December 19, 2025 — Shares of TMC the metals company Inc. (NASDAQ: TMC) are back in the spotlight after another sharp move higher, extending what has already been a headline-grabbing year for one of the market’s most polarizing “critical minerals” stories: deep-sea mining.
As of mid-day on Dec. 19, TMC stock traded around the mid-$7 range and was up roughly ~10% on the session, after opening near $7.00 and hitting an intraday high near $7.70. [1]
That price action is the easy part. The harder — and far more important — question for investors is why TMC keeps whipping around, and what the latest swirl of policy signals, partnerships, and forecasts really means for the stock.
What’s driving TMC stock on Dec. 19, 2025?
The most immediate spark behind today’s attention isn’t a new mine plan or a quarterly report. It’s derivatives — specifically, a rush of bullish options activity that tends to show up when traders expect volatility or are trying to front-run a catalyst.
A MarketBeat note published Dec. 18 reported unusually large call-option volume in TMC: 76,689 call contracts, about a 216% jump versus average daily call volume cited in the report. [2]
Meanwhile, TipRanks flagged what it described as an “options frenzy,” pointing to heavy call activity clustered in near-term weekly calls and longer-dated contracts — the kind of pattern that often accompanies momentum chasing and event-driven speculation. [3]
There’s also a calendar factor: Dec. 19 is a major quarterly “triple witching” expiration day for many markets, a session that can amplify trading volume and create price dislocations even without company-specific news. [4]
Bottom line: Some of today’s move appears to be positioning and volatility trading, not necessarily a brand-new fundamental development.
The real TMC thesis still comes down to one thing: permits
TMC is not a typical mining stock. It’s a pre-revenue company whose valuation swings wildly based on the market’s belief that commercial deep-sea mining can be approved — and done — on a realistic timeline.
The U.S. permitting route: DSHMRA + NOAA
A central pillar of the current bull case is TMC’s push through a U.S. regulatory pathway under the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act (DSHMRA) administered by NOAA.
NOAA’s own public explainer states that U.S. entities seeking to mine polymetallic nodules in areas beyond national jurisdiction must obtain exploration licenses and commercial recovery permits under DSHMRA, and notes an April 24, 2025 executive order establishing policies aimed at advancing U.S. leadership in seabed mineral exploration and “responsible commercial recovery.” [5]
TMC says its U.S. subsidiary submitted applications to NOAA for two exploration licenses and one commercial recovery permit in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone (CCZ) — a vast Pacific region often described as one of the richest nodule fields on Earth. [6]
A U.S. Congressional Research Service brief also references those applications and outlines NOAA’s expected initial review timelines under the Code of Federal Regulations. [7]
Why this is controversial (and why markets care)
The International Seabed Authority (ISA) — the U.N.-linked body created under UNCLOS — has not finalized exploitation rules for deep-sea mining in international waters. Reuters reported earlier in 2025 that the White House was considering an executive order that could allow companies to bypass ISA and pursue permitting via the U.S. system, with NOAA as the overseer. [8]
That governance gap is exactly where TMC lives: if investors believe the U.S. will move decisively (and withstand legal and diplomatic blowback), TMC can re-rate sharply. If investors believe international opposition will stall or derail the effort, the stock can deflate just as fast.
The Associated Press captured the intensity of that pushback earlier this year, describing international outcry and quoting critics who argue a unilateral U.S. permit would be a major breach of international law — while also noting that the U.S. is not a party to UNCLOS. [9]
TMC’s fundamentals: cash-rich (for now), still loss-making, and not yet a producer
TMC’s story can feel like it’s all geopolitics and ocean law — but the company’s financials still matter, because permitting delays can become financing events.
In its Q3 2025 corporate update, TMC reported:
- Cash of ~$115.6 million at Sept. 30, 2025
- Cash used in operations of ~$11.5 million for the quarter
- Net loss of ~$184.5 million (net loss per share $0.46) for the quarter
- Management also referenced ~$165 million in total liquidity including undrawn credit facilities (as described in the release). [10]
That same update framed the company’s progress around completed economic studies and argued it had enough runway that it did not “need to come to the public markets anytime soon” (language attributed to management in the release). [11]
Still, this remains a business with no commercial production today, and a large portion of investor value is tied to future execution — and future capital needs — that depend heavily on regulators.
