There is a long-standing debate on which are the fundamental drivers of crude oil price. The main question concerns on which factors, market fundamentals, economic, (geo)political or other prevail on the formation of crude oil price. The dominant role of OPEC has been identified in previous decades. However, over the last years, the sharp penetration of shale oil producers, sharp decreases of crude oil prices, significant losses in balance sheets of OPEC members challenge the dominant role of OPEC and their potential to affect the crude oil prices. There is an extended literature review on oil prices and their main drivers. Many researchers conclude that oil price can be explained by

Oil prices have had considerable surges and bursts since the first oil crisis of 1973. Until then its price was stable, with almost zero volatility. Since then, apart from the two oil crises of 1973 and 1978/9, oil prices had consecutive bubble episodes like the surges up to 2008 and 2014 and their successive bursts, respectively. The trace of these bubble periods is of crucial importance for policymakers, since their drivers and consequences impact global economic developments. Phillips et al. and Phillips et al. methodologies are applied to detect whether West Texas Intermediate prices experienced bubble periods. Both methodologies suggest that WTI prices experienced explosive episodes, which could be fundamentally, speculatively, or politically attributed. Some suggested periods coincide for both methods, but the second methodology seems to be more sensitive than its predecessor is, leading to better bubble detection but also to identification of non-existent bubbles. The identified bubble periods are compared to relevant research in the literature concerning their presence, duration, and explosiveness. The main goal of the research, apart from the detection of bubbles’ presence and duration, is to identify the causal underlying reasons for each explosive episode. Further, we compare the start and endpoints of each bubble episode with time-points when structural changes occurred. The contribution of the paper is that it clearly defines the bubble episodes with their corresponding drivers. The paper identifies the importance of market fundamentals’ swifts in explaining the bubble periods. The findings of the papers can help policymakers and other stakeholders to monitor oil price shifts and their underlying reasons, and then proceed with prompt actions. Since bubble episodes are fundamentally explained, then the practical utility is that by focusing on the market fundamentals, stakeholders can avoid actions that could result in market failures.

The paper examines both the time-varying price and volatility transmission between US natural gas and crude oil wholesale markets, over the period 1990–2017. Short iterations suggest that neither commodity determines other’s returns, but sub-periods with very short-lived causal relationships exist. It can be asserted that the markets are decoupled, where unconventional production further enhances the already established commodities’ independence. Using Momentum Threshold Autoregressive (MTAR) cointegration methodology, we find evidence of positive asymmetry from crude oil to natural gas prices, i.e., oil price increases cause faster adjustments to natural gas prices than decreases. We also find that an 1% change of oil price has positive and significantly larger long-term impact (between 0.01% to 0.02%) to the gas price, compared to the negligible impact of gas to oil. Volatility transmission is examined using the Dynamic Conditional Covariance (DCC)-Generalized Autoregressive Conditional Heteroscedasticity (GARCH) methodology, presenting their time-varying correlation. Results show that both commodities influence each other’s volatility at the aggregate level. Finally, we conclude that both regional commodity markets are liquid and integrated, where the market fundamentals drive their price formulation. However, although markets are decoupled and not appropriate for perfect hedging of each other, the existence of bidirectional volatility transmission and their substitutability might be useful for diversified portfolio allocation.

No abstract

No abstract