REEX Insights
Chinese Rankings
The REEx Rankings provide independent, proprietary scores of rare earth companies across the global supply chain, giving investors a clear view of how industry players stack up.
No companies match your search.
Scores are proprietary REEx assessments. Some underlying inputs are intentionally not displayed.
Key REEx LREE Ranking Notes
Purpose of Ranking
Our ranking prioritizes what would likely be the safest and most profitable NdPr projects for investment from a Western perspective. This takes into account:
- Geopolitical risk and jurisdictional stability
- Project development stage and timeline to production
- Deposit size and scale
- Mineralogical complexity and processing viability (cost, stage, and impurity profile)
Project Selection
Where a company has multiple deposits or development phases, we include only the producing asset (or the next expected to enter production). This approach excludes long-dated or less-certain resources that currently contribute little to near-term NPV.
Exclusion Criteria
Some entities are involved in NdPr production but are excluded from this ranking if they do not own or operate a dedicated rare earth ore deposit (e.g., those refining third-party feedstock only).
Weighting Methodology
The most heavily weighted categories are:
- Mineralogy (incl. type, impurities, stage, cost)
- Project Stage
- Country Risk / Geopolitics
Explanation of Categories
At Rare Earth Exchanges (REEx), we’ve developed a proprietary scoring system to rank the global Light Rare Earth Element (LREE) Project/Deposits based on a set of criteria aimed at assessing the most secure and economically viable investment opportunities — particularly for ex-China stakeholders.
| Ranking Category | Sub Category | Explanation |
|---|---|---|
| Deposit Location | n/a | Based on country stability, regulatory environment, and general infrastructure. |
| Project Stage | n/a |
Production – Operational mine. Proven ability to extract, process, and sell product. Major risks are resolved, with infrastructure, permitting, and financing in place Construction – Within ~5 years of production. Key milestones like financing and permitting are secured. Risks include delays, cost overruns, and commissioning challenges. Development – Typically 5–15 years from production. Feasibility studies may exist, but no Final Investment Decision (FID). Risks include permitting, financing, off-take, and execution. Exploration – Early-stage. Limited geological understanding and unproven commercial viability. High risk; long lead time to potential production Care and Maintenance – Previously active or advanced projects now paused. Future viability uncertain due to market, technical, or regulatory issues. Cancelled – No longer considered viable. Removed from future supply plans unless major conditions change. |
| Mineralogy | Mineral Type | Ease of processing mineral. Monazite typically easier; bastnaesite moderate; xenotime, others harder. |
| Mineralogy | Impurities | Score based on complexity of impurities and treatment needs. Ie Radiation. |
| Mineralogy | Processing Stage | Processing maturity – from Exploration, Concept, PEA, PFS, DFS, FEED to fully operational processing plants. |
| Mineralogy | Capex/Opex Cost | Cost implications of processing route. Lower = cleaner, simpler metallurgy. |
| ESG | Environmental | Energy, emissions, water, land impact, and processing method. |
| ESG | Social | Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), labor, local employment and training. |
| ESG | Governance | Transparency, ownership clarity, board diversity. |
| LREE Deposit | n/a | Calculated from resource grades, tonnage, and recovery assumptions, TREO%, Tb4O7 and Dy2O3 % – normalized. |
| Production Capacity | (tpa) | Projected/name plate capacity in tonnes per annum of either oxide, carbonate or concentrate. May be modelled, announced, or estimated based on mine life and size of deposit. |
| Production Capacity | Type | Oxide, Concentrate or Carbonate |
| Production Capacity | Oxide Production | If the oxide produced was processed in China or ex-China. |
Key REEx HREE Ranking Notes
Production Capacity
All figures are estimates. China and Myanmar figures are based on smelting quotas; others are estimated due to limited public data. Lynas and MP Materials also lack disclosed HREE production data.
Lynas – Deposit Location
Score reduced from 10 to 7 due to sovereign risk in Malaysia.
HREE Deposits
Most are pre-Ore Reserve. Rankings use M&I Resource × metallurgical assumptions to reflect future supply potential.
