Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Wed Mar 21, 2018 6:26 pm

jalbert wrote:
Wed Mar 21, 2018 1:38 pm
Intuitively though that fits with my mental model of when i want to invest in commodity futures. i.e. when Commodity producers (think corn farmers) are worried about falling prices, the curve is in backwardation, they are willing to pay up for price insurance for the coming harvest and i am selling it to them. and then as events play out corn prices "do" fall but not as much as was feared and i make money off the roll.
Or they fall further than projected. On average, I think it will balance out, and the long term expected real return of commodities is zero.
right that is definitely a possibility. I would agree that for spot prices the long term expected real return is zero. One could even make an argument i suppose that for spot prices the expected real return is negative due to technological improvements etc (easier to grow corn, etc.)

the question is whether the commodity futures curve being in backwardation is a reliable signal that there are "risk premia" to be had in the commodities futures market. I don't know the answer. I certainly wouldn't bet more than 5% of my risk portfolio on such a bet. Vanguard for example has a 5% allocation in the Vanguard managed payout fund to commodity futures. that level seems to me like it could be appropriate. But i personally wouldn't make that bet now with commodities broadly in contango.
RIP Mr. Bogle.

Northern Flicker
Posts: 4138
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 12:29 am
Location: Taking a break from Bogleheads

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by Northern Flicker » Thu Mar 22, 2018 1:01 am

My belief is that the expected real return of a commodities investment is zero whether or not futures contracts are used. Including a small stake in commodities in a portfolio likely reduces volatility. I think the only source of positive real return is a rebalancing premium.
Taking a break from Bogleheads.

psteinx
Posts: 2928
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 2:24 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by psteinx » Thu Mar 22, 2018 1:37 pm

grok87 wrote:
Wed Mar 21, 2018 6:26 pm
right that is definitely a possibility. I would agree that for spot prices the long term expected real return is zero. One could even make an argument i suppose that for spot prices the expected real return is negative due to technological improvements etc (easier to grow corn, etc.)
I would say that, in fact, it's PROBABLE that the the long term real price of the average physical commodity is negative.

Inflation is roughly the sum of inflation on physical goods and on services. The latter has a higher labor component, and, IMO, is less subject to productivity improvements. Prices of physical stuff in general are likely, IMO, to increase (nominally) at less than the total (services included) rate of inflation.

I would think that if you looked at most of the important agricultural yields, they've increased sharply over most long measured horizons (a decade or three, or the last century). One might think that for mined/drilled commodities (gold, iron, oil, etc.) that depletion would cause real prices to increase. I'm on less firm ground here - speculative - but I suspect that most of these are holding close to even or decreasing in real prices. Yes, the readily accessible stuff (closer to the surface) depletes, but I suspect that technology & technique improvements over time (i.e. fracking, etc.) more than offset this...

EDIT: Tweaked some.

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:21 am

april report is out
https://data.bloomberglp.com/promo/site ... utlook.pdf
as page 18 the index is still in contango, in fact it is getting worse, now at -3.3% vs -1.8% last month (negative means contango , positive backwardation)

(energy though has moved into more backwardation at 5.1% vs 4.5% last month. )

so i'm still staying away for now...
RIP Mr. Bogle.

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Sun May 06, 2018 7:27 am

may report is out
https://data.bloomberglp.com/promo/site ... utlook.pdf

as per page 5 the index is still in contango at -2.3%
energy however is in backwardation

to paraphrase Aragorn in LOTR- "a day may come [when it is time to invest in a broad commodity index]..but it is not this day"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXGUNvIFTQw
:)

my current thinking on commodities is as follows:
1) it may be a long wait but eventually i think the broad commodity index will move into backwardation
2) at that point i think investing in commodities is going to seem like the stupidest thing in the world to do.
3) i'm hoping i have the discipline to do it anyway based on this thread

cheers,
grok
RIP Mr. Bogle.

lack_ey
Posts: 6639
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2014 11:55 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by lack_ey » Sun May 06, 2018 10:43 am

Do you have good insights or studies on actually how predictive the term structure generally is of forward return for commodity futures? To some degree the curve can represent changing expectations of future spot prices, and it's not an indication of a risk premium on one side or the other.

