Mumbai: India’s steel sector is poised for a fresh burst of primary market activity, with at least 10 steel producers and steel-related companies preparing to raise ₹5,000-7,000 crore in total through initial public offerings over the next eight to 10 months.

Steel Infra Solutions Company Ltd, German Green Steel & Power Ltd, Rajputana Stainless Ltd, Bombay Coated Steel Ltd, A-One Steels India Ltd, Jindal Supreme (India) Ltd, Madhur Iron & Steel Ltd, and Synergy Advanced Metals Ltd are among those who have filed draft red herring prospectuses (DRHPs), while a few others are in advanced stages of preparation, according to investment bankers.

The steel industry’s rush to tap the capital markets comes amid improving demand visibility and supportive policy measures.

“India’s steel demand is expected to grow due to infrastructure push for roads, railways, ports, recovery in the steel sector, the PLI scheme for manufacturing, and the government’s continued focus on capex,” said Uday Patil, executive director at PL Capital Markets.

He added that about 25-30% of steel demand is linked to government projects and that safeguard and anti-dumping duties on select imports have helped domestic producers compete on a more level-playing field.

Local companies are targeting significant capacity expansions under the government’s long-term steel policy, aiming to capture the next leg of growth. Mid-sized processors and specialty steel makers, particularly those in coated steel, stainless products, and specialty alloys, are seeing improved order visibility from infrastructure, renewables, railways, metro projects, auto and engineering sectors.
“There is a clear capacity build-out cycle underway among mid-tier players who want to capture domestic demand growth and reduce import dependence in certain product categories,” said Deep Shah, senior manager at Unistone Capital, an investment banking firm. IPO proceeds are expected to be deployed towards greenfield lines, galvanising units, colour-coating facilities and stainless capacity additions. Besides expansion, companies are also looking to strengthen financial profiles, Shah said. After a prolonged deleveraging phase over the past decade, many steel companies are using favourable equity market conditions to further clean up their balance sheets. Lower leverage can improve return ratios, reduce interest burden, enhance credit ratings, and support future borrowing at better terms.

Given the working capital-intensive nature of the steel trade, a portion of the IPO proceeds is also likely to be earmarked for liquidity support to meet capacity expansions.

Bankers also flagged sectorspecific risks such as volatility in steel prices, swings in coking coal costs, import competition, global demand slowdown, and currency movements affecting exports. Margin sustainability will be closely monitored, particularly if raw material costs remain elevated. Yet market participants argue that the narrative around steel is gradually evolving. “India’s steel industry is not viewed purely as a commodity story but as a structural growth play backed by consumption from infrastructure, renewables, railways and urban development.” said Amogh Giridhar, associate partner at Prequate Advisory, adding that investors are becoming comfortable underwriting cyclical businesses where there is evidence of prudent leverage and disciplined capex plans.

However, bankers believe the real test in public markets would always be balance sheet quality and capital allocation discipline for a historically — volatile industry. “Those with clear integration strategies and export competitiveness, coupled with strong domestic consumption may be able to command premium valuations despite the cyclical backdrop,” said Giridhar.

ET Intelligence Group: The BSE Metal Index has jumped 13% in the past three months, outperforming nearly 2% drop in the Sensex amid a broad rally across ferrous and non-ferrous stocks. Shares of metal companies have surged up to 33% over the past three months amid rising prices of both ferrous and non-ferrous metals due to a combination of factors such as demand recovery, policy support, and supply constraints.

Domestic steel prices have rebounded sharply from their December lows after the government reinstated the safeguard duty- which had expired in November- for three years starting from the end of December. This lifted the sentiments for domestic steel manufacturers as imports declined and prices firmed up.

Domestic steel prices have rebounded since December, with average Q4 hot-rolled coil (HRC) prices rising by about ₹5,300 per tonne or 2% quarter-on-quarter and primary rebar prices increasing by roughly ₹8,200 per tonne or 3%. Steel firms have also announced ₹1,000-2,000 per tonne price increase in early January.

