Loading…
Ferro-Alloy Resources' updated Balasausqandiq feasibility study shows sharply improved economics: US$311.9m funding, US$931.6m NPV, 31% IRR. A pivotal moment for the vanadium developer?
This article covers information on Ferro-Alloy Resources Limited.
LON:FARFerro-Alloy Resources has used its 2025 final results to hammer home one message: the Balasausqandiq vanadium project looks far more valuable than it did a few months ago. The standout is the updated Phase 1 feasibility study economics, which now show a revised funding requirement of US$311.9 million, a post-tax net present value, or NPV, of US$931.6 million, and an internal rate of return, or IRR, of 31%.
That is a serious improvement on the earlier feasibility study numbers of US$520 million funding required, US$748 million NPV and 22% IRR. For retail investors, this is the bit that matters most. The project has not changed from being big to being small – it has changed from looking heavy and expensive to looking much more financeable.
The trigger for the upgrade was an indicative engineering, procurement and construction, or EPC, cost estimate from China National Chemical Engineering Sixth Construction Co., Ltd of US$261 million. That excluded relatively minor uranium and molybdenum sorption equipment, but it still appears to have moved the whole investment case forward.
| Phase 1 metric | Earlier feasibility study | Revised after CC6 estimate |
|---|---|---|
| Funding required to get into production | US$520 million | US$311.9 million |
| Post-tax NPV at 8% discount rate | US$748 million | US$931.6 million |
| Project IRR | 22% | 31% |
| Cash cost on V2O5 equivalent basis | Not disclosed in the earlier summary here | US$4.35/lb |
| Cash cost net of by-products | Not disclosed in the earlier summary here | US$0.36/lb |
Those cost numbers are eye-catching. Vanadium pentoxide, or V2O5, is the main product, but the economics are helped massively by by-products such as carbon black substitute, molybdenum and uranium. When a miner says its net cash cost is US$0.36/lb after by-products, that tells you these side revenues are doing a lot of heavy lifting.
Phase 1 is planned to produce 8,500 tonnes of V2O5 a year and 247,000 tonnes of carbon black substitute, or CBS, over a 20-year mine life from ore-body 1 only. The company also points out this is just one of seven identified ore-bodies, so there is clearly blue-sky upside. That said, further phases are still just that – upside, not bankable value today.
Ferro-Alloy says Balasausqandiq is unusual because the ore is black shale rather than the more typical vanadiferous titano-magnetite. In plain English, that means the process does not require pre-concentration or roasting, which should mean lower capital costs, lower operating costs and lower emissions.
Related
Polar Capital Technology Trust sees 102% NAV growth in FY2026, beating its benchmark by 47 points thanks to AI and semiconductor exposure.
JoshuaJuly 10, 2026
Last updated
Category
InvestingViews
27 viewsLikes
No ratings yet
The company’s market consultant, CRU, forecasts a vanadium supply deficit from 2029 onwards, with a later update suggesting a deficit could emerge as early as the end of 2026. That updated forecast is not reflected in the feasibility study. If CRU is right, low-cost future supply could become strategically valuable.
There is also a second angle here. Ferro-Alloy is not just pitching a vanadium mine. It is also pitching a lower-emissions carbon black substitute product for rubber manufacturing, with the feasibility study assuming a CBS price of US$500 per tonne. Smithers said the non-tyre market could support up to US$600 per tonne, but the company has not baked that upside into the study.
The project story looks better, but the current financials still look like a business in development mode. Revenue fell slightly to US$4.53 million from US$4.72 million, while cost of sales dropped to US$6.3 million from US$7.6 million. That narrowed the gross loss to US$1.7 million from US$2.8 million, which is an improvement, but it is still a gross loss.
| FY25 financial snapshot | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | US$4.53 million | US$4.72 million |
| Cost of sales | US$6.3 million | US$7.6 million |
| Gross loss | US$1.7 million | US$2.8 million |
| Administrative expenses | US$3.6 million | US$3.0 million |
| Net finance costs | US$2.56 million | US$1.98 million |
| Net loss | US$8.42 million | US$9.43 million |
| Cash at year end | US$1.68 million | US$3.78 million |
The existing plant is now being used primarily as a research and development centre, with opportunistic processing of concentrates when profitable. That explains why revenue is modest and why management is more focused on technology development than current earnings.
Operationally, 2025 was not bad. Vanadium production rose to 316.8 tonnes from 300.9 tonnes, while molybdenum production increased to 47.7 tonnes from 34.9 tonnes. But these are still side shows compared with the main prize, which is getting Balasausqandiq financed and built.
Now for the bit investors should not gloss over. The directors and the auditor both flag a material uncertainty over going concern. That is accountant language for: the company needs more money, and there is real execution risk around getting it.
At 31 December 2025, cash was US$1.68 million. Current liabilities had jumped to US$17.0 million from US$2.4 million, largely because bond liabilities were reclassified from non-current to current as maturities approach in 2026. Current loans and borrowings were US$12.87 million, and total equity was negative at US$(2.73) million.
That is the tension at the heart of this story. On paper, the project economics look strong. In the bank, the cash balance is tight.
I think this RNS is clearly positive on asset quality and project economics. A jump to US$931.6 million NPV and a 31% IRR gives the financing team a much stronger pitch, and the low-cost angle looks genuinely differentiated. The company also has some useful optionality through battery electrolyte, CBS and other by-product work.
But this is not a low-risk rerating story yet. It is still a funding story. Until Ferro-Alloy shows a credible route through the 2026 bond maturities and towards full project finance, the market is likely to keep one hand firmly on the brake.
So the simple version is this: the mine looks better, the balance sheet does not. If management can turn those improved feasibility numbers into real funding, this result could end up being a pivotal moment. If not, the quality of the project alone will not solve the near-term cash squeeze.
For now, Ferro-Alloy looks more interesting than it did before these results – but also still very much a speculative small-cap developer, not a finished producer. That distinction matters.
Impax Q3 AUM rises to £23.3bn despite £1.7bn net outflows, driven by market gains and strong investment performance.
JoshuaJuly 10, 2026
MJ Gleeson FY2026 trading update: steady profits, mixed home sales with operational restructuring improving outlook.
JoshuaJuly 10, 2026
No comments yet - start the conversation.