Wheaton Precious Metals declined approximately 13%, from around C$217 in mid-September to C$189.71 on October 16, 2026.
The chart shows three periods of weakness:
September 23–30: Sharp selling, with the share price falling toward C$191.
October 1–10: Partial recovery, but insufficient to reverse the decline.
October 13–15: Renewed selling pushed the share price toward C$182 before rebounding.
Main reasons for the decline
Falling gold and silver prices: Both metals weakened, reducing expected revenue and cash flow for precious-metal companies. Silver was particularly weak.
Inflation and interest rates: Higher U.S. inflation increased expectations of Federal Reserve rate hikes, putting pressure on gold and silver prices. The Wall Street Journal+1
Profit-taking: Selling followed WPM’s September rally, particularly after its September 22 peak.
Precious-metal sector weakness: Investors reduced exposure to precious-metal equities as commodity prices declined.
Technical outlook
Level (CAD)
Interpretation
$182–185
Near-term support
$190–195
First resistance
$200
Stronger recovery threshold
RSI 52.50
Neutral to slightly positive momentum
Conclusion: The decline appears primarily driven by weaker precious-metal prices and interest-rate expectations, rather than confirmed deterioration in WPM’s underlying operations. The rebound toward C$190 is encouraging, but a sustained move above C$195 would provide stronger evidence of recovery.
TSX Composite rose 1.44% for the week, closing at 36,176.55, compared with 35,664.62 on October 9.
Energy stocks were a major source of strength, supported by rising oil prices and Middle East supply concerns.
Materials and mining stocks rebounded, contributing to a strong Thursday session.
Technology stocks faced conflicting pressures: lower bond yields supported valuations, while the U.S. AI-related selloff threatened investor confidence.
Canada outperformed the U.S. S&P 500, which declined 1.95% over the same week. MarketScreener+3
1. TSX Composite — Weekly results
October 9
35,664.62
October 16
36,176.55
Weekly return
+1.44%
The TSX gained 511.93 points during the holiday-shortened trading week.
On October 13, energy strength helped push the TSX to 35,983.98. On October 15, gains in mining and technology lifted the index 1.55% to 36,137.10. Friday’s further 0.11% advance brought the index to its highest close since early September.
Reuters
+2
2. What drove the weekly performance?
Energy — Strong positive contribution
Oil producers benefited from increasing geopolitical supply risks. Brent crude approached US$110 per barrel on October 16, and the TSX energy sector gained 2.8% that day.
Higher realized crude prices can improve operating cash flow at producers such as SU, CNQ and IMO, although refining margins, operating costs and hedges also matter.
The longer-term risk is that sustained high oil prices increase inflation and eventually reduce global petroleum demand.
MarketScreener
+1
Materials — Recovery in mining shares
Mining stocks helped lift the TSX, particularly during Thursday’s broad rebound.
Lower government bond yields can support precious-metal valuations by reducing the opportunity cost of holding gold. Copper producers remain more exposed to Chinese industrial demand and global manufacturing growth.
The net effect differs substantially among gold miners, copper producers and diversified mining businesses.
Reuters
+1
Technology — Competing forces
The TSX technology sector benefited from falling bond yields on Thursday, but international sentiment deteriorated sharply toward AI-related companies.
The U.S. Nasdaq lost about 4.5% over the week. Concerns centred on expensive AI infrastructure, financing requirements and whether projected revenue growth could justify high valuations.
For Canadian names such as SHOP, CSU and KXS, the important variables are earnings growth, free cash flow and whether their share-price multiples are supported by those fundamentals.
Reuters
+1
3. Understanding the sector chart you supplied
Your Barchart image is a six-month relative-performance chart ending October 2, rather than a chart of the latest week.
It shows how different TSX sectors performed over approximately April–October 2026. The following values come from the chart’s October 2 tooltip, not from the latest week’s sector returns.
