|
Institutional
Investors Behind Food and Energy Price Inflation
By Michael W. Masters
Testimony of
Michael W. Masters
Managing Member / Portfolio Manager
Masters Capital Management, LLC
Before
the
Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs
United States
Senate,
May 20,
2008
Good morning and thank you, Mr.
Chairman and Members of the Committee, for the invitation to speak
to you today. This is a
topic that I care deeply about, and I appreciate the chance to share
what I have discovered.
I have been successfully managing a
long-short equity hedge fund for over 12 yearsand I have extensive
contacts on Wall Street and within the hedge fund community.
Itʼs important that you know that I am not currently involved
in trading the commodities futures
markets. I am not representing any corporate, financial, or lobby
organizations. I am speaking with you today as a concerned citizen
whose professional background has given me insight into a situation
that I believe is negatively affecting the
U.S.
economy. While some in
my profession might be disappointed that I am presenting this
testimony to Congress, I feel that it is the right thing to do.
You have
asked the question “Are Institutional
Investors contributing to food and energy price inflation?” And my
unequivocal answer is “YES.” In this testimony I
will explainthat Institutional
Investors are one of, if not the primary,
factors affecting commodities prices today.
Clearly, there are many factors that contribute to price
determination in thecommodities markets; I am here to expose a
fast-growing yet virtually
unnoticed factor, and one that presents a problem that can be
expediently corrected through legislativepolicy action.
Commodities prices have increased
more in the aggregate over the last five years than at any other
time in
U.S.
history.1
We have seen commodity price spikes occur in the past
as a result of supply crises, such as during the 1973 Arab Oil
Embargo. But
today, unlike previous episodes, supply is ample: there are no lines
at the gas pump and there is plenty of food on the shelves.
If supply is adequate - as has been
shown by others who have testified before thiscommittee2 -
and prices are still rising, then demand must be increasing.
But
how do you explain a continuing increase in demand when commodity
prices have doubled ortripled in the last 5 years?
What we are experiencing is a
demand shock coming from a new category of participant in the
commodities futures
markets: Institutional
Investors. Specifically, these are Corporate and Government Pension
Funds, Sovereign Wealth Funds, University Endowments and other Institutional
Investors. Collectively, these investors now account on average for
a larger share of outstanding commodities futures
contracts than any other market participant.3
These parties, who I call Index
Speculators, allocate a portion of their portfolios to
“investments” in the commodities futures
market, and behave very differently from the traditional speculators
that have always existed in this marketplace. I refer to them as
“Index” Speculators because of their investing strategy: they
distribute their allocation of dollars across the 25 key commodities
futures
according to the popular indices – the Standard & Poors - Goldman
Sachs Commodity Index and the Dow Jones -
AIG
Commodity Index.4
I’d like to provide a little
background on how this new category of “investors” came to exist.
In the early part of this decade,
some institutional
investors who suffered as a result of the severe equity bear market
of 2000-2002, began to look to the commodity futures
market as a potential new “asset class” suitable for institutional
investment. While the commodities markets have always had some
speculators, never before had major investment institutions
seriously considered the commodities futures
markets as viable for larger
scale
investment programs. Commodities looked attractive because they have
historically been “uncorrelated,” meaning they trade inversely to
fixed income and equity portfolios. Mainline financial industry
consultants, who advised large institutions
on portfolio allocations, suggested for the first time that
investors could “buy and hold” commodities futures,
just like investors previously had done with stocks and bonds.
Index Speculator Demand Is Driving
Prices Higher
Today, Index Speculators are
pouring billions of
dollars into the commodities futures
markets, speculating that commodity prices will increase. Chart One
shows Assets allocated to commodity index trading strategies have
risen from $13 billion at the end of 2003 to $260 billion as of
March 2008,5 and
the prices of the 25 commodities that compose these indices have
risen by an average of 183% in those five years!6

COMMODITY INDEX INVESTMENT COMPARED
TO S&P GSCI
SPOT
PRICE COMMODITY INDEX

19701972197419761978198019821984198619881990199219941996199820002002200420062008
Source: Goldman Sachs,
Bloomberg,
CFTC Commitments of Traders
CIT
Supplement,
MAR
According to the CFTC and spot
market participants, commodities futures
prices are the benchmark for the prices of actual
physical commodities, so when Index Speculators drive futures
prices higher, the effects are felt immediately in spot prices and
the real economy.7 So
there is a direct link between commodities futures
prices and the prices your constituents
are paying for essential goods.
The next table looks at the
commodity purchases that Index Speculators have made viathe futures
markets. These are huge numbers and they need to be put in
perspective tobe fully grasped.
