AMU Survey: Lead times fall as demand rises

August aluminum lead times reset lower

August produced the first unanimous stable qualitative lead time result in the survey’s history dating back to April 2025.

Producers, manufacturers and assemblers, distributors and traders, and scrap recyclers and processors all reported stable lead times.

July partially returned to “extending,” before reverting to steady lead times in August. In July, 32% reported extending lead times and 63% reported stability. Another 5% reported shrinking lead times.

The May-August progression gives the change more context. Extending responses accounted for 47% in May before falling to 19% in June. They rose to 32% in July, then disappeared in August.

The qualitative question can capture lead times at any point in the value chain. As a result, unanimous stability does not require every measured lead time to remain unchanged.

In fact, the measured figures show that several specific products became available more quickly.

Mill waits contract across most products

All three broad measured lead time categories declined in August.

Sheet

Average sheet lead times fell to just under 6.5 weeks from 7.88 weeks in July. The week-and-a-half decline brought the category to its lowest level since November 2025.

Common alloy sheet recorded the largest reversal. Lead times fell two-and-a-half weeks to six weeks in August.

Following the closure of the July survey, Kaiser Aluminum reported higher General Engineering shipments in the company’s second quarter earnings. Kaiser attributed part of the increase to service center inventory replenishment. That activity coincided with common alloy sheet lead times remaining above 8 weeks from May through July.

If that trend held broadly for common alloy sheet orders, the elevated lead times may have represented restocking rather than sustained consumption. The subsequent dip in lead times may be the result of the opening in mill availability.

Auto body sheet declined a little more than a week to 9 weeks. The August reading remained slightly above June’s 7.5 weeks.

Although the month-to-month decline was sharp, the August reading landed between May’s and June’s readings for the subcategory, returning lead times closer to their recent elevated range.

Can sheet edged a half-a-week higher to 6 weeks month over month, returning to its May reading. Though can sheet edged higher, the subcategory was still tied for shortest lead time.

Additional packaging volume has continued to enter the US market from the Aluminum Dynamics ramp-up. Additionally, Kaiser began raising packaging shipments, following the completion of its fourth coating line.

Extrusions

The decline in the aggregate extrusion category broadened beyond the 6061 contraction seen in July.

The 6063 mill-finish reading fell to 4.56 weeks in August, a roughly two-and-a-half week drop from July. Meanwhile, 6061 mill-finish extrusion fell for the second consecutive month to 3.5 weeks from 5 weeks the month prior.

Second-quarter company results provide some demand-side context for the decline. Hydro reported little year-over-year change in North American extrusion shipments, while Constellium’s automotive and other extrusion volumes were flat in the quarter. Kaiser reported a sharper decline in automotive extrusion shipments.

The July decline had come entirely through 6061, making the initial move less representative of the wider extrusion market. August changed that picture as both measured categories shortened.

Recent shipment data support some of the decline. Second-quarter company results similarly showed limited shipment growth among several North American extrusion producers.

Still, more recent indicators make continued demand deterioration a partial explanation at best for August. CRU noted separately that market feedback published in early August described buyers taking a wait-and-see approach to 2027 contract pricing amid expectations for lower LME and billet prices.

Imports provide a narrower supply-side factor. Aggregate extrusion imports did not see an increase through June.

US imports of hollow profiles, however, rose by a little less than 12% year over year. Heat-treatable hollow profiles, which accounted for about 81% of volume, increased roughly 10% with most of that growth concentrated in the first quarter. Non-heat-treatable hollow profiles increased by more than 23%, with most of that growth concentrated in the second quarter.

Primary

Primary showed a similar change in direction.

Billet lead times fell to 5.37 weeks from 7 weeks, reversing increases recorded in June and July.

European billet premiums also declined broadly heading into August, reducing Europe’s relative attractiveness as a destination for billet. That potentially eased one source of competition for supply compared with the initial US-Iran conflict concerns, when higher European premium raised the prospect of billet being drawn away from the US market.

P1020 or high-purity ingot remained at 4.5 weeks, ending its recent decline that began in April to May.

Stronger demand changes the interpretation

The measured declines did not accompany weaker overall demand.

The share reporting improving demand increased to 41% from 20% in July. Declining responses fell to 6% from 30%, while 53% reported stable conditions.

Manufacturers and assemblers split evenly between improving and stable demand, as did producers.