TSX index / sector
Six-month chart return
Technology (TTTK)
+29.41%
Financials (TTFS)
+19.14%
Energy (TTEN)
+8.03%
TSX Composite
+7.23%
Industrials (TTIN)
+5.69%
Healthcare (TTHC)
+2.13%
Consumer Discretionary (TTCD)
+0.71%
Materials (TTMT)
−2.69%
Consumer Staples (TTCS)
−4.08%
This reveals three important developments.
First, technology and financials led the preceding six-month period. Technology gained 29.41%, significantly outperforming the TSX Composite. That earlier appreciation also creates vulnerability if investors begin reducing growth-stock valuations.
Second, energy strengthened during the latter part of the period. This helps explain why higher oil prices could support the TSX during October’s global technology weakness.
Third, materials lagged the broader index. Its recent rebound therefore needs to be distinguished from the sector’s weaker longer-term trend.
These returns are historical chart readings; they must not be interpreted as sector returns for October 12–16.
October 12–16, 2026Nasdaq fell 4.48%, its worst week since June, as semiconductor and AI-related companies experienced substantial selling.
S&P 500 declined 1.95%, pressured by technology stocks, which have significant weight in the index.
Dow Jones gained 0.67%, benefiting from stronger performance in energy, consumer staples and other non-technology sectors.
AI investment profitability became a major concern. Investors questioned whether enormous data-centre expenditures would generate sufficient returns.
Higher oil prices and persistent inflation increased concerns about borrowing costs, corporate margins and Federal Reserve monetary policy
What caused the decline?
Nasdaq — Technology and AI selloff
Weekly −4.48%
The Nasdaq experienced the most significant losses because of its heavy exposure to technology and semiconductor companies.
Four primary reasons:
AI spending concerns: Investors questioned the profitability of rapidly expanding AI data centres and whether future revenues would justify capital expenditures.
Semiconductor selling: Chip manufacturers declined sharply. Micron Technology fell approximately 5.6% Friday, while Intel declined approximately 5.8%.
Financing risks: AI infrastructure providers that rely heavily on borrowing came under pressure. CoreWeave lost approximately 25% over five trading sessions.
Valuation compression: High-growth technology shares became vulnerable as investors reduced expectations for future earnings and became less willing to pay premium multiples.
The PHLX Semiconductor Index declined approximately 11.4% during the week, demonstrating how concentrated the selling became in chip-related companies.
AP News
+2
Assessment: The selloff reflects increased doubts about the financial returns from AI investments, not necessarily a collapse in demand for AI technology.
The S&P 500 declined because weakness in large technology companies outweighed gains in other sectors.
Technology, communication services and growth-oriented businesses suffered from valuation pressures. Meanwhile, selected energy, utility and consumer-staples companies performed better.
The combination of persistent inflation and expensive equity valuations increased sensitivity to earnings disappointments.
On Friday, the technology sector declined approximately 3%, compared with a gain of around 2.5% for energy.
Dean Financials
+1
Dow Jones — Positive week despite Friday’s decline
Weekly +0.67%
The Dow’s resilience was primarily due to its different sector composition.
The index has less exposure to the most speculative AI infrastructure businesses and greater representation from established industrial, healthcare, consumer and financial companies.
Investors rotated toward sectors with established profitability and more predictable cash flows.
Energy and consumer staples each gained approximately 5% over the week, helping explain why the Dow outperformed the Nasdaq by approximately 5.15 percentage points.
Barron’s
+1
3. Major economic factors affecting Wall Street
Factor
Weekly development
Market impact
U.S. inflation
CPI approximately 3.7% YoY
Raised concerns about persistent price pressures
WTI crude oil
Approximately +10.4% weekly
Supported energy companies but threatened inflation and consumer spending
U.S. 10-year Treasury yield
Fell from 5.244% to 5.098%
Suggested increased demand for bonds despite inflation concerns
Semiconductor stocks
Approximately −11.4%
Significant pressure on Nasdaq and S&P 500
Market volatility (VIX)
Rose from 14.84 to 19.99
Indicated greater expectations of short-term equity volatility
Portfolio Terminal
+2
Important distinction: Falling Treasury yields did not signal an end to inflation concerns. Investors appeared increasingly concerned about equity valuations and economic growth, encouraging capital movement into bonds.