The “hard asset” narrative: reserves, NPVs, and why numbers keep getting repeated
TMC’s supporters often emphasize that polymetallic nodules contain multiple in-demand metals (notably nickel, copper, cobalt, and manganese) and that nodules can be collected without traditional drilling and blasting.
Over 2025, the company highlighted technical and economic milestones, including:
- Public references to world-first mineral reserve declarations for a polymetallic nodule project (often cited around 51 million tonnes of probable mineral reserves) in connection with its NORI-D project updates. [12]
- A separate SEC-filed exhibit headline stating the company released economic studies with a combined NPV of $23.6 billion and declared “world-first” nodule reserves. [13]
- In its NOAA application announcement, TMC also described resource estimates for exploration areas in the CCZ, including very large “wet tonnes” figures and contained metal estimates (company-provided figures). [14]
These milestones help explain why the stock can behave like a “concept rocket”: when the market is risk-on and policy headlines look favorable, investors start treating TMC less like a loss-making explorer and more like an embedded call option on future U.S.-aligned critical minerals supply.
Korea Zinc, processing capacity — and the “can this be refined outside China?” question
Even if nodules can be collected, they still must be processed and refined into usable products. That’s where a major 2025 partnership storyline comes in.
TMC announced in June 2025 that Korea Zinc agreed to a strategic investment of approximately $85.2 million, purchasing 19.6 million shares and receiving warrants (with an exercise price cited at $7.00), becoming a roughly 5% shareholder after closing, according to the release. [15]
The same release said Korea Zinc was evaluating a bulk sample of nodule material and expressed interest in working with TMC USA on processing/refining capacity and potentially battery-materials manufacturing in the United States. [16]
Fast-forward to this week: Reuters reported Korea Zinc’s plan to build a $7.4 billion smelter project in the U.S., a move framed around supply-chain security and strategic minerals. [17]
And a Reuters item tied to the Korea Zinc story noted that Korea Zinc had agreed earlier in the year to help process polymetallic nodules from TMC, and added that TMC had asked President Trump to issue it an international seabed mining permit. [18]
For TMC investors, the strategic logic is clear: if nodules can be permitted and recovered, and if credible non-Chinese processing routes exist, TMC becomes more than a speculative miner — it becomes a potential supply-chain asset aligned with U.S. industrial policy.
Macro tailwinds: copper near record highs and the U.S. critical minerals list expands
TMC’s basket includes copper, and copper has been a major theme in 2025 reminders that “electrification eats metal.”
On Dec. 19, Reuters reported copper prices near record highs, citing tight supply concerns and long-term demand expectations; the report also noted copper was up more than 35% in 2025. [19]
Separately, the U.S. government’s definition of “critical” changed in a way that directly supports TMC’s narrative:
The U.S. Geological Survey and Department of the Interior announced the final 2025 List of Critical Minerals, which includes copper among newly added minerals, expanding see-it-everywhere policy language around domestic and allied mineral security. [20]
Reuters also covered copper’s addition to the critical minerals list, linking the designation to trade dynamics and the broader policy climate. [21]
TMC itself pointed to this shift in its Q3 update, noting that copper’s addition meant all four key nodule metals are now on the U.S. critical minerals list (company framing). [22]
Forecasts and analyst outlook: price targets cluster around the mid-to-high single digits — but confidence varies
Forecasting TMC is tricky because standard valuation models struggle with “no revenue yet + huge optionality + uncertain permits.” Still, analysts publish price targets, and retail-facing data aggregators summarize them.
Here’s how the current landscape looks around Dec. 19, 2025:
- MarketBeat described coverage as mixed, citing a consensus “Hold” and an average target price around $7.42, while noting H.C. Wainwright raised its target to $7.50 with a “Buy” rating (per MarketBeat’s recap). [23]
- Investing.com’s consensus page (as surfaced in search results) reported an average 12‑month target around $8.8, with a high estimate of $12 and a low estimate of $6.5, and characterized the consensus as “Strong Buy” based on the analysts tracked there. [24]
- WallStreetZen listed an average target of $9.25 (with a high of $11.00 and low of $7.50) based on its tracked analysts. [25]
How to read this: The Street isn’t modeling TMC like a mature miner. Targets are effectively probability-weighted guesses about (1) permits, (2) financing, and (3) whether deep-sea mining becomes politically “allowed” in practice.