In addition, steel exports strengthened as European Union buyers engaged in pre-emptive restocking ahead of the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), which came into effect on January 1, 2026. Under CBAM’s transition phase, EU importers are required to start reporting emissions of imported steel, and once the full regime begins, they will have to pay for the embedded carbon. To avoid these future costs and uncertainties, many EU buyers front-loaded their purchases from India.
In non-ferrous metals, supply disruptions in key mining regions such as Chile, Peru and Indonesia have pushed up copper and nickel prices. Several global aluminium smelters faced outages, keeping supply tight. Demand remains strong, especially as China has capped its aluminium capacity at 45 million tonnes.

Analysts expect steelmakers to report stronger earnings for the March quarter in the light of higher prices, strong volumes and improved operating performance, while non-ferrous producers are likely to benefit from firm global prices and robust demand.
“For Q4, realisations for steel companies are expected to improve by ₹2,500-4,500 per tonne. This will be partially offset by higher coking coal costs, which could increase by ₹1,300-1,600 per tonne of steel,” Parthiv Jhonsa, lead analyst (metals & mining), Anand Rathi Institutional Equities, told ET. He added that for non-ferrous companies, elevated global prices and rupee depreciation will support earnings in the March-quarter since their revenues are dollar denominated. The current quarter is also typically the strongest volume quarter for metals, and most steel companies have maintained their volume guidance. “Aluminium fundamentals remain stronger, supported by the limited scope for incremental production in China and firm copper prices,” said Elara Capital in a report.

India is on course to become “a very meaningful” part of the LGT Group‘s global business, said Prince Max von und zu Liechtenstein, chairman of the private banker and asset manager owned by the royal family of Liechtenstein. In an interview with Nishanth Vasudevan and Sruthijith KK, the Harvard Business School graduate, and former JP Morgan executive spoke about the wealth management industry, AI trade, and precious metals. Edited excerpts:

LGT Group’s assets under management have increased dramatically since you started in 2006. Where is the money coming from, and what kind of money is coming in?

Geographically, we have gotten Asia right. There are many of our competitors in Europe that have been much larger than us, but they haven’t tried Asia, or they haven’t really gotten Asia right. We have gotten the asset classes right, too. We were early to recognise the attractiveness of the private markets-private equity and private debt, where returns have been better than in public markets. Clients on the private banking side, but also on the institutional asset management side, don’t like too many changes in strategy, in relationship management, and in coverage. They want to tell their story on the private client side, that is typically an intimate story that you don’t want to share all the time with too many people, too many times.

Could you share LGT’s India expansion plans?
We think long and hard before we enter a market and, once we enter, we do so with a long-term perspective. Ideally, we want to become profitable as we enter a new market. Once we achieve profitability, it is critical that we keep it in a good range. Clearly, with India, we’re not worried that it cannot become a very meaningful part of our business.

What is the biggest challenge that you face in India that you don’t face in any other market?

I think the regulatory complexity of India continues to be higher than in other markets and is still a hurdle for investors. I am not the biggest expert on it, and I think it is improving. We are taking advantage of the improvements that are taking place, but it remains a more complicated and difficult regulatory and tax regime.
In terms of deploying capital, how attractive are different parts of the world, and especially India?
If I look at different economic blocs and jurisdictions, there are risks and challenges everywhere. It is very hard to predict how the US will look in 10 years, how China and Europe will look in 20 years. The world has always been unpredictable, but I think it has become more unpredictable. So, there is a clear case for disciplined diversification. 2026 has been a rough year for the AI trade. When you talk to clients, are they still overweight on AI?
The winning way of investing in AI is to identify which areas and companies can benefit from it, make a longer-term bet, and look at valuations.A lot of people have seen this, which leads to excitement, fantasies, and bubbles. Most technological transformations have been associated with significant bubbles that, at some point, burst. So, if valuations are coming down, it is probably healthy. I don’t worry about it too much.

