A note on price futures versus revenue futures contracts

Here we consider the hedging roles of a price futures contract versus a revenue futures contract. In the absence of idiosyncratic output risk, the revenue contract almost always dominates the price contract. Idiosyncratic output risk provides conditions under which the price contract should dominate. When production risk is largely idiosyncratic, a producer with an anticipated long actuals position might combine a long revenue futures position with a short price futures position. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Jrl Fut Mark 24:503–512, 2004     

When stock futures dominate price discovery

This paper revisits the role of leverage in price discovery, using one of the most liquid single-stock futures (SSFs) markets in the world. Price discovery is analysed as a dynamic intraday process. We find that the information share of the SSFs is 55% during news arrivals. It increases to 61%, when the news is negative and the futures is preferred because of short-sales restrictions on the spot. A partial equilibrium analysis predicts that the trade-off between leverage and market liquidity determines price discovery across securities. These predictions are validated by empirical evidence.     

Substitution between revenue futures and price futures contracts: A note

In recent years, commercial interest has been expressed in agricultural revenue insurance instruments. Participating parties may look to futures markets to offset assumed positions. In this note, conditions are identified such that revenue futures contracts are perfect substitutes for price futures contracts. If these conditions approximate reality, then it would seem questionable whether sufficient interest would exist to sustain markets in both futures contracts. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Jrl Fut Mark 22:387–391, 2002     

Managed futures,positive feedback trading,and futures price volatility

A major issue in recent years is the role that large, managed futures funds and pools play in futures markets. Many market participants argue that managed futures trading increases price volatility due to the size of managed futures trading and reliance on positive feedback trading systems. The purpose of this study is to provide new evidence on the impact of managed futures trading on futures price volatility. A unique data set on managed futures trading is analyzed for the period 1 December 1988 through 31 March 1989. The data set includes the daily trading volume of large commodity pools for 36 different futures markets. Regression results are unequivocal with respect to the impact of commodity pool trading on futures price volatility. For the 72 estimated regressions (two for each market), the coefficient on commodity pool trading volume is significantly different from zero in only four cases. These results constitute strong evidence that, at least for this sample period, commodity pool trading is not associated with increases in futures price volatility. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Jrl Fut Mark 19: 759–776, 1999     

石油期货价格与交易头寸的关系分析

本文采用多空头寸比值的新处理方法,保持了头寸变化的方向。研究发现:石油期货价格引导了投资资金顺势而为,是推动两种期货交易净头寸变动的格兰杰原因;两类期货交易净头寸不是推动或平抑石油价格的手段,两类场内期货交易者都是价格接受者,其交易活动不能成为石油期货价格变动的显著推动力,说明石油期货市场并没有因为投机而失去价格发现功能。     

Modeling seasonality in agricultural commodity futures

The stochastic behavior of agricultural commodity prices is investigated using observations of the term structures of futures prices over time. The continuous time dynamics of (log‐) commodity prices are modeled as a sum of a deterministic seasonal component, a non‐stationary state‐variable, and a stationary state‐variable. Futures prices are established by standard no‐arbitrage arguments and the Kalman filter methodology is used to estimate the model parameters for corn futures, soybean futures, and wheat futures based on weekly data from the Chicago Board of Trade for the period 1972–1997. Furthermore, in a discussion of the estimated seasonal patterns in agricultural commodity prices, the paper provides empirical evidence on the theory of storage that predicts a negative relationship between stocks of inventory and convenience yields; in particular, convenience yields used in this analysis are extracted using the Kalman filter. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Jrl Fut Mark 22:393–426, 2002     

Large trades and intraday futures price behavior

This study examines the effects of large trades executed by outside customer on the prices of futures contracts traded on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. We find that, on average, large buyer-initiated trades have a larger permanent price impact (information effect) than large seller-initiated trades, whereas the opposite is found for the temporary price impact (liquidity effects) of large trades. These results are consistent with previous findings for block and institutional trades in equity markets. However, we also find that the information effects of large sells are larger than large buys in bearish markets, whereas the results are the reverse in bullish markets. The liquidity price effects of buys are larger than the liquidity price effects of sells in bearish markets whereas the reverse results hold in bullish markets. Our results are consistent with the hypothesis that the current economic condition is a key determinant of asymmetric price effects between large buys and large sells. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Jrl Fut Mark 28:1147–1181, 2008     

Cash trading and index futures price volatility

This study examines the effect of cash market liquidity on the volatility of stock index futures. Two facets of cash market liquidity are considered: (1) the level of liquidity trading proxied by the expected New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) trading volume and (2) the noise composition of trading proxied by the average NYSE trading commission cost. Under the framework of spline–GARCH with a liquidity component, both the quarterly average commission cost and the quarterly expected NYSE volume are negatively associated with the ex ante daily volatility of S&P 500 and NYSE composite index futures. Conversely, liquidity and noise trading in the cash market both dampen futures price volatility, ceteris paribus. This negative association between secular cash trading liquidity and daily futures price volatility is amplified during times of market crisis. These results retain statistical significance and materiality after controlling for bid–ask bounce of futures prices and volume of traded futures contracts. This study establishes empirical evidence to affirm the conventional prediction of a liquidity–volatility relationship: the liquidity effect is secular and persistent across markets. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Jrl Fut Mark 31:465–486, 2011