STRUCTURAL ALPHA RESEARCH
Uranium & nuclear · Weekly market structure

Uranium Stocks: MA200 Distance Reaches Its Deepest Reading in 155 Weeks

Published November 8, 2026 · Data through November 6, 2026 · 76 uranium and nuclear-related securities · Source: Structural Alpha Research Weekly Analysis

Uranium and nuclear-related equities resumed their decline in the week ending November 6. The median stock fell 3.47%, while only 9.59% of eligible securities closed above their 200-day moving average. More strikingly, the median distance below MA200 reached −30.86%—the lowest weekly reading in our 155-observation history since November 2023.

Securities tracked76
Median weekly return−3.47%
Above MA2009.59%
Median MA200 distance−30.86%

1. A failed follow-through after last week's rebound

Of 76 securities, 19 advanced, 52 declined, and five were unchanged. The average weekly return was −3.35%, close to the −3.47% median, showing that weakness was not confined to a handful of extreme losers. Last week's bounce—48 advancers and a +1.68% median return—did not persist.

The benchmark S&P 500 fell 2.68%. Thirty-five universe constituents (46.05%) outperformed that benchmark on the week, but relative outperformance should not be mistaken for positive absolute returns.

2. Long-term breadth remains close to its lows

Share of stocks above MA200 · September–November 2026
-4.3%6.9%18.1%29.3%40.4%08-2809-1110-0210-2311-06

Just seven of 73 stocks with valid moving-average data traded above MA200 at the November 6 close, or 9.59%. This was slightly higher than 8.22% a week earlier but down 6.85 percentage points over four weeks on the comparable sample. Such limited participation does not establish a broad-based recovery.

3. MA200 distance: breadth alone understates the damage

Median distance from the 200-day moving average · September–November 2026
-34.0%-25.9%-17.9%-9.9%-1.9%08-2809-1110-0210-2311-06

The median distance to MA200 deteriorated from −6.76% on September 4 to −30.86% on November 6. The mean distance stood at −29.33%. The latest median is the most negative in our 155 weekly observations; this is a sample-specific record, not a claim about the sector's entire history.

The distance distribution is unusually skewed to the downside. At the latest observation, the calibrated lower-decile threshold (P10) was −33.98%, yet 43.84% of valid stocks were below that level (32 of 73). The lower-quartile threshold (P25) was −17.63%, with 75.34% of stocks below it (55 of 73). The reference thresholds reflect the system's historical calibration, rather than the current week's cross-sectional percentiles.

Interpretation: Extreme negative MA200 distance quantifies stretched market conditions, but does not, by itself, identify a durable bottom. The median has continued to deteriorate despite already-extreme readings.

Seven stocks remain above their MA200

CompanyDistance to MA200
Berkeley Energia Ltd.+66.60%
Power Minerals+12.56%
Fortum Oyj+9.97%
CGN Power Co Ltd.+9.74%
Itochu Corp+8.77%
CEZ+7.28%
Gs En & Co+1.64%

The universe includes diversified utilities, industrial companies and other nuclear-linked securities alongside uranium miners; findings should not be generalized to pure-play miners without qualification.

4. Drawdowns show broad structural weakness

Among 73 stocks with valid 52-week observations, 64 (87.67%) were more than 30% below their 52-week closing highs, and 40 (54.79%) were more than 50% below. The median 52-week drawdown was −56.82%. Deep drawdowns establish the extent of the decline, but are not independently predictive of a reversal.

5. Volume still favors the sellers

Median five-session relative volume was 0.95 times its reference level. Thirteen securities showed relative volume of at least 1.5 times; ten of these fell over the five-session window, compared with just two that rose. The median 20-session signed-volume balance was −21.61%, and only 14 stocks had a positive balance. Among securities with drawdowns greater than 30%, nine declined on elevated relative volume versus one rising under similar conditions.

This pattern is consistent with persistent selling pressure. It does not establish a definitive capitulation event.

6. Weekly rebounds contrast with longer-horizon leadership

The top weekly performers were Jindalee Lithium (+24.59%), GS En & Co (+14.42%), Haranga Resources (+11.54%), Manhattan Uranium Discovery (+11.11%), and Peninsula Energy (+8.11%). Several remain sharply negative over three months, illustrating the limits of short-term rebounds.

The leading overall ranked securities were Berkeley Energia, Power Minerals, GS En & Co, Fortum and Bannerman Energy. Berkeley remained 66.60% above MA200, a notable exception to the wider sector. Rankings describe the measured cross-sectional performance; they are not buy recommendations.

7. What would improve the outlook?

Stabilization: the median distance to MA200 stops falling, downside volume pressure eases and breadth begins to recover. Broader recovery: more companies reclaim technical reference levels while participation expands beyond a narrow group of leaders. Further deterioration: weak breadth persists and negative MA200 distance and drawdowns deepen. The present data support caution rather than a confirmed trend reversal.

8. Full weekly ranking — 76 securities

The interactive ranking includes every security, with weekly rank, global rank, ticker, company, last close, and one-week, four-week, three-month and year-to-date returns. Sort any column and filter by ticker or name.

Loading complete ranking…

Methodology and limitations

This analysis uses weekly close-to-close returns and available price, volume and moving-average metrics from the Structural Alpha Research URANIUM universe. MA200 calculations and 52-week drawdowns use available observations; the current sample has 76 ranked securities, with 73 eligible for MA200-based statistics. Historical comparisons can be affected by changes in universe composition and data availability. Percentile thresholds refer to the system's historical reference calibration, not the current cross-section. No proprietary ranking formulas or internal strategy parameters are disclosed.

See our research methodology and research archive.