4. Implications for the TSX
TSX sector
Examples
Expected near-term influence
Technology
SHOP, CSU, KXS
Negative — potential spillover from Nasdaq valuation pressures
Energy
SU, CNQ, IMO
Positive earnings sensitivity to stronger WTI prices
Gold
AEM, ABX, WPM
Potential support from uncertainty and safe-haven demand
Financials
RY, TD, BMO
Mixed — lower bond yields may help valuations, while slower growth threatens credit quality
Materials
TECK.B, FM, LUN
Mixed — infrastructure investment supports demand, but global growth concerns create downside risk
The strongest direct earnings benefit could occur among Canadian oil producers if higher crude prices persist. Technology shares face the clearest near-term sentiment risk.
5. U.S. market outlook — October 19–23
Scenario
Key conditions
Likely market response
Bull
Strong corporate earnings, recovery in semiconductor shares and easing inflation expectations
Nasdaq rebounds; S&P 500 strengthens
Base
Mixed earnings, elevated oil prices and continued AI valuation concerns
Treasury yields: Whether bond investors continue favouring safety over equities.
Market breadth: Whether weakness spreads from technology into industrials, financials and consumer stocks.
Conclusion
The U.S. market experienced a significant rotation out of AI-related technology stocks rather than a uniform equity-market decline.
The Nasdaq’s 4.48% weekly fall contrasted with the Dow’s 0.67% advance. This divergence indicates growing investor selectivity toward valuations, earnings quality and capital expenditure.
For the TSX, the immediate implications are potential strength in oil producers, increased volatility in technology stocks and mixed prospects for banks.
A sustained rebound in semiconductor shares, supported by improving earnings expectations and cash-flow forecasts, would weaken the bearish technology thesis.
European equities advanced across all four major indices, outperforming the technology-heavy U.S. Nasdaq.
FTSE 100 led, gaining 3.13%, its strongest weekly performance in approximately six months.
Germany’s DAX gained 2.13%, supported by corporate earnings and improving sentiment toward European equities.
STOXX 600 gained 2.09%, its strongest week since June, helped by earnings and rotation away from highly valued U.S. technology stocks.
France’s CAC 40 gained 1.97%, although fiscal uncertainty and weak luxury-sector performance remained concerns.
European equities benefited from investors moving toward defensive companies and selected industrial businesses, even as inflation and interest-rate risks remained elevated
What drove each market?
United Kingdom — FTSE 100
Weekly +3.13%
The FTSE 100 was Europe’s strongest performer among the four indices.
Key reasons:
Defensive sector rotation: Investors favoured established companies in consumer staples, healthcare and other less technology-dependent sectors.
Fiscal reassurance: Government commitments to fiscal discipline helped stabilize market sentiment.
Economic resilience: UK GDP expanded 0.1% in August, reducing immediate concerns about an economic contraction.
Banking uncertainty: Potential increases in UK bank taxation weighed on Lloyds, NatWest and other financial stocks, limiting gains in that sector.
The rally reflected both earnings expectations and changing investor preferences, rather than evidence of a substantial acceleration in UK economic growth.
Reuters
+3
Germany — DAX
Weekly +2.13%
Germany recovered despite continued uncertainty affecting manufacturing and export-oriented companies.
Key reasons:
Positive European industrial and technology earnings helped improve investor confidence.
Lower bond yields during parts of the week supported equity valuations.
European technology and industrial companies benefited from selective buying despite the broader AI-related selloff.
Aerospace and defence companies attracted interest following reports of potential European industry consolidation.
Principal risk: Germany remains sensitive to global trade, energy costs and demand from China. Persistently high oil prices or weaker international industrial activity could undermine the recovery.
Reuters
+2
Europe — STOXX 600
Weekly +2.09%
The broad European benchmark gained 13.19 index points.
Key reasons:
Strong corporate results helped offset weakness in AI-related stocks.
