a b s t r a c tA strong increase in the demand for some commodities over the last decade will have a major impact on their future supply situation. Of increasing importance, therefore, is an assessment of a commodity's criticality, and especially its supply risk, by appropriate indicators. The literature has proposed numerous indicators of the supply risk. Here, we use the convenience yield of commodity futures as a supply risk indicator to address some of the major shortcomings of existing indicators, especially regarding their predictive power. This paper aims to test the applicability of the convenience yield as an indicator of a commodity's future supply risk. Therefore, we calculate historical convenience yields for 3-, 15-, and 27-month futures contracts for five major industrial metals (aluminum, copper, lead, nickel, and zinc) during the period 1999 to 2011. We compare the convenience yields at the beginning of the contract period to known indicators at maturity to find that the convenience yield has generally predictive power for the static stock lifetime (i.e., inventory volume/turnover) and future spot prices. Furthermore, we find that, with some restrictions, the convenience yield is an applicable indicator of a commodity's supply risk.
Metals are very important resources for industrial production, but recently they have attracted more and more attention from investors. While certainly industrial producers, consumers, and financial investors do have some influence on metal price development, the role of relevant price factors is not yet quite clear. Therefore, in this paper we examine the explanatory power of various fundamental factors and characteristics known from financial markets, specifically on the expected returns in a unique data sample of 30 metals. We applyto our knowledge for the first time in this contextthe widely accepted method of characteristicsorted portfolios, extended by the very recent method of two-way portfolio sorts as an alternative to classical multivariate regressions. This mostly non-parametric approach, combined with portfolio aggregation, provides very robust results. Our major finding is that the financial characteristics value and momentum have a very high predictive power for monthly returns of metal portfolios. Metal-specific fundamental factors like stocks, secondary production, apparent consumption, country concentration, mine production, or reserves perform depending on the interpretation moderately well or rather poorly, regarding some economically interpretable transformations and when using multivariate two-way sorts. Hence, from the perspective of expected returns, metals are predominantly assets, while fundamental metal-specific factors still play a non-negligible role. Thus, to a much lesser extent, metals can still be regarded as resources. Overall, the combination of financial characteristics and metal-specific fundamental factors yields the best results. With these robust results, we hope to contribute to a better understanding of metal prices and their underlying factors.
Commodity future prices are explained either by price expectations and a risk premium in the theory of normal backwardation or with the theory of storage in a cost of carry valuation. Both approaches are compared in separate equations with Johansen cointegration tests. The data sample contains five LME metals with maturities of 3–27 months and real inventory data. It is found that expected spot prices explain only short maturity future prices. But the cost of carry approach, with the inventory level-dependent convenience yield, explains prices for all maturities.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.