Skip to main content
Main analysis: Alltrade Recycling In 2025: The Local Plants Are Working, But The Growth Engines Still Need Proof
ByMarch 30, 2026~8 min read

Alltrade Recycling: The Dollar, Metal Prices And The Settlement Window, How Much Of Profit Still Stays Open To The Commodities Market

Alltrade Recycling’s FX exposure is not a footnote: 82.6% of recycling revenue is exposed mainly to the dollar, and part of the metals flow keeps profit open for another 30 to 120 days. In 2025, shekel appreciation already ran through financing expense and cut net profit by about NIS 2.0 million after tax.

CompanyAlltrade

What This Follow-Up Is Isolating

The main article already dealt with growth and execution. This follow-up isolates a narrower issue, but a very important one for earnings quality: how much of the economics is truly closed when material is shipped, and how much still remains open to the dollar and metal prices even after the sale looks done.

At Alltrade Recycling, this is not noise. 82.6% of recycling revenue is exposed to foreign currencies, mainly the dollar, while most of the cost base, including labor, stays in shekels. On top of that sits another layer: in part of the refining and metals flow, final price fixation and final settlement happen only after shipment, sometimes after a 30 to 60 day window, and in precious metals even after 90 to 120 days.

That is the core point here. The company already showed in 2025 that this exposure is not theoretical. Shekel appreciation of about 12.5% versus 2024 increased financing expense from FX differences by NIS 2.2 million, and after tax reduced net profit by about NIS 2.0 million. At the same time, commodity-hedging expense rose to NIS 0.733 million. The result is that profit that can look fairly clean on an operating read still stays exposed to the market, both through financing expense and through the settlement window itself.

What is working is clear: overseas sales already rose to NIS 58.6 million in 2025 out of total revenue of NIS 72.7 million. Export is no longer secondary, it is central. What is still not closed is the exposure-management regime. On FX, the company explicitly says it does not hedge currency fluctuations. On metals, it has hedging tools, but uses them at management discretion and in line with sales, not through a hard policy that automatically closes the full window.

Sales In Israel Versus Overseas

The FX Layer, The Exposure Does Not End At Sale

The FX story is broader than the fact that the customer pays in dollars. The company describes risk in cash balances, financial assets, and receivables, and explicitly says that receivables risk comes from the period between billing the customer and collecting the cash. In other words, the exposure also sits on the balance sheet, not only on the transaction at the moment of shipment.

At the end of 2025, the company had NIS 18.254 million of dollar-linked balances in cash and receivables, versus NIS 13.943 million a year earlier. Within that, dollar-linked receivables rose to NIS 10.314 million from NIS 8.271 million. That suggests the exposure is growing with activity, rather than staying at the level of a theoretical export discussion.

The sensitivity test reinforces the same point. A reasonably possible 5% move in the dollar changes profit or loss by NIS 0.913 million in 2025, versus NIS 0.603 million in 2024. When sensitivity rises together with overseas sales, the company gains more from shekel weakness, but the hit from shekel strength also reaches the bottom line more forcefully.

Dollar-Linked Cash And Receivables
Profit Sensitivity To A 5% Dollar Move

The important point is not simply that the company is exposed to the dollar. That is almost obvious for an exporter. The real point is that, as of the report date, the company chooses not to hedge FX fluctuations. So if export growth continues without a different exposure-closing policy, profit volatility can rise with it.

The Metals Layer, Not Every Sale Is Economically Closed On Shipment

The contracts with refineries make clear that the final price is not always the point at which the transaction is economically closed. In one mechanism, the fixation price is set according to the average price in the month when the refinery confirms the metal content of the shipment. In another, the company may choose the fixation date starting from a period of 30 to 60 days after waste is transferred to the refinery, once content has been examined.

Cash collection is not uniform either. In part of the agreements, consideration is paid no earlier than 90 days after the waste reaches the customer’s yard. In others, the company receives an advance shortly after arrival, and only the balance is paid after the final metal extraction report. In precious metals, the settlement mechanism is even longer: the extraction stage lasts 90 to 120 days, and payment is based on the quoted price on the settlement date. That means the group is exposed to metal value from export date until collection date.

What can mislead a superficial read is that this risk does not require most of the waste stream by weight. Management estimates that only up to about 10% of the weight of treated electronic waste contains precious metals, yet that layer represents a meaningful part of group revenue. In 2025, materials containing precious metals generated NIS 20.642 million of revenue. So even an economically open window on a relatively small share of tonnage can still matter a great deal for profit.