European banks contributed to gains early in the week.
Individual companies including Ericsson, Aixtron and Nestlé provided support.
Investors increasingly diversified away from concentrated U.S. technology exposure.
Reuters reported that STOXX 600 companies’ third-quarter earnings were expected to grow approximately 20.7% year over year. This was an earnings forecast, not realized earnings growth.
Principal risk: Euro-area inflation and the possibility of further ECB tightening could pressure borrowing costs and equity valuation multiples.
Reuters
+1
France — CAC 40
Weekly +1.97%
France recovered during the week but continued to face more significant domestic risks than Germany or the UK.
Key reasons:
A rebound in industrial and luxury shares helped the index recover from previous weakness.
Improved European earnings sentiment supported French multinational companies.
Broader European market gains helped offset domestic political uncertainty.
Principal risks:
France’s public debt, approaching 120% of GDP, and elevated government bond yields remain concerns. Luxury companies also face weaker Chinese demand, while banks are sensitive to sovereign debt and financing conditions.
The weekly gain is therefore a recovery, not confirmation that France’s structural challenges have been resolved.
Financial Times
+1
3. Key economic and geopolitical factors
Factor
Impact on European equities
Corporate earnings
Positive — stronger results supported valuations
AI-related selloff
Mixed — hurt technology but encouraged rotation into other sectors
Interest rates
Mixed — easing bond yields helped, but further ECB hikes remain a risk
Middle East tensions
Negative for energy-intensive industries through elevated oil costs
China economic weakness
Negative for exporters, automakers and luxury companies
European defence investment
Positive for selected aerospace and defence companies
European market performance contrasted with the U.S. Nasdaq, which declined approximately 4.5% during the week. This divergence suggests investors were increasingly distinguishing between businesses with established cash flows and those dependent on aggressive AI investment assumptions.
Australia: The ASX 200 gained approximately 1.03% for the week, supported by banks and a late recovery in mining and technology stocks.
Japan: The Nikkei 225 declined 5.37% over the week despite Friday’s 1.39% rebound. Semiconductor and AI-related shares were under selling pressure.
India: The Nifty 50 advanced approximately 2.78%, outperforming the other markets with strong information technology earnings.
Hong Kong and China: Both indices finished Friday higher, but their one-day gains do not establish their weekly performance.
Global influence: U.S. inflation, interest-rate expectations, and concerns about AI company valuations contributed to volatile trading across international markets.
Key drivers by market
1. Australia — ASX 200
Weekly +1.03%
Australia’s equity market held up comparatively well.
The main drivers were the support from major bank shares, rebounds in mining companies including BHP and Rio Tinto, and Friday’s recovery in technology stocks.
However, market strength was concentrated in larger companies. The Small Ordinaries declined approximately 2.82%, suggesting that investors were favouring established companies over smaller, riskier businesses.
2. Japan — Nikkei 225
Weekly −5.37%
Japan experienced the sharpest confirmed weekly decline among the five indices.
Semiconductor manufacturers and AI-related companies were particularly exposed to a global technology selloff. Higher U.S. inflation and uncertainty about interest rates added pressure to richly valued growth companies.
The Nikkei’s Friday recovery of 898 points was insufficient to reverse the substantial losses earlier in the week. The broader TOPIX fell only 0.95%, indicating that the weakness was disproportionately concentrated in the Nikkei’s large technology constituents.
3. India — Nifty 50
Weekly +2.78%
India was a notable outperformer.
The principal catalyst was a rebound in information technology shares following stronger corporate earnings. The Nifty IT index gained approximately 11.7% for the week.
Additional support came from rupee appreciation, institutional buying and improved sentiment surrounding potential India–U.S. trade arrangements.
The principal risks remain elevated crude oil prices, inflation and pressure on corporate profitability from higher energy costs.
4. Hong Kong — Hang Seng Index
Weekly −0.10%
Hong Kong ended the week almost unchanged, despite several volatile sessions.
