IperionX Ltd.
A Critical Analysis of Commercial Viability and Valuation Concerns
Download Report
IperionX Ltd.
Letter to IPX Audit Committee Member
Download Report 2
IperionX Ltd.
Download Report 3
IperionX Ltd.
Download Report 4
IperionX Ltd.
Download Report 5
IperionX Ltd.
Download Report 6
IperionX Ltd.
Download Report 7

Research Overview

INDEX:
S&P 500
Sector:
Materials
Position:
Short
Date:
Nov 12, 2025

After conducting a forensic review of IperionX Ltd. (Nasdaq / ASX: IPX or “the Company”) and its ambitions of becoming a vertically integrated producer (mining to production) of titanium powders and products, we believe that investor expectations are too high, and it faces significant challenges in commercial efforts that may not be fully reflected in its valuation. We also express concerns with the accuracy of its financial reporting. We applaud IPX’s desire to reshore the U.S. titanium supply chain with a lower cost and more environmentally friendly production process and think management is competent and capable. However, we do not believe the end markets to be attractive or that its highly promoted HAMRTM process is likely to “revolutionize” the industry or displace the 70-year established Kroll process. As such, we question IPX’s economic rationale for expanding capacity when it has few customer contracts and no historical revenue. Originally a penny stock named TAO Commodities, then Hyperion Metals, and now IperionX, the Company has a $1.2 billion market cap and is trading at 9.7x and 24x book value and 2026E revenues vs. the specialty metal industry median of 1.4x and 1.8x, respectively. Based on our analysis, we believe investors should exercise caution because the shares may be significantly overvalued, with potential downside risk of 70% - 95% under certain scenarios outlined in this report.

The report highlights several key concerns with the Company, including:

  • IPX management and technical advisors have significant overlap with Piedmont Lithium (Nasdaq/ASX: PLL) which faced allegations from two short sellers that it was a stock promotion with ties to a banned Australian stockbroker and had various financial and operational shortcomings. PLL collapsed in value, merged and changed names. We identified other ventures where IPX management promoted large resources and clear paths to predictable, strong cash flows, but which failed to produce anything, including Paringa Resources (now Terra Metals) and Coalspur Mines. While these examples do not represent all of management’s experience at public company ventures and the ones that faced difficulties do not necessarily indicate future performance issues at IPX, investors should consider their track record alongside other factors.
  • Even if IPX reaches scaled production, based on our research, the end markets are not attractive. The titanium powder market is already oversupplied with 3.5x more capacity than shipments. Fasteners are also highly competitive with the market being consolidated and dominated by large players.
  • We question the scalability and likelihood of success of IPX’s promoted HAMR technology which it believes can displace the 70-year-old established Kroll process. The technology appears to have been passed over by its initial commercial partners Boeing and Arconic and was acquired for only a modest premium to its decade-long R&D cost. We also identify other promising technologies that were intended to compete against the Kroll process but ultimately failed to scale from the lab to sustained commercial production.
  • We express concerns with IPX’s claim that the HAMR process can succeed with titanium scrap feedstock and identify a potential barrier to scale. The alternative is that IPX uses ore from its Titan mining project in Tennessee, but we see that project as challenged and having fallen short of its initial timeline. IPX described a potential offtake partner as a Japanese conglomerate but just this week a Japanese conglomerate invested in a similar mining project in Australia.
  • Other partnership and customer announcements do not appear to have resulted in much and future revenue remains uncertain. We’ve analyzed each of IPX’s partner and customer announcements and spoke with experts familiar with the business. Some partnerships have expired, while others IPX no longer references. There is enthusiasm around a Ford contract estimated to generate ~$11 million starting in 2025 but no revenues have been booked and IPX listed no inventory on its balance sheet (raw materials or finished goods) at fiscal year end and no inventory purchases through September 30th, so we question if any revenues are imminent.
  • We identify concerns with financial and operational reporting including discrepancies with Titan’s acreage, capex, G&A costs and employee counts. IPX recently had a material weakness of internal controls but says it was remediated. A recent site visit to IPX’s U.S. headquarters revealed what appeared to be an empty office with stacked boxes, mail on the ground, and outdated investor materials.
  • The Company is valued at a substantial premium to other specialty metal companies with revenue and production while IPX faces continued revenue uncertainties and has yet to completely demonstrate it can scale production to its desired goal of 1,400 and eventually 10,000 tpa.

Update - December 1, 2025:

Spruce Point has uncovered concerning evidence of what may be, in our opinion, a breach of duty by IPX CEO Taso Arima related to undisclosed entities he appeared to control through IperionX called PowerChem Inc., PowerChem Land, LLC and its subsidiary GX Technologies, LLC (“GX”), while also serving as CEO of Hyperion Metals (now IPX). The situation of these entities involves a similar investment story to IPX: promote an exciting industrial technology, in this case related to graphene oxide. The contact email in two PowerChem public filings is accounting@iperionx.com and we cannot find these entities referenced in U.S. securities filings.

Last week we sent a letter to IPX audit committee chair Tony Tripeny detailing our findings and suggesting the Company form a committee with the assistance of an independent forensic investigator to confirm the accuracy of both IPX’s financial reporting and the affairs of Mr. Arima concerning his participation in PowerChem and GX. We are now releasing that letter publicly, it can be viewed at the link on the left side of the page.

This letter presents our analysis of publicly available information. We recognize that there may be reasonable explanations for the matters described therein, and we encourage the audit committee to conduct its own independent investigation to determine the facts and whether any disclosure obligations or conflicts existed. Our purpose is to bring these matters to the committee's attention for proper review, not to convey definitive conclusions.

Downloads & More

Research Assets & Releases

Press Releases

Nothing posted currently

Broadcast Coverage

Nothing posted currently

Join The Mailing List

Spruce Point Alerts & Updates

See the other side of the Wall Street hype machine.