Recycler demand also shifted sharply. About 40% reported improving demand, while 60% reported stability. None reported declining demand after 40% did so in July.

About half of distributors and traders reported stable demand, while the remaining respondents split between improving and declining conditions.

The shift toward stable-to-improving demand limits the explanation for shorter measured lead times. Respondents reported stable-to-stronger demand in August while most measured products became available faster.

Production schedules and order mixes can still affect quoted lead times. Nevertheless, the survey places more weight on supply availability and available capacity than on weaker consumption.

Construction demand reverses while mill waits fall

Respondents serving the building and construction end market recorded the sharpest demand change.

Among non-recycler respondents serving the sector, 57% reported improving demand in August. The remaining 43% reported stable conditions. In July, about 67% of the comparable group reported declining demand, while 33% reported improvement.

Despite the shift, every August building and construction respondent reported stable qualitative lead times.

Measured products associated with the sectors also shortened. Common alloy sheet fell by 2.5 weeks. Both measured extrusion alloys declined as well.

Other supply measures moved substantially. About 60% said imports were becoming more competitive, while all July responses from the subcategory reported no change.

Meanwhile, 86% expected a balanced market three months forward, while only 14% expected undersupply. In July, two-thirds of comparable respondents expected undersupply.

Moreover, the construction results do not show every supply indicator becoming looser. They do show stronger current demand alongside shorter mill lead times and a much more balanced forward outlook.

Transportation concern eases

Transportation provided another useful end market breakdown.

In July, every non-recycler, transportation-serving respondent noted new US supply of primary and semi-fabricated aluminum wasn’t keeping up with demand. In August, the group was split between yes and no.

That could help explain why the lead times for auto body sheet contracted in the most recent survey results.

Import competitiveness changed even more. About 80% of transportation-related respondents said imports were becoming more competitive. Interestingly, the remaining 20% said imports were becoming less competitive and none noted “no change.”

Conversely, all July respondents reported “no change.”

Forward expectations of undersupply shrank as well. In July, 75% expected undersupply and 25% expected balance. By August, the group split at about 43% balanced and 43% undersupplied. The remaining 14% expected oversupply.

Still, current transportation demand did not change nearly as much. About 29% reported improving demand and 57% reported stability, while the remainder noted a decline. That share roughly correlated to the 60/40 split seen in July.

Overall, the transportation results showed less supply concern without a large deterioration in current demand.

Imports become a larger part of the supply picture

Import competitiveness produced one of August’s largest month-to-month survey changes.

About 45% of respondents said imported primary or semi-fabricated products were becoming more competitive, up from 10% in July. Another 45% reported no change.

The “more competitive” share was the second highest since the question began in July 2025. Only February 2026 recorded a higher result, at 57%.

The shift becomes more pronounced when recyclers are removed. About 63% of non-recycler respondents reported greater import competitiveness in August. Every comparable July respondent had selected no change.

Three-quarters of producers reported more competitive imports and two-thirds of distributors and traders did so.

Forward expectations swing toward balance

The three-month market balance recorded one of August’s clearest movements as well.

About 61% expected balanced conditions, up from 37% in July. That was the highest “balanced” share in the survey question’s history, which dates to March 2025.

The undersupplied share fell to 33% from 47%. Oversupplied expectations declined to 6% from 16%.

Again, removing recyclers makes the month-to-month reversal even sharper.

About 67% of non-recyclers expected balance in August. Only 25% expected undersupply, while 8% expected oversupply. In July, 67% of non-recyclers had expected undersupply, while the remaining third expected balance.

The question regarding how companies are currently managing inventory did not show a trend towards compensating for shortages either.

Across the aggregate respondent pool, “drawing down” responses eased to 33% from 40% in July. Meanwhile, 56% kept were keeping inventories steady. Among non-recyclers, 75% were holding inventories steady, while only 16% were drawing down.

Putting it together

The August survey results do not describe a market with uniformly abundant supply.

A majority maintain new US primary and semi-fabricated supply was not keeping pace with demand. Yet the question’s roughly year-and-a-half history is nearly evenly divided between “yes” and “no,” making the August result less indicative of an unusually constrained market when viewed across the whole series.

Shorter measured lead times, more competitive imports and a much stronger shift toward balanced three-month expectations all developed while current demand increased.

The combination of those factors makes greater material availability and available production capacity a more convincing explanation of August’s narrative trend exiting July.