The index declined 1.03% on Thursday before recovering 0.52% on Friday. Technology valuations, Chinese economic uncertainty and global interest-rate developments remained important sources of market risk.
The relatively small weekly decline indicates that the broader market was more resilient than Japan’s technology-heavy Nikkei.
5. China — Shanghai Composite
Weekly −2.56%
Mainland Chinese equities experienced a difficult week.
The Shanghai Composite declined from 3,813.79 on October 9 to 3,716.28 on October 16. Thursday’s 1.59% decline was particularly significant.
Investors face uncertainty about domestic consumer demand, economic growth, trade tensions and the outlook for China’s technology sector. The next release of third-quarter GDP and related economic indicators will help determine whether current valuations are supported by improving fundamentals.
The Canadian market share of U.S.-made vehicles fell by 20 per cent in the first half of 2026 from a year earlier, as the trade war pushed automakers to shift supply lines or halt exports to Canada.
Cars and trucks made in the United States face retaliatory tariffs of 25 per cent on U.S. content, a measure Ottawa took in response to U.S. tariffs worth the same amount.
In response to the Canadian tariffs, Volvo, Tesla, Subaru and Mazda have stopped exports of certain U.S.-made models to Canada, or shifted production to other countries in order to avoid the Canadian tariffs. Cars made in Mexico, Japan and South Korea enter Canada free of tariffs.
The JD Power figures show Mexican-made cars’ market share rose by 22 per cent to hold 22.2 per cent of sales in the first half of 2026, compared with the year-ago period. Japanese cars’ share increased 21 per cent to command 16.6 per cent of the market, while South Korea’s share increased by more than 7 per cent to 15.6 per cent.
Canadian-made vehicles saw their market share fall by 9 per cent to 11.5 per cent.
U.S.-made vehicles retained the largest share of the Canadian market in the first half of the year, with 28.4 per cent. This is down from 35.4 per cent in the first half of 2025, JD Power said.
“Our data shows the largest change for vehicles coming out of the U.S.,” said Robert Karwel, director of OEM Solutions with JD Power in Canada.
Brian Kingston, head of the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers’ Association (CVMA), which represents the Detroit Three automakers in Canada, said the share of U.S. vehicles in Canada was 43 per cent as recently as 2024. He said U.S. government data that show declines in U.S. auto production and employment underline the impact of U.S. protectionism.
“U.S. trade policy is damaging the U.S. automotive industry, and virtually every metric supports that,” Mr. Kingston said.
Tariffs are “not a policy that is strengthening the U.S. automotive industry,” Mr. Kingston said. “It’s obviously hurting Canada, it’s obviously hurting Mexico, but overall it is weakening North America’s industry at a time where we have Chinese exports growing all over the world.”
Canada remains the largest market for U.S.-made vehicles – larger than Germany, China, Mexico and South Korea combined, according to the CVMA. Many of the U.S.-made vehicles are bigger SUVs and pickups for which there is little demand in places outside Canada and the U.S., said Lucas Malinowski, head of Global Automakers of Canada, which represents overseas brands.
“It is a perverse outcome of this whole trade war, right?” he said. “It’s hurting Canadian auto manufacturing, but it’s also hurting U.S. auto manufacturing.”
Andrew King, managing partner of DesRosiers Automotive Consultants, confirmed imports from the U.S. have slipped this year.
“It is likely more based on sourcing changes to avoid tariffs than consumer demand,” Mr. King said. “A number of vehicle companies have changed their sourcing of U.S. vehicles to avoid the Canadian countertariffs – Tesla being the leading example – it is now bringing in vehicles to Canada from Germany and China rather than from the U.S. This was done primarily to avoid the 25-per-cent countertariff. A number of other manufacturers have done the same thing – which has changed sourcing patterns notably.”
DesRosiers’ data show Canadians bought 950,000 cars in the first half, down by 2.6 per cent from the same period of 2025.
Mazda Canada spokeswoman Sandra Lemaitre said the Huntsville, Ala.-made Mazda CX-50 is no longer available in Canada because of the tariffs.
