LAC Year-to-Date Performance: How High Can It Go?

Lithium Americas Corp. (LAC) has re-entered the spotlight after spending most of 2025 in accumulation and seemingly forming a bottom. Other stocks have seen similar patterns where they spend a long time forming a bottom before trending higher. Notably, LAC has had an impulsive rally in Q4 of 2025 and has since been in a cool-off period.

After a sharp, impulsive advance earlier in the year, the stock has since faded, leaving behind unresolved technical questions: unfilled gaps, key retracement levels, and weakening momentum indicators. Relative performance adds another layer of complexity. LAC’s behavior versus LIT, precious metals, and historical analogues suggests the stock may be at an inflection point rather than in a clear trend.

This article looks at LAC from a technical and relative-value perspective—examining where it sits within the lithium ETF ecosystem, how current price action compares to past cycles, and whether recent weakness is a pause within a larger move or a warning signal. The goal is not to predict a single outcome, but to frame the range of scenarios now confronting investors.

LAC Technical Analysis

LAC experienced a sharp, impulsive advance in September 2025, characterized by strong momentum and expanding ranges. Such moves often signal a shift in market perception, but they also tend to leave the stock vulnerable to consolidation or retracement once buying pressure subsides. Currently, it has been in a downtrend for around 12 weeks at the time of writing and could finally settle in the 3.50–4.00 USD range, though it is not guaranteed to happen.

The impulsive move left behind an unfilled gap around the 3.31 USD level. From a technical perspective, gaps created during fast advances frequently act as magnets during corrective phases. A retracement into this area would not necessarily invalidate the broader structure and could be a potentially buying opportunity and a useful signal for investors to prepare for a possible continuation. Whether the gap is filled soon or much later remains to be seen and it can also happen on a wick rather than a close.

When viewed relative to the LIT ETF, LAC appears to be oscillating within a defined range rather than trending decisively. This suggests that recent price action may be driven more by sector-wide forces than by stock-specific outperformance. Until a clear relative breakout occurs, LAC may continue to move broadly in line with the lithium equity complex. While the range can be broken, it is something to keep in mind as price approaches either of these two ends. The hopeful scenario would be to bounce of the lower range and go back up to the upper range.

PALL has seen a similar pattern of impulsive advances and retracement, though its retracements were weaker. When comparing LAC to PALL, the retracement has already been completed potentially, and it could signal a shift from PALL to the lithium sector.

In contrast, LAC’s relative performance versus silver has already broken down, pointing to near-term underperformance against precious metals. This divergence may reflect a broader preference for defensive or monetary metals during periods of uncertainty, while growth-oriented materials such as lithium consolidate.

Fibonacci retracement analysis could show potential areas for future rallies. The last rally went as high as the 0.382 Fibonacci level approximately and has since consolidated. While the Fibonacci levels are not guaranteed to be reached, they can be a useful indicator of potential a future rebound.

Momentum indicators reinforce the cautious near-term picture. RSI appears to be drifting toward its trend line, while stochastic RSI remains weak. This combination often accompanies corrective or sideways phases, suggesting that momentum has not yet reset sufficiently to support another sustained advance. Once the RSI hits the trend line and depending on where price is at that time and what the broader market sentiment is, it could potentially become a good buying opportunity along with strengthening momentum (increasing SRSI). Currently, these classical indicators point rather to weakness and consolidation then strength.

A historical comparison with LAC’s 2013–2014 price behavior highlights similarities in structure, particularly the sequence of sharp advances followed by extended consolidations. While analogues should be used carefully, they can provide useful context for understanding how sentiment and positioning evolved in prior cycles. The RSI shows a similar trend line with higher lows forming on the RSI.

Extending that comparison to the current 2025–2026 period suggests that LAC may be following a familiar rhythm: impulse, correction, and range-building before any potential continuation. Whether history repeats again will depend on the broader market conditions at that time, though this analogue could be useful to reason about how a future move could behave.

In the 2013–14 cycle, LAC had two notable rallies where LAC appreciated as much as 200% respectively 300% in value. When following this analogue, the first rally has already been completed in Q4 of 2025 with a move of around 260%. Given the previous comparisons and measured-move projections, one longer-term scenario allows for another rally phase that could carry LAC into the 14–17 USD range which would correspond to a 300 to 400% move. Such an outcome would put LAC between the 0.5 and 0.618 Fibonacci levels. Whether this scenario occurs as outlined remains to be seen as LAC could very well go higher than the bullish case outlined here. At the same time, it could break below 3.31 USD in a sustained fashion and become uninteresting.

Pitfalls

Keep in mind that this is a dubious speculation that may or may not occur. LAC might be more bullish than the analysis of the article or more bearish depending on how market sentiment evolves in the future. Indicators do not tell the future with absolute certainty. They are useful to reason about the future, and it is important to balance both bullish and bearish scenarios to avoid bias as best as possible. Lastly, all indicators are prone to failure every now and then. They tend to work well for a while, but eventually, some indicators fail, while others do not at a given time. As more data comes in, the analysis will evolve to incorporate new moves, invalidate a previous hypothesis or gain evidence for a previous idea.

Conclusion

LAC shows an interesting future if it were to play out like this. Whether it makes sense to wait until the gap is filled or one of the support levels is reached or to simply follow a DCA (dollar cost average) approach is up to each individual investor. The potential for a significant rally exists, but so do risks of further consolidation or a breakdown lower. Lastly, there is also the idiosyncratic risk to be taken into account since LAC might be affected by company-specific risks which the general market is not subjet to.