I recall seeing this:

Image

https://www.aqr.com/-/media/AQR/Documen ... ptions.pdf

The carry predictor there is based on the term structure. I mean, it looks predictive if maybe not statistically significantly so under many assumptions, maybe not so much that it's worth using for market timing so heavily. I suppose where there is a known causal mechanism you don't need the empirical evidence to be as strong to be sufficiently convinced of something, but it's not that amazing here.

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Sun May 06, 2018 1:17 pm

lack_ey wrote:
Sun May 06, 2018 10:43 am
Do you have good insights or studies on actually how predictive the term structure generally is of forward return for commodity futures? To some degree the curve can represent changing expectations of future spot prices, and it's not an indication of a risk premium on one side or the other.

I recall seeing this:

Image

https://www.aqr.com/-/media/AQR/Documen ... ptions.pdf

The carry predictor there is based on the term structure. I mean, it looks predictive if maybe not statistically significantly so under many assumptions, maybe not so much that it's worth using for market timing so heavily. I suppose where there is a known causal mechanism you don't need the empirical evidence to be as strong to be sufficiently convinced of something, but it's not that amazing here.
thanks.
i wonder why it is important to have an equal volatility weighted portfolio of commodities?

i think i agree with your point ("To some degree the curve can represent changing expectations of future spot prices, and it's not an indication of a risk premium on one side or the other.")
if i was super convinced that backwardation was the key to everything i would be buying some sort of oil/energy commodity fund right now- if there were any cheap ones that don't issue k-1s.

but i think may come a day when people throw in the towel on commodities and everything moves into backwardation. we'll see i guess...
RIP Mr. Bogle.

lack_ey
Posts: 6639
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2014 11:55 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by lack_ey » Sun May 06, 2018 1:33 pm

grok87 wrote:
Sun May 06, 2018 1:17 pm
i wonder why it is important to have an equal volatility weighted portfolio of commodities?
It's not so much important as their baseline portfolio for evaluation. I suppose it would be diversified by risk, most so if correlations were equal (which is not true).

How would you weight commodities? Some kind of production weighting? Or modified with caps? Equal weighting? BCOM has the arbitrary caps of min 2% / max 15% for a single commodity and no sector above 33%.

Weighting is always a big question when evaluating commodities.

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Mon May 07, 2018 5:02 pm

lack_ey wrote:
Sun May 06, 2018 1:33 pm
grok87 wrote:
Sun May 06, 2018 1:17 pm
i wonder why it is important to have an equal volatility weighted portfolio of commodities?
It's not so much important as their baseline portfolio for evaluation. I suppose it would be diversified by risk, most so if correlations were equal (which is not true).

How would you weight commodities? Some kind of production weighting? Or modified with caps? Equal weighting? BCOM has the arbitrary caps of min 2% / max 15% for a single commodity and no sector above 33%.

Weighting is always a big question when evaluating commodities.
Agree.
Weighting based on volatility seems to be an aqr thing though. Maybe it is a hedge fund thing? It goes along with their volatility targeting approach in general.

I think its problematic on a couple of levels.

1) it's the wrong measure of risk. I care about downside risk (what i can lose) not standard deviation (sd). Distributions in investing are almost never normally distributed so volatility (sd) tells you nothing about downside risk. Either they inherently have fat tails (like stocks) or investments like hedge funds are engineered to have low standard deviation but high blow up risk.

2) market value is a good measure of risk for stocks and stock indexes. For individual stocks i figure i can lose the whole thing. For stock indices i figure i can lose half.

3) the problem with using volatility to weight anything is that when it goes up you are a forced seller. And that can create a death spiral. It's going to be like the role of portfolio insurance in the 1987 crash all over again.
https://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/19/busi ... treet.html

Don't mean to preach stuff you already know. For the benefit of others who are reading...
:)
Cheers,
Grok
RIP Mr. Bogle.