Explanation of Categories
The most heavily weighted categories are:
| Ranking Category | Sub Category | Explanation |
|---|---|---|
| Deposit Location | n/a | Based on country stability, regulatory environment, and general infrastructure. |
| Project Stage | n/a |
Production – Operational mine. Proven ability to extract, process, and sell product. Major risks are resolved, with infrastructure, permitting, and financing in place Construction – Within ~5 years of production. Key milestones like financing and permitting are secured. Risks include delays, cost overruns, and commissioning challenges. Development – Typically 5–15 years from production. Feasibility studies may exist, but no Final Investment Decision (FID). Risks include permitting, financing, off-take, and execution. Exploration – Early-stage. Limited geological understanding and unproven commercial viability. High risk; long lead time to potential production. Care and Maintenance – Previously active or advanced projects now paused. Future viability uncertain due to market, technical, or regulatory issues. Cancelled – No longer considered viable. Removed from future supply plans unless major conditions change. |
| Mineralogy | Mineral Type | Score based on the complexity of impurities and treatment needs. Ie Radiation. |
| Mineralogy | Impurities | Score based on complexity of impurities and treatment needs. Ie Radiation. |
| Mineralogy | Processing Stage | Processing maturity – from Exploration, Concept, PEA, PFS, DFS, FEED to fully operational processing plants. |
| Mineralogy | Capex/Opex Cost | Cost implications of processing route. Lower = cleaner, simpler metallurgy. |
| ESG | Environmental | Energy, emissions, water, land impact, and processing method. |
| ESG | Social | Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), labor, local employment and training. |
| ESG | Governance | Transparency, ownership clarity, board diversity. |
| HREE Deposit | n/a | Calculated from resource grades, tonnage, and recovery assumptions, TREO%, Tb4O7 and Dy2O3 % – normalized. For HREE (Dy/Tb), most deposits are not yet at Ore Reserve stage, especially those with ion-adsorption clays or early-stage hard rock HREEs. In such cases, M&I Resource × metallurgical assumptions is the best available proxy for future potential supply — particularly when ranking supply-side capacity rather than current mine life. |
| Production Capacity | Production | Projected tonnes per annum of separated Dy₂O₃ and Tb₄O₇ oxides. May be modelled, announced, or estimated. NB – The project may not be processing to oxide, but it is the oxide that would be generated from their project. |
| Production Capacity | Oxide Production | If the oxide produced was processed in China or ex-China. |
Key REEx Processor Ranking Notes
Ranking rare earth processing facilities requires navigating limited transparency, complex ownership structures, and evolving global supply chains. China currently dominates this stage, accounting for the majority of global separation and refining capacity, while Western nations are racing to rebuild domestic capabilities. To create a consistent comparison, Rare Earth Exchanges evaluates processors based on capacity, feedstock security, technology maturity, and integration potential. These rankings emphasize progress toward non-Chinese refining capacity and the strategic importance of midstream independence. As new facilities come online or expand, rankings will be updated to reflect market readiness and geopolitical significance.
Explanation of Categories
The most heavily weighted categories are:
| Ranking Category | Sub Category | Explanation |
|---|---|---|
| Project Stage | n/a |
Fully Operational / In Production – Facility is built and producing separated oxides or metals at commercial scale. Construction / Commissioning – Physical construction or final commissioning underway. FEED or DFS Completed – Definitive Feasibility Study or Front-End Engineering Design completed; project technically de-risked but not yet in construction. PFS or Scoping / Concept Study – Early technical work underway but not construction-ready. Exploration or Concept Stage – Concept-only or minimal technical work completed. No Defined Stage – No publicly communicated development stage. |
| Technology | Element Separation Capability to Oxide |
Assesses current and planned ability to separate rare earths into oxides (LREE, HREE, or both). LREE + HREE (commercial): Best-in-class processors; highly strategic LREE + Partial HREE or Partial LREE + HREE: Still strong, but less comprehensive than score 10 LREE only (commercial): Typical of many ex-China projects (e.g., NdPr only) HREE only (commercial): More common in China, Myanmar (ionic clay sources) LREE or HREE (pilot scale): Technology shown, but not operating at scale Mixed RE stream only: Produces MREC/SEG but can't separate into oxides Lab-scale only: No scalable process; early-stage R&D No separation: No chemical separation; e.g., carbonate sellers |
| Technology | Technology Type |
Evaluates the processing technology used (e.g., Solvent Extraction, Ion Exchange, Hybrid, Chromatography) and its scalability, maturity, and ESG profile. |
| Operational Scale | Actual LREE Processing (tpa) | Measures actual annual Light Rare Earth (LREE) separation capacity (in tonnes per annum). |
| Operational Scale | Actual HREE Processing (tpa) | Measures actual annual Heavy Rare Earth (HREE) separation capacity (in tonnes per annum). |
| Operational Scale | Planned Annual LREE Processing Capacity (tpa) | Measures planned annual Light Rare Earth (LREE) separation capacity (in tonnes per annum). |
| Operational Scale | Planned Annual HREE Processing Capacity (tpa) | Measures planned annual Heavy Rare Earth (HREE) separation capacity (in tonnes per annum). |
| Feedstock | Feedstock Flexibility | Assesses ability to process multiple feedstock types vs. reliance on a single ore source. |
| Feedstock | Source of Feedstock | Evaluates security of feedstock supply – fully integrated, long-term contracts, spot purchases, or China-dependent sources. |
| Geopolitical & Strategic | Location (Jurisdiction Stability) | Rates the legal, political, and operational stability of the host country. |
| Geopolitical & Strategic | Ex-China Relevance | Scores alignment with ex-China supply chains (fully independent vs. China-dependent). |
| Geopolitical & Strategic | End-User Contracts / Offtakes | Considers the quality and security of end-user agreements (Tier 1 OEMs, multi-year contracts, MOUs, or none). |
| Geopolitical & Strategic | Government Support / Co-funding | Assesses direct investment, subsidies, strategic recognition, or policy backing from governments. |
Key REEx Magnet Ranking Notes
Ranking rare-earth permanent magnet projects is uniquely challenging given the opacity of global data and China’s dominance—producing roughly 85–90% of the world’s supply, dwarfing Japan, the U.S., and Europe combined. To build a consistent comparative framework, Rare Earth Exchanges applies reverse calculations and estimates among other evaluation categories. These rankings reflect a Western retail investor’s risk-adjusted lens: Chinese projects naturally top the list due to scale and vertical integration, but emerging U.S., Japanese, European, and Korean producers—though small today—are beginning to carve credible footholds. As these projects mature from pilots to commercial scale, we’ll update the rankings to keep them dynamic, investor-relevant, and forward-looking.