Given geopolitical tensions and the flight to safety, is the surge in demand for gold and silver justified?
I am more of a cash-flow-driven investor. I prefer assets that generate good cash flows and feel safe. That aspect is missing with precious metals, so I have not fully understood the excitement around them. It is a pattern that has existed forever, but it doesn’t have much appeal to me personally.

There is now a narrative that Europe is falling behind. You see Trump saying Europe is in ruins, while someone like Macron in Davos said this case is overstated. As a representative of a storied royal dynasty, how do you look at the continent?
I think there is some truth to that. I think Europe’s strong recovery after the Second World War led to a little bit of laziness that we need to get rid of. The ambition level in Europe needs to come back in a stronger way. I think it is still there with some companies in some areas, but overall, I do think Europe needs to step up its game a little bit.

The world is breaking into different blocks of capital. Does this make your business more difficult in terms of deploying capital globally?
Ironically, it has helped us in the short term. In the past, some US companies were very strong competitors globally. The US and many US companies have lost sympathy over the last 12 months, given recent changes. That has helped us, because people make decisions in an emotional way and sympathies matter.We are an organisation from a small country that doesn’t inflict pain on anybody, and that is appreciated. Having said that, I hope the world does not continue in a more conflictive and nationalistic direction.

Private wealth management is a crowded space. Are you trying to tap a particular niche, or are you open for business with everyone?
We want to have good clients who pursue business with a long-term perspective, with good ethics, and who are generally doing well. We must set certain lines and borders when clients are either too marginal or too difficult or fall outside our regulatory and ethical guardrails.

Has the dilution of secrecy laws and increasing geopolitical pressures made things more challenging for you?
These changes around banking secrecy took place more than 10 years ago, and we have done very well over that period. The political and economic stability of Switzerland and Liechtenstein continues to be appreciated, especially as such stability becomes more exceptional.

White House economic advisor Kevin Hassett on Wednesday called for the New York Federal Reserve to punish economists who published a research paper that found that the bulk of the burden of the Trump administration’s tariffs are falling on U.S. businesses and consumers.

“The paper is an embarrassment. It’s, I think, the worst paper I’ve ever seen in the history of the Federal Reserve system,” Hassett said in an interview on CNBC’s “Squawk Box.”

“The people associated with this paper should presumably be disciplined, because what they’ve done is they’ve put out a conclusion which has created a lot of news that’s highly partisan based on analysis that wouldn’t be accepted in a first-semester econ class,” Hassett continued.

The New York Fed’s research found that U.S. businesses and consumers bore 86% of the tariff burden, while foreign exports bore 14% of the burden as of November 2025. The researchers found that the share borne by U.S. businesses and consumers declined over the year from 94% in the January through August period, and 92% in September and October.

FED DISSENT GROWS AS SOME OFFICIALS WEIGH RETURN TO INTEREST RATE HIKES AMID STUBBORN INFLATION

They also found that the average tariff rate jumped last year as the Trump administration raised the import levies, rising from 2.6% at the beginning of 2025 to 13% at the end of the year. The report found that the average tariff rate peaked at around 16% in April and May, following the president’s announcement of his “Liberation Day” tariffs.

“Our results show that the bulk of the tariff incidence continues to fall on U.S. firms and consumers,” the New York Fed wrote, noting that its findings were consistent with a pair of recent studies on U.S. tariff pass-through showing American importers absorbing nearly all the cost.

TARIFFS MAY HAVE COST US ECONOMY THOUSANDS OF JOBS MONTHLY, FED ANALYSIS REVEALS

Those findings are also similar to those contained in another analysis by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), which noted in its recently released 10-year budget and economic outlook that foreign exporters are absorbing about 5% of the tariff costs with the remaining 95% falling on U.S. firms and consumers. 