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Tue Jun 05, 2018 12:58 pm

June report is out not.
https://data.bloomberglp.com/promo/site ... utlook.pdf

Not much change from last month. Broad market in contango of -2%.
RIP Mr. Bogle.

Dudley
Posts: 104
Joined: Tue May 09, 2017 5:34 am

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by Dudley » Thu Jun 07, 2018 6:31 am

grok87 wrote:
Tue Jun 05, 2018 12:58 pm
June report is out not.
https://data.bloomberglp.com/promo/site ... utlook.pdf

Not much change from last month. Broad market in contango of -2%.
Grok : And if at some point you did decide to put money into commodities exactly which funds would you choose ? Many have either high fees or have nuisance K1s. Those that do not are small funds and hence suffer from light volume and risk of closure.

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Thu Jun 07, 2018 10:18 am

Dudley wrote:
Thu Jun 07, 2018 6:31 am
grok87 wrote:
Tue Jun 05, 2018 12:58 pm
June report is out not.
https://data.bloomberglp.com/promo/site ... utlook.pdf

Not much change from last month. Broad market in contango of -2%.
Grok : And if at some point you did decide to put money into commodities exactly which funds would you choose ? Many have either high fees or have nuisance K1s. Those that do not are small funds and hence suffer from light volume and risk of closure.
Hi Dudley,
Good question. So far the most interesting fund i’ve Found that appears to address both your concerns is bcd or maybe bci

http://www.etf.com/BCD

What do you think?
Cheers,
Grok
RIP Mr. Bogle.

Dudley
Posts: 104
Joined: Tue May 09, 2017 5:34 am

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by Dudley » Thu Jun 07, 2018 12:59 pm

The big problem I see with BCD (I actually have a teeny bit in it..) is that it only has $4M AUM. Liquidity/spread aside who knows how long their managers will keep it alive if it doesn't grow.

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Thu Jul 26, 2018 6:35 am

July report is out
https://data.bloomberglp.com/profession ... -July1.pdf
See page 18 for backwardation/contango

Broad index still in contango at -2.3%

Ie still not time to invest in commodities yet.

But energy in backwardation at 6%
Livestock also at +4.1%

Rest in contango
Industrial metals -0.3%
Precious metals -3.0%
Agriculture -7.5%

Cheers,
Grok
RIP Mr. Bogle.

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Sat Aug 04, 2018 11:06 am

still not time to invest in commodities.

https://data.bloomberglp.com/promo/site ... utlook.pdf

see page 15. broad commodities index is in contango of -3.6% which is 1.4% points worse than where it was last month.

that being said i still think the situation is worth monitoring with all the uncertainty and volatility internationally.

cheers,
grok
RIP Mr. Bogle.

boglerdude
Posts: 655
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2015 1:28 am

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by boglerdude » Sat Aug 04, 2018 9:43 pm

DBC is actively managed, they adjust for contango?

http://www.etf.com/DBC

desafinado
Posts: 138
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 3:14 am

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by desafinado » Sun Aug 05, 2018 12:35 am

I think I understand why expected real return for ags/softs spot should be zero or negative but I'm not sure I understand why that's the case for the fossil fuel complex or possibly metals? Obviously in the energy space you can substitute for fossil fuels but there are some places where you can't...

User avatar
market timer
Posts: 5977
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 1:42 am

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by market timer » Sun Aug 05, 2018 1:31 am

What is the idea behind waiting for backwardation? I haven't seen where this has any predictive power for returns.

Some commodities that are cheap to store and have low consumption, such as gold, rarely trade in backwardation. Contango in the gold market arises from the cost of capital. The forward curve of gold is basically the future value of the spot price, extrapolated using the risk-free rate. This relationship is maintained through arbitrage.

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Sun Aug 05, 2018 7:11 am

boglerdude wrote:
Sat Aug 04, 2018 9:43 pm
DBC is actively managed, they adjust for contango?

http://www.etf.com/DBC
not sure i trust the idea of active management. and the e.r. is 0.88%
RIP Mr. Bogle.

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Sun Aug 05, 2018 7:27 am

market timer wrote:
Sun Aug 05, 2018 1:31 am
What is the idea behind waiting for backwardation? I haven't seen where this has any predictive power for returns.

Some commodities that are cheap to store and have low consumption, such as gold, rarely trade in backwardation. Contango in the gold market arises from the cost of capital. The forward curve of gold is basically the future value of the spot price, extrapolated using the risk-free rate. This relationship is maintained through arbitrage.
see this post upthread and ensuing discussion
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=243986#p3828240
RIP Mr. Bogle.

Valuethinker
Posts: 37017
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:07 am

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by Valuethinker » Sun Aug 05, 2018 9:49 am

desafinado wrote:
Sun Aug 05, 2018 12:35 am
I think I understand why expected real return for ags/softs spot should be zero or negative but I'm not sure I understand why that's the case for the fossil fuel complex or possibly metals? Obviously in the energy space you can substitute for fossil fuels but there are some places where you can't...
Remember though it is demand at the margin which shifts price. If a meaningful proportion of cars shift to EVs, or even to natural gas,. That hits the oil price.

Oil is a very energy dense, valuable feedstock. Aviation fuel does not have easy substitutes. The floor price of oil in the long run tends to be the new supplies at the margin. Oil sands, deep offshore, fracking. Say 60 to 80 dollars a barrel. But small shifts in usage will tend to push prices down.

Natural gas is not particularly valuable per unit. But it's the likely substitutefor coal for electricity and heating. A growth fuel at least in the short to medium term. Main constraint is not supply but transport location and capacity.

Coal is a shrinking fuel. See the capacity factors on Indian powerplants which are dreadful. It's unlikely even the new capacity in emerging markets will fully offset shrinkage in developed countries.

Because of the high fixed cost nature of the fossil fuels industry, lost demand can provoke disproportionate falls in price.

User avatar
nedsaid
Posts: 10931
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 12:33 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by nedsaid » Sun Aug 05, 2018 6:48 pm

grok87 wrote:
Sat Aug 04, 2018 11:06 am
still not time to invest in commodities.

https://data.bloomberglp.com/promo/site ... utlook.pdf

see page 15. broad commodities index is in contango of -3.6% which is 1.4% points worse than where it was last month.

that being said i still think the situation is worth monitoring with all the uncertainty and volatility internationally.

cheers,
grok
Well, I would say the returns from Commodity funds are very discouraging. I noticed that in the Fidelity Funds network that the best 10 year returns were a -6.41% annual return. No thank you.
A fool and his money are good for business.

Theoretical
Posts: 1443
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 10:09 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by Theoretical » Mon Aug 06, 2018 4:38 am

grok87 wrote:
Sun Aug 05, 2018 7:11 am
boglerdude wrote:
Sat Aug 04, 2018 9:43 pm
DBC is actively managed, they adjust for contango?

http://www.etf.com/DBC
not sure i trust the idea of active management. and the e.r. is 0.88%
The better one is PDBC which is actively managed on the collateral and uses a wholly owned Cayman sub to make it a ‘40 Act fund with no K-1. It’s .59 now. There’s several other cotango managed ETFs that are much cheaper than PDBC while also being 1988

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Mon Aug 06, 2018 4:57 am

Theoretical wrote:
Mon Aug 06, 2018 4:38 am
grok87 wrote:
Sun Aug 05, 2018 7:11 am
boglerdude wrote:
Sat Aug 04, 2018 9:43 pm
DBC is actively managed, they adjust for contango?

http://www.etf.com/DBC
not sure i trust the idea of active management. and the e.r. is 0.88%
The better one is PDBC which is actively managed on the collateral and uses a wholly owned Cayman sub to make it a ‘40 Act fund with no K-1. It’s .59 now. There’s several other cotango managed ETFs that are much cheaper than PDBC while also being 1988
thanks that does look interesting. so PDBC is a sister fund to DBC?
RIP Mr. Bogle.

Theoretical
Posts: 1443
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 10:09 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by Theoretical » Mon Aug 06, 2018 5:34 am

Yes, because what it does to avoid being a commodity pool is (1) actively manage the collateral and (2) hold the commodities in question in a Cayman sub. The commodity part is pretty-strictly index.

Dudley
Posts: 104
Joined: Tue May 09, 2017 5:34 am

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by Dudley » Mon Aug 06, 2018 5:52 am

what do you think of CMDY ? (iShares, new so currently low vol and AUM, er=0.28%, no K1)

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Mon Aug 06, 2018 6:18 am

Dudley wrote:
Mon Aug 06, 2018 5:52 am
what do you think of CMDY ? (iShares, new so currently low vol and AUM, er=0.28%, no K1)
i like the low expense ratio. it's hard to understand this fund's strategy. i think it is actively managed? on both the commodities side and the collateral? would prefer and index approach on the commodities
RIP Mr. Bogle.

Theoretical
Posts: 1443
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 10:09 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by Theoretical » Mon Aug 06, 2018 7:52 am

This one is the one you’re looking for. Index futures and active collateral. .29%

BCI

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Mon Aug 06, 2018 7:57 am

Theoretical wrote:
Mon Aug 06, 2018 7:52 am
This one is the one you’re looking for. Index futures and active collateral. .29%

BCI
thanks, much appreciated. i think this fund was mentioned upthread as well...
RIP Mr. Bogle.

Dudley
Posts: 104
Joined: Tue May 09, 2017 5:34 am

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by Dudley » Mon Aug 06, 2018 7:59 am

I have a tiny bit of BCI and BCD. I think the big problem with BCI, BCD and CMDY is volume is so low. I wonder if anyone will offer them commission free. Also with low AUM if they don't grow I feel risk is they get closed out. I would be inclined to spread any purchase of commodity over multiple funds.

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Thu Aug 09, 2018 5:10 am

Dudley wrote:
Mon Aug 06, 2018 7:59 am
I have a tiny bit of BCI and BCD. I think the big problem with BCI, BCD and CMDY is volume is so low. I wonder if anyone will offer them commission free. Also with low AUM if they don't grow I feel risk is they get closed out. I would be inclined to spread any purchase of commodity over multiple funds.
yes this happened to me. i used to own CSCR and it got closed out.
RIP Mr. Bogle.

User avatar
ReformedSpender
Posts: 263
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2018 1:24 pm
Location: Stone's Throw from Vanguard

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by ReformedSpender » Thu Aug 09, 2018 7:50 am

Fun with numbers - total returns over the last 7 years:
Nasdaq 100: +289%
S&P 500: +193%
Bloomberg Commodity Index: -43%

:beer
Market history shows that when there's economic blue sky, future returns are low, and when the economy is on the skids, future returns are high. The best fishing is done in the most stormy waters.

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Thu Aug 09, 2018 7:54 am

ReformedSpender wrote:
Thu Aug 09, 2018 7:50 am
Fun with numbers - total returns over the last 7 years:
Nasdaq 100: +289%
S&P 500: +193%
Bloomberg Commodity Index: -43%

:beer
thanks
RIP Mr. Bogle.

User avatar
Sammy_M
Posts: 1890
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 8:30 am

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by Sammy_M » Wed Aug 22, 2018 1:27 pm

Bumping this thread. BCD looks very interesting given the 0.29% ER and longer-dated futures to reduce roll impacts (both + and -).

What are the issues with investing in a fund with low AUM if you hold in tax-advantaged and use a limit order set near the intraday indicative value?

Dudley
Posts: 104
Joined: Tue May 09, 2017 5:34 am

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by Dudley » Wed Aug 22, 2018 6:28 pm

re BCD : Volume is very low. Now its a free trade at Vanguard could help by breaking order up into smaller chunks. But I'm wary of stability/lifetime of such a small fund.

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Thu Aug 23, 2018 6:05 am

Sammy_M wrote:
Wed Aug 22, 2018 1:27 pm
Bumping this thread. BCD looks very interesting given the 0.29% ER and longer-dated futures to reduce roll impacts (both + and -).