In the popular press the
explanation given most often for rising oil prices is the increased
demand for oil from China. According to the DOE, annual Chinese
demandfor petroleum has increased over the last five years from 1.88
billion barrels to 2.8 billionbarrels, an increase of 920 million
barrels.8 Over
the same five-year period, IndexSpeculatorsʼ demand for petroleum futures
has increased by 848 million barrels.9
The increase in demand from Index Speculators is almost
equal to the increase in demandfrom China!
Commodity Purchases
By
Index Speculators The Last 5 Years
|
Sector Commodity
|
Units
|
Previous Futures
Market StockpileJanuary 1, 2003
|
Net Purchases Last 5¼
Years
|
Current Futures
Market StockpileMarch 12, 2008
|
|
Agricultural
Cocoa Coffee Corn Cotton Soybean Oil Soybeans Sugar Wheat
Wheat KC
|
Metric Tons Pounds
Bushels
Pounds Pounds
Bushels
Pounds
Bushels
Bushels
|
18,828 195,716,944
242,561,708 544,934,999 163,135,678 81,028,272 2,291,358,746
166,738,225 54,746,014
|
303,352 2,238,858,056
2,138,383,292 5,548,915,001 4,312,624,322 890,616,728
46,094,097,254 967,351,775 102,618,986
|
322,180 2,434,575,000
2,380,945,000 6,093,850,000 4,475,760,000 971,645,000
48,385,456,000 1,134,090,000 157,365,000
|
|
Livestock Feed Cattle Lean
Hogs Live Cattle
|
Pounds Pounds Pounds
|
104,446,612 517,414,747
669,766,732
|
365,453,388 3,827,425,253
5,099,033,268
|
469,900,000 4,344,840,000
5,768,800,000
|
|
Energy
Brent
Crude Oil WTI Crude Oil Gasoil Heating Oil Gasoline Natural
Gas
|
Barrels
Barrels
Metric Tons Gallons Gallons Million
BTUs
|
47,075,357 99,880,741
1,682,662 1,067,859,608 1,102,184,401 330,652,415
|
144,524,265 538,499,579
6,027,680 2,568,925,661 2,488,458,616 1,932,356,225
|
191,599,621 638,380,320
7,710,342 3,636,785,269 3,590,643,018 2,263,008,640
|
|
Base
Metals Aluminum Lead Nickel Zinc Copper
|
Metric Tons Metric Tons
Metric Tons Metric Tons Metric Tons
|
344,246 82,019 20,147
133,381 220,096
|
3,232,406 158,726 101,988
1,182,091 1,144,538
|
3,576,652 240,745 122,135
1,315,472 1,364,634
|
|
Precious Metals Gold Silver
|
Troy Ounces Troy Ounces
|
979,863 11,126,862
|
8,742,401 152,866,187
|
9,722,264 163,993,049
|
Sources:
Goldman Sachs, Standard & Poors, Dow Jones,
CFTC Commitments of Traders
CIT
Supplement, calculations
In fact, Index Speculators have now
stockpiled, via the futures
market, the equivalent of
1.1 billion barrels of petroleum,
effectively adding eight times as much oil to their own stockpile as
the United States has added to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve over
thelast five years.10
Let’s
turn
our attention to food prices, which have skyrocketed in the last six
months. When asked to
explain this dramatic increase, economists’ replies typically focus
on the diversion of a significant portion of the U.S. corn crop to
ethanol production.11 What
they overlook is the fact that Institutional
Investors have purchased over 2 billion bushels of corn futures
in the last five years. Right now, Index Speculators have stockpiled
enough corn futures
to potentially fuel the entire United States ethanol industry at
full capacity for a year.12
That’s equivalent to producing 5.3 billion gallons of
ethanol, which would make America the world’s largest ethanol
producer.13
Turning to
Wheat, in 2007 Americans consumed 2.22 bushels of Wheat per capita.14
At
1.3 billion bushels, the current
Wheat futures
stockpile of Index Speculators is enoughto supply every American
citizen with all the bread, pasta and baked goods they can eatfor
the next two years!
Index Speculator Demand
Characteristics
Demand for futures
contracts can only come from two sources: Physical Commodity
Consumers and Speculators. Speculators include the Traditional
Speculators who have always existed in the market, as well as Index
Speculators. Five years ago, Index Speculators were a tiny fraction
of the commodities futures
markets. Today, in many commodities futures
markets, they are the single largest force.15
The huge growth in their demand has gone virtually
undetected by classically-trained economists who almost never
analyze demand in futures
markets.
Index Speculator demand is
distinctly different from Traditional Speculator demand; it arises
purely from portfolio allocation decisions. When an Institutional
Investor decides to allocate 2% to commodities futures,
for example, they come to the market with a set amount of money.
They are not concerned with the price per unit; they will buy as
many futures
contracts as they need, at whatever price is necessary, until all of
their money has been “put to work.” Their insensitivity to price
multiplies their impact on commodity markets.
Furthