S&P 500, the median weekly return reached +2.68%, with 71.60% of securities advancing. The STOXX 600 posted the same median return, but with even broader positive participation: 79.02% of its securities rose.
The situation was radically different among miners.
Chart: Median weekly return by universe. These are universe-level medians, not ETF or index returns.
Energy is the clearest exception among commodity-related sectors. Its median weekly return was +2.05%, with 62.72% of companies advancing.
Agribusiness also managed a slightly positive close, although its structural indicators continue to show weakness.
This divergence raises an important question: Are we seeing a mining-specific correction within an equity market that remains resilient?
The current data are consistent with that interpretation, although they cannot establish how long it will last.
2. Breadth reveals extraordinary structural differences
The proportion of companies trading above their 200-day moving average is one of the most revealing indicators in this study.
Chart: Share of securities above their 200-day moving average, based on valid observations.
Energy retains the strongest breadth among the twelve universes, with 65.09% of its securities above MA200.
Lithium, by contrast, is in an exceptionally weakened position: just 3.70% of companies are above that benchmark.
Uranium also lacks a healthy structure, with only 11.11% above its moving average.
Breadth stands at 24.37% among junior miners, compared with 26.80% in SIL–SILJ and 29.53% in GDX–GDXJ.
These percentages expose a problem that is not always obvious when looking only at indices: most mining companies remain below their long-term trend benchmarks.
3. Four weeks of deterioration: even the strongest sectors are losing participation
The contraction in market breadth over the past four weeks is particularly significant.
GDX–GDXJ recorded the sharpest decline, losing 34.46 percentage points.
SIL–SILJ lost 27.08 points, and agribusiness 25.71 points.
Junior miners lost 20.81 points, junior copper 19.89 points, and copper 18.81 points.
Meanwhile, breadth in the S&P 500 improved by 2.81 points, and STOXX 600 improved by 5.26 points.
This divergence matters because it shows that the loss of participation is not affecting every market equally.
Nor is it limited to sectors that were already structurally weak. The sharp contraction in GDX–GDXJ and SIL–SILJ shows that areas which had previously maintained considerable relative strength are also experiencing rapid internal deterioration.
4. Drawdowns: speculative segments account for the deepest losses
Drawdown breadth confirms these structural differences.
In lithium, 100% of valid observations are more than 30% below their 52-week closing highs.
In uranium, that proportion reaches 84.72%; in junior miners, 71.43%; and in junior copper, 70.11%.
The comparison with the major equity markets is especially revealing: only 17.10% of S&P 500 securities and 12.66% of STOXX 600 securities show drawdowns exceeding 30%.
Chart: Share of securities more than 30% below their 52-week closing highs.
Median drawdowns reinforce this picture. Lithium records −60.00%, uranium −49.83%, junior miners −43.89%, and junior copper −43.01%.
These figures do not imply that declines must necessarily continue. They do, however, demonstrate the depth of the damage already accumulated.
5. Volume still does not confirm a mining recovery
The median 20-session directional volume balance is negative across all ten universes other than the two broad equity benchmarks.
The weakest readings belong to lithium (−30.33%), ASX (−23.60%), SIL–SILJ (−21.26%), and uranium (−20.11%).
By contrast, the S&P 500 records a positive balance of +1.68%, and STOXX 600 stands at +4.09%.
Moreover, median relative volume remains below 1× in most universes.
Lithium is an exception at 1.24×, but its deeply negative directional balance prevents that increase in activity from being interpreted as a positive signal on its own.
Consequently, the combination of weak breadth, deep drawdowns, and negative volume balances still offers no convincing confirmation of a broad-based recovery.
6. Complete comparison of the twelve universes
The following table presents all twelve universes, including weekly median performance, participation above MA200, four-week breadth change, drawdown breadth, median drawdown, and volume measures.
| Universe | Names | Median 1W | Above MA200 | MA200 4W Δ pp | DD >30% | Median DD | Signed volume | Rel. volume |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AGRIBUSINESS | 70 | +0.43% | +30.00% | -25.71% | +22.86% | -19.34% | -10.87% | 0.96× |
| ASX | 90 | -3.26% | +32.22% | -17.98% | +58.43% | -35.47% | -23.60% | 0.91× |
| COPPER | 103 | -6.73% | +38.24% | -18.81% | +51.49% | -32.48% | -13.32% | 0.91× |
| ENERGY | 169 | +2.05% | +65.09% | -5.33% | +15.38% | -10.80% | -3.29% | 0.95× |
| GDX–GDXJ | 150 | -3.77% | +29.53% | -34.46% | +49.32% | -29.77% | -14.00% | 0.82× |
| JUNIOR | 482 | -5.15% | +24.37% | -20.81% | +71.43% | -43.89% | -17.21% | 0.82× |
| JUNIOR COPPER | 187 | -6.36% | +26.09% | -19.89% | +70.11% | -43.01% | -15.73% | 0.88× |
| LITHIUM | 27 | -8.77% | +3.70% | -7.41% | +100.00% | -60.00% | -30.33% | 1.24× |
| SIL–SILJ | 98 | -5.64% | +26.80% | -27.08% | +59.38% | -36.19% | -21.26% | 0.89× |
| S&P 500 | 500 | +2.68% | +51.70% | +2.81% | +17.10% | -14.62% | +1.68% | 0.97× |
| STOXX 600 | 610 | +2.68% | +59.44% | +5.26% | +12.66% | -12.45% | +4.09% | 0.98× |
| URANIUM | 75 | -7.05% | +11.11% | -15.28% | +84.72% | -49.83% | -20.11% | 1.01× |
Samples may contain overlapping companies and differ in size. They should therefore not be added together to produce one deduplicated global universe. Weekly returns are medians of securities in each research universe. Signed volume is the median 20-session directional volume balance; relative volume compares recent five-session activity with the 60-session reference. Figures are rounded.
7. Interpretation: three different market realities
The indicators allow us to distinguish three situations.
First: major equity markets with relatively favorable participation. The S&P 500 and STOXX 600 combine positive weekly returns, breadth above 50%, and positive directional volume balances.
Second: sectors showing greater relative resilience. Energy stands out for its breadth, weekly performance, and relatively contained drawdowns. Agribusiness posted a slightly positive week, although its breadth remains limited.
Third: mining sectors with deep structural deterioration. Lithium, uranium, and the junior mining groups show the weakest structures. Gold and silver mining markets have also suffered very significant contractions in breadth, even though some individual securities retain relative strength over longer horizons.
This fragmentation makes it difficult to speak of a broad-based recovery across commodities or mining companies.
8. What we should monitor
A more convincing stabilization in mining markets would require three changes: breadth above MA200 would need to stop falling; the share of companies with deep drawdowns would need to begin declining; and directional volume balance would need to improve across a growing number of securities.
An isolated improvement in prices would not be enough to confirm a structural reversal.
Conversely, further declines in breadth accompanied by expanding drawdowns would be consistent with a correction that remains unresolved.
9. Conclusion
This week's message is not that every market is weak. It is that their behavior is diverging to an extraordinary degree.
Major equity markets retain relatively favorable participation, energy maintains a comparatively solid structure, and much of the mining sector is going through a deep correction.
The deterioration among gold and silver miners deserves particular attention because of the speed at which their breadth has contracted over the past four weeks.
Nevertheless, differences between companies and sectors also show that weakness is not uniform.
The next move in the indices will matter. But it will probably matter even more to observe how many companies participate in that move, and whether volume confirms that participation.
Methodology and data notes
This study compares twelve Weekly Analysis research universes using the cross-universe scanner dated October 16, 2026: agribusiness, ASX, copper, energy, GDX–GDXJ, junior miners, junior copper, lithium, SIL–SILJ, S&P 500, STOXX 600, and uranium. Every scanner observation has the same as-of date.
Each universe is summarized separately using its valid observations and relevant denominators. The groups may overlap; they do not constitute a deduplicated global index. The STOXX 600 research universe includes 610 tracked securities and should not be confused with the index's constituent count. MA200 breadth is the share above the 200-day moving average; its four-week change is measured in percentage points. Drawdowns refer to 52-week closing highs; the volume balance covers 20 sessions, and relative volume compares the recent five sessions with a 60-session reference.
This is independent descriptive research, not an investment recommendation. Read the public methodology and interpretation guide or compare this report with the previous global market structure study.