The CBO found that U.S. businesses would pass on about 70% of their tariff costs to consumers, with the remaining 30% coming out of their profit margins. After accounting for domestic producers raising prices because of reduced foreign competition, the “net effect of tariffs is to raise U.S. consumer prices by the full portion of the cost of the tariffs borne domestically (95 percent),” the CBO found.

CBO’s analysis also projected that the new tariffs imposed over the last year will have increased the personal consumption expenditures (PCE) index by about 0.8 percentage points on aggregate by the end of 2026. PCE inflation is the Fed’s preferred inflation gauge and was most recently at 2.8% in November, well above the Fed’s 2% target.

TRUMP CREDITS TARIFFS FOR HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS GAINED WITH ‘VIRTUALLY NO INFLATION,’ TOUTS SECURITY

Hassett went on to defend the Trump administration’s tariffs during the CNBC interview, saying that American consumers are better off for them, while saying the New York Fed’s analysis was an “embarrassment.”

“Prices have gone down. Inflation is down over time. Import prices dropped a lot in the first half of the year, that leveled off, and real wages were up $1,400 on average last year, which means that consumers were made better off by the tariffs,” Hassett said on CNBC. 

GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE

“So consumers couldn’t have been made better off by the tariffs, if this New York Fed analysis was correct. It’s really just an embarrassment,” Hassett said.

By Samuel Rines & Christopher Gannatti, CFA

During the latest monthly rebalance, the WisdomTree GeoAlpha Opportunities Index implemented a set of changes that, taken together, sharpen the portfolio’s exposure to the three realities defining the geopolitical backdrop

Oil prices eased in early Asia trade on Thursday, following the previous day’s 4% jump, as investors assessed efforts by the U.S. and Iran to resolve tensions while both sides have stepped up military activity in the key oil-producing region.

Brent futures fell 12 cents, or 0.2% to $70.23 a barrel by 0110 GMT, while U.S. West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude slipped 8 cents, or 0.1%, to trade ‌at $65.11 a ⁠barrel.

Both benchmarks ⁠settled more than 4% higher on Wednesday, posting their highest settlements since January 30, as traders priced in potential supply disruptions amid concerns of U.S.-Iran conflict.

“Tensions between Washington and Tehran remain high, but the prevailing view is that full-scale armed conflict is unlikely, prompting a wait-and-see approach,” said Hiroyuki Kikukawa, chief strategist of Nissan Securities Investment, a unit of Nissan Securities.

“U.S. President Donald Trump does not want a sharp rise in crude prices, and even if military ⁠action occurs, ‌it would likely be limited to short-term air strikes,” Kikukawa added.

A little bit of progress was made during Iran talks in Geneva this week but distance ⁠remained on some issues, the White House said on Wednesday, adding that Tehran was expected to come back with more details in a couple of weeks.
Iran issued a notice to airmen (NOTAM) that it plans rocket launches in areas across its south on Thursday from 0330 GMT to 1330 GMT, according to the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration website. At the same time, the U.S. has deployed warships near Iran, with U.S. Vice President JD Vance saying Washington was weighing whether to continue diplomatic engagement with ‌Tehran or pursue “another option”.

Satellite images show that Iran has recently built a concrete shield over a new facility at a sensitive military site and covered it in soil, experts say, advancing work ⁠at a location reportedly bombed by Israel in 2024.

Meanwhile, two days of peace talks in Geneva between Ukraine and Russia ended on Wednesday without a breakthrough, with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy accusing Moscow of stalling U.S.-mediated efforts to end the four-year-old war.

U.S. crude and gasoline and distillate inventories fell last week, market sources said, citing American Petroleum Institute figures on Wednesday, contrary to expectations in a Reuters poll that crude stocks would rise by 2.1 million barrels in the week to February 13.

Official U.S. oil inventory reports from the Energy Information Administration are due on Thursday.