Exposure layerWhat sets price or collectionHow long the exposure can stay openWhy it matters
Refining transactions with refineriesFixation price by monthly average or by company choice30 to 60 days after transfer to the refineryLME pricing and the dollar can still move before fixation
Part of the payment agreementsPayment no earlier than 90 days after waste arrivalA long collection windowExposure stays in receivables and does not close on shipment
Precious metalsPayment based on the price at settlement date90 to 120 days on averageThe metals market can still reshape transaction economics through the extraction period
Other metals sold on future pricingFuture price until arrival and acceptance by the customer30 to 60 days, depending on the customer and contractMargin stays open to commodity volatility after export

The gap is two-sided. On the one hand, the company does use hedging tools in metals. It has had a clearing agreement since January 2021, and as of the financial-statement approval date it uses commodity futures, at management discretion, matched to metal sales in order to reduce price risk. On the other hand, the company also says it does not usually enter into forward contracts for precious metals as a standing policy, but rather evaluates each transaction individually. So this is not a model where every profit stream is automatically locked. It is a model where part of the exposure is managed selectively and part remains open.

What Already Ran Through Financing Expense

Anyone looking only at operating profit can miss where the exposure already hurt. Net financing expense jumped to NIS 6.008 million in 2025, versus NIS 0.993 million in 2024. Management ties the increase mainly to three factors: shekel appreciation, a loss on commodity hedging, and higher financing expense following the first-time consolidation of Electro Recycling in the second half of 2024.

The financing note sharpens the picture even more. Out of NIS 6.202 million of gross financing expense, NIS 2.243 million came from FX differences, NIS 0.733 million from commodity hedging, and NIS 2.146 million from credit-related financing expense. Financing income of NIS 0.194 million offset only a small part of that amount. This is not exposure that hides only in gross margin or inside an operating explanation. It already ran through financing expense and reduced net profit in practice.

2025 Financing-Expense Components

Precision matters here. Not all of the NIS 6.0 million reflects an FX or commodity problem. There is also normal bank financing, fees, and group-structure effects. But the shekel appreciation effect alone already cut about NIS 2.0 million from net profit after tax, roughly a fifth of annual net profit. That means anyone reading 2025 only through growth, or only through improvement in recycling activity, is missing an important part of earnings quality.

What Needs To Be Checked Next

The next test is not whether Alltrade Recycling can grow exports. That is already visible. The test is whether it can turn that growth into profit that still belongs to it after currency, time, and commodity exposure are fully included.

The first signal will be whether dollar receivables and FX sensitivity keep climbing alongside revenue, or whether the company starts to close the collection window faster. The second will be whether commodity hedging becomes a volatility-smoothing tool, or keeps reappearing in financing expense as an additional source of noise. The third is the quality of growth itself: as export becomes a larger share of activity, the company will need to show that margin does not depend only on a favorable metal market or a favorable dollar, but on a tighter exposure-management regime.

Conclusion

The thesis here is simple: at Alltrade Recycling, part of profit is still not closed when the shipment leaves the gate. As long as 82.6% of recycling revenue is exposed mainly to the dollar, as long as dollar receivables remain meaningful, and as long as part of the metals flow closes only after a 30 to 120 day window, earnings quality will depend not only on operating execution but also on exposure management.

The counter-thesis is clear too. One can argue that 2025 was unusual because of a sharp shekel appreciation, and that in metals the company does use futures and advances that reduce part of the risk. That is a fair argument. But until a more consistent FX-closing policy shows up, and until the open settlement window becomes smaller, profit remains more exposed than the operating headline alone suggests.

Disclosure: Deep TASE analyses are general informational, research, and commentary content only. They do not constitute investment advice, investment marketing, a recommendation, or an offer to buy, sell, or hold any security, and are not tailored to any reader's personal circumstances.

The author, site owner, or related parties may hold, buy, sell, or otherwise trade securities or financial instruments related to the companies discussed, before or after publication, without prior notice and without any obligation to update the analysis. Publication of an analysis should not be read as a statement that any position does or does not exist.

The analysis may contain errors, omissions, or information that changes after publication. Readers should review official filings and primary sources before making decisions.

Found an issue in this analysis?Editorial corrections and sharp feedback help keep the coverage honest.
Report a correction