Explanation of Categories
The most heavily weighted categories are:
| Ranking Category | Sub Category | Explanation |
|---|---|---|
| Commercial | Stage of Development |
Fully Operational / Commercial Scale– Facility is built and producing metal products at scale. Construction/Commissioning– Physical construction or final commissioning of plant underway. Pilot or Low-Volume Production– Pilot plant working; technically de-risked. Concept / Early Feasibility– Earlier technical work underway but not yet pilot or construction-ready. No Defined Stage– Highlevel plans only or unknown. |
| Downstream Partnerships/Offtake | Presence and strength of binding offtake agreements or partnerships with downstream users (e.g., EV makers, magnet manufacturers). Strong, diversified agreements reduce commercial risk. | |
| Public Support/Policy Enablement | Access to grants, loans, or strategic backing from government programs (e.g., DOD, DOE, EU critical minerals funds). Indicates long-term support and lower financing risk. | |
| Technology | Magnet Type | Type(s) of permanent magnets produced (e.g., NdFeB, SmCo, Alnico). Higher-performance or specialized magnet types score higher for technological competitiveness. |
| Dy/Tb Reduction Tech | Use of advanced technology to reduce or eliminate dependence on dysprosium/terbium heavy rare earths, improving cost and supply chain resilience. | |
| Operations | Actual Annual Production Capacity | Nameplate or actual annual magnet output (in tonnes per annum). Higher capacity indicates greater commercial relevance and operational maturity. |
| Planned Annual Production Capacity | Planned annual production (in tonnes per annum). |
Legal Notice
Data Accuracy
We’ve used best endeavours to source and verify all information from company reports, public filings, and industry sources. If you believe any detail is incorrect or outdated, please contact us at: business@rareearthexchanges.com
Disclaimer
- These rankings are an indicative guide only, designed to help retail investors understand the rare earths supply chain. They should not be relied upon as financial advice, investment recommendations, or as a substitute for independent research.
- Most data is sourced from publicly available information including company reports, regulatory filings, investor presentations, government data, technical studies, and credible news outlets.
- Where data is unavailable, incomplete, inconsistent, or disclosed in non-standard formats, REEx may use reasonable assumptions, industry averages, estimates, or backward calculations based on typical rare-earth sector benchmarks.
If you require the exact derivation of any data point, please contact us and we may provide our working source notes. - Some companies and projects do not fit neatly into standard categories. In these cases, the REEx team may apply manual judgment to classify stage, capacity, or technology positioning. These adjustments are always made transparently and in good faith based on available information.
- Rare earths projects change rapidly. Permitting, funding, government policy, offtake agreements, and technical performance can change at short notice. Rankings may therefore lag real-time developments.
- Given the sheer number of companies and deposits we will inevitably make mistakes. If you see missing information, questionable figures, or anything that appears inaccurate, please let us know — we welcome corrections and updates from the community, companies, and industry professionals.
- Nothing in these rankings is investment advice. REEx does not guarantee accuracy, completeness, or suitability for investment decision-making. Users should always seek professional advice before making financial decisions.
- Companies mentioned in these rankings have no involvement in determining their scores unless explicitly stated. REEx maintains full editorial independence.
- All trademarks, company names, and logos belong to their respective owners.
Copyright
© 2026 Rare Earth Exchanges, LLC. All rights reserved. This ranking, its underlying data, scoring methodology, and visual presentation are the intellectual property of Rare Earth Exchanges™ (REEx). You may not reproduce, distribute, or republish this content without explicit written permission. The information presented is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. While we aim to ensure accuracy, REEx makes no warranties or guarantees, express or implied, as to the completeness or reliability of the data. Use of this material is at your own risk. Always perform your own due diligence or consult a licensed financial advisor before making investment decisions.