What are the issues with investing in a fund with low AUM if you hold in tax-advantaged and use a limit order set near the intraday indicative value?
well i think most commodities are still in contango. so there is likely to be a negative roll impact even with a longer dated futures fund, just delayed?
RIP Mr. Bogle.

User avatar
Sammy_M
Posts: 1890
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 8:30 am

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by Sammy_M » Thu Aug 23, 2018 7:24 pm

grok87 wrote:
Thu Aug 23, 2018 6:05 am
well i think most commodities are still in contango. so there is likely to be a negative roll impact even with a longer dated futures fund, just delayed?
Fewer rolls though?

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Thu Aug 23, 2018 7:26 pm

Sammy_M wrote:
Thu Aug 23, 2018 7:24 pm
grok87 wrote:
Thu Aug 23, 2018 6:05 am
well i think most commodities are still in contango. so there is likely to be a negative roll impact even with a longer dated futures fund, just delayed?
Fewer rolls though?
yes i suppose you're right.
RIP Mr. Bogle.

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Sun Oct 14, 2018 9:40 am

latest data out, october report, data as of end of september
https://data.bloomberglp.com/promo/site ... utlook.pdf

bloomberg commodity index still shows material contango at -3.1%. so not time to buy collateralized commodity futures (CCF) yet.
see page 21
cheers,
grok
RIP Mr. Bogle.

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Sat Nov 17, 2018 6:32 pm

latest data out as of end of october. contango for the bcom index has gotten worse now at -3.4% or -0.3% points worse .
https://data.bloomberglp.com/profession ... r-2018.pdf
see page 16.

so not time to invest in commodities (i.e. CCFs) yet.
RIP Mr. Bogle.

User avatar
hdas
Posts: 606
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 8:24 am

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by hdas » Sat Nov 17, 2018 7:40 pm

grok87 wrote:
Sun May 06, 2018 1:17 pm

i wonder why it is important to have an equal volatility weighted portfolio of commodities?
Cambell R. Harvey et al argue that:
The bottom line is that in this sample, the average
return of the average commodity futures contract
is not statistically different from zero or, stated
differently, the average commodity futures has an
average geometric “risk premium” of zero. It is
intriguing, however, that a rebalanced and equally
weighted portfolio of these commodity futures had
an average excess return of 4.5 percent—which is
significantly greater than zero. Thus, an important
question for investors considering a long-only
investment in commodity futures is: How can a
portfolio have equity-like returns when the average
and median returns of the portfolio’s constituents
are zero?
The geometric return of a rebalanced portfolio
can significantly exceed the weighted-average geometric
return of its constituents if the securities in
the portfolio have low correlations with one another
and the securities have high average standard deviations.
For investors used to investing in unrebalanced
bond and stock portfolios, the significance of
this observation may or may not seem obvious.
Do read the whole thing.
"whenever there is a randomized way of doing something, then there is a nonrandomized way that delivers better performance but requires more thought" ET Jaynes

User avatar
hdas
Posts: 606
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 8:24 am

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by hdas » Sat Nov 17, 2018 7:45 pm

jalbert wrote:
Thu Mar 22, 2018 1:01 am
My belief is that the expected real return of a commodities investment is zero whether or not futures contracts are used. Including a small stake in commodities in a portfolio likely reduces volatility. I think the only source of positive real return is a rebalancing premium.
no need for it to be a belief, it's an empirical fact. However, notice that some commodities, including oil, copper have excess returns. Also don't forget about the re balancing effect at portfolio level (equally weighted), due to high variability and low correlation. See Campbell Harvey et. al

Image
"whenever there is a randomized way of doing something, then there is a nonrandomized way that delivers better performance but requires more thought" ET Jaynes

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Sun Nov 18, 2018 5:44 am

hdas wrote:
Sat Nov 17, 2018 7:40 pm
grok87 wrote:
Sun May 06, 2018 1:17 pm

i wonder why it is important to have an equal volatility weighted portfolio of commodities?
Cambell R. Harvey et al argue that:
The bottom line is that in this sample, the average
return of the average commodity futures contract
is not statistically different from zero or, stated
differently, the average commodity futures has an
average geometric “risk premium” of zero. It is
intriguing, however, that a rebalanced and equally
weighted portfolio of these commodity futures had
an average excess return of 4.5 percent—which is
significantly greater than zero. Thus, an important
question for investors considering a long-only
investment in commodity futures is: How can a
portfolio have equity-like returns when the average
and median returns of the portfolio’s constituents
are zero?
The geometric return of a rebalanced portfolio
can significantly exceed the weighted-average geometric
return of its constituents if the securities in
the portfolio have low correlations with one another
and the securities have high average standard deviations.
For investors used to investing in unrebalanced
bond and stock portfolios, the significance of
this observation may or may not seem obvious.
Do read the whole thing.
thanks.
table 6 is interesting. it seems to suggest that for the period 1982-2004 the driver of commodity futures excess returns (that is returns over tbills) was driven by the "roll return".

for the average of 12 commodities

excess return = spot return + roll return

-1.7% = 0.5% + -2.2%

spot returns were slightly positive but close to zero- basically kept up with tbills which i guess are a proxy for inflation.
but that small positive return was wiped away by negative roll return, presumably because commodity futures were in contango.

for the GSCI the figures for this period were:

4.5% = 1.9% + 2.6%

cheers,
grok
RIP Mr. Bogle.

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Fri Dec 14, 2018 5:29 pm

RIP Mr. Bogle.

staythecourse
Posts: 6343
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 9:40 am

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by staythecourse » Fri Dec 14, 2018 6:21 pm

grok87 wrote:
Sun Nov 18, 2018 5:44 am
spot returns were slightly positive but close to zero- basically kept up with tbills which i guess are a proxy for inflation.
but that small positive return was wiped away by negative roll return, presumably because commodity futures were in contango.
Correct. 2 out of the 3 sources of returns on CCF should be zero in real terms. Spot price follows inflation and the margin (tbills) follows inflation. So returns or losses should be all up to the roll return.

BTW, if folks are interested in CCF remember MOST (except one I know of) are market to market when it comes to taxation. That means the IRS treats all returns as being sold at the end of the year tax wise even if they are or aren't. That means all returns are treated as short term cap. gains. That is a HUGE hurdle to overcome in a taxable account. The only one I know that isn't market to market (outside of ETNs) is: GSG which follows GSCI (heavy on oil) but is structured as a CERF (3 or 5 year contract).

Good luck.
"The stock market [fluctuation], therefore, is noise. A giant distraction from the business of investing.” | -Jack Bogle

User avatar
aspirit
Posts: 269
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2018 12:52 am
Location: Bos/Mia-south

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by aspirit » Fri Dec 14, 2018 6:36 pm

tag* disscussion.... :happy
Time & tides wait for no one. A man has to know his limitations. | "Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes it's laws" | — Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild ~

Topic Author
grok87
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg commodities index still in contango

Post by grok87 » Fri Dec 14, 2018 6:40 pm

staythecourse wrote:
Fri Dec 14, 2018 6:21 pm
grok87 wrote:
Sun Nov 18, 2018 5:44 am
spot returns were slightly positive but close to zero- basically kept up with tbills which i guess are a proxy for inflation.
but that small positive return was wiped away by negative roll return, presumably because commodity futures were in contango.
Correct. 2 out of the 3 sources of returns on CCF should be zero in real terms. Spot price follows inflation and the margin (tbills) follows inflation. So returns or losses should be all up to the roll return.

BTW, if folks are interested in CCF remember MOST (except one I know of) are market to market when it comes to taxation. That means the IRS treats all returns as being sold at the end of the year tax wise even if they are or aren't. That means all returns are treated as short term cap. gains. That is a HUGE hurdle to overcome in a taxable account. The only one I know that isn't market to market (outside of ETNs) is: GSG which follows GSCI (heavy on oil) but is structured as a CERF (3 or 5 year contract).

Good luck.
thanks
RIP Mr. Bogle.

Post Reply