Volvo makes the EX90 in Charleston, S.C., but stopped shipping the electric SUV to Canada because of the tariffs, said company spokeswoman Jennifer Okoeguale. The company is considering bringing in the smaller, Chinese-made EX30 under Canada’s agreement to allow 49,000 electricvehicles from China, Ms. Okoeguale said.
After a one-year halt, Nissan recently resumed shipping to Canada the models made in Tennessee and Mississippi: Pathfinder, Murano and Frontier, and Infiniti QX60 and QX65.
Nissan cars made in Mexico and Japan account for more than 80 per cent of its Canadian sales, a share that is unchanged since before tariffs, said Didier Marsaud, a company spokesman.
U.S. tariffs on vehicles made in Europe have eliminated a Stellantis car from Canadian dealerships. The automaker ceased production of the Dodge Hornet, made in Italy and exported to North America, after the U.S. imposed 25-per-cent tariffs, said Lou Ann Gosselin, a spokeswoman for Stellantis.
Ottawa’s tariffs on U.S.-made cars, announced last year, include a confidential carve-out for companies that have an investment or production footprint in Canada. This allows the five companies that make cars in Ontario – Ford, General Motors, Stellantis, Honda and Toyota – to import U.S. cars tariff-free. However, the federal government has said recent job or production cuts by Stellantis and GM have led to a reduction in tariff remissions for those companies.
The U.S. tariffs, imposed by President Donald Trump, are a violation of the North American free-trade deal he signed in his first term.
According to U.S. Customs and Border Patrol, the U.S. has collected US$50-billion in tariffs on autos and parts since 2025. This includes US$7-billion on Canadian-made vehicles, Mr. Kingston said.
September producer prices were expected to increase 0.6% month-over-month and 5.5% annually, according to the consensus estimate of economists polled by Dow Jones.
September retail sales were estimated to increase by 0.4% from the prior month, according to the Dow Jones Survey.
China’s CXMT reportedly announced progress on a denser memory-chip design and plans for a server-memory product by year-end 2026. This raised competitive concerns for Micron, SK Hynix and Samsung. ua.news
The key uncertainty is commercial execution: manufacturing yields, production volumes and cost competitiveness remain unproven. investopedia.com
The sell-off also coincides with broader concerns about inflation, interest rates and AI investment spending. Attributing the entire decline to China would be misleading. wsj.com
Key drivers and implications
My interpretation: Investors are reassessing how long today’s favourable industry conditions can last. Strong demand does not automatically protect profits if competitors increase supply faster.
Driver
Potential earnings effect
Evidence to monitor
Additional Chinese supply
Greater price competition and weaker margins
Actual shipments and customer adoption
Continued AI investment
Supports memory demand
Customer orders and spending commitments
Higher production spending
Can reduce free cash flow despite revenue growth
Capital expenditure relative to operating cash flow
Higher interest rates
Can reduce the valuation investors assign to future earnings
Bond yields and valuation multiples
The distinction between a technical announcement and profitable mass production matters. An announcement can move share prices immediately; the operating impact depends on whether the product can be manufactured reliably, economically and at scale.
Valuation logic
A falling share price does not necessarily mean a cheaper business if expected earnings are falling too.
Illustrative example—not a company forecast:
Measure
Before
After
Share price
$100
$80
Expected annual earnings per share
$10
$6
Forward P/E
10.0×
13.3×
The shares fall 20%, but the earnings multiple rises because expected earnings fall 40%. For cyclical manufacturers, sustainable earnings and cash flow matter more than a low P/E based on unusually strong profits.
Prices, margins and earnings expectations weaken together
These are conditional scenarios, not probability-weighted forecasts.
Actionable takeaways
The most useful indicators are memory selling prices, inventories, gross-margin guidance, customer commitments and free cash flow.
The bearish thesis would weaken if incumbents maintain pricing and margins despite Chinese expansion. The bullish thesis would weaken if inventories rise and earnings guidance falls despite continued AI demand.
The Wall Street Journal+1