The bull case vs. the bear case — in plain English
Why bulls think TMC stock still has upside
Bulls see TMC as a rare intersection of:
- Critical minerals scarcity fears (nickel/cobalt/copper/manganese)
- U.S. industrial policy momentum (executive branch support + NOAA pathway) [26]
- A plausible pathway to non-China processing partnerships (Korea Zinc) [27]
- Technical milestones that help the story feel more “mine-like” and less “science-project-like” (PFS/reserves/NPV headlines) [28]
In that world, today’s volatility is just the market repeatedly repricing the same giant question: “Is TMC about to become first?”
Why bears think TMC could still break hearts (and wallets)
Bears point to three heavy risks:
1) Global political and legal resistance may intensify, not fade.
AP reported more than 30 countries calling for a ban/pause/moratorium and noted major corporate pledges not to use seafloor minerals. [29]
2) Environmental and human-rights concerns are becoming more institutionally mainstream.
On Dec. 15, U.N. human rights experts commended Norway’s decision to halt issuance of deep-sea mining licenses until at least end‑2029, framing it as a precautionary move for ocean protection and human rights. [30]
Euronews also reported Norway’s decision not to issue licenses during the current legislative term through 2029, underscoring the political sensitivity of seabed mining even inside national waters. [31]
3) The company is still a cash-burning developer.
Even with substantial liquidity, the Q3 2025 net loss and ongoing operating cash use are real — and delays can eventually become dilution or debt, no matter how exciting the story sounds. [32]
Motley Fool’s recent coverage captured that tension: huge past performance, but meaningful risk if the regulatory and execution path doesn’t materialize on optimistic timelines. [33]
What investors are watching next
For TMC, the next catalysts are less about drill results and more about paperwork, policy and politics:
- NOAA permitting progress on TMC’s DSHMRA exploration and commercial recovery applications [34]
- The evolution of NOAA’s process, including the agency’s discussion of consolidating parts of the review pathway (as outlined in NOAA’s public guidance) [35]
- Continued development of U.S.-aligned processing/refining capacity narratives — especially anything that connects nodules to real-world downstream production [36]
- And, in the shorter term, whether the current options-driven momentum fades after expirations or rolls forward into new positioning [37]
The takeaway
On Dec. 19, 2025, TMC stock is moving like a policy-linked volatility vehicle — not like a normal metals producer. The combination of unusual call-option activity, U.S. critical minerals tailwinds, and ongoing debate over how (and whether) deep-sea mining can be permitted keeps the stock in a perpetual state of “priced for possibility.”
That can be exhilarating. It can also be financially carnivorous.
For investors, the cleanest mental model may be this: TMC is a bet on regulatory approval and geopolitical alignment first, and a mining company second. Until permits and commercialization become concrete, the stock’s biggest swings are likely to keep seeing-sawing between hope, backlash, and the occasional options-fueled rocket boost.
References
1. www.fool.com, 2. www.marketbeat.com, 3. www.tipranks.com, 4. www.axios.com, 5. oceanservice.noaa.gov, 6. metals.co, 7. www.congress.gov, 8. www.reuters.com, 9. apnews.com, 10. investors.metals.co, 11. investors.metals.co, 12. www.globenewswire.com, 13. www.sec.gov, 14. metals.co, 15. investors.metals.co, 16. investors.metals.co, 17. www.reuters.com, 18. www.reuters.com, 19. www.reuters.com, 20. www.usgs.gov, 21. www.reuters.com, 22. investors.metals.co, 23. www.marketbeat.com, 24. www.investing.com, 25. www.wallstreetzen.com, 26. oceanservice.noaa.gov, 27. investors.metals.co, 28. www.sec.gov, 29. apnews.com, 30. www.ohchr.org, 31. www.euronews.com, 32. investors.metals.co, 33. www.fool.com, 34. metals.co, 35. oceanservice.noaa.gov, 36. investors.metals.co, 37. www.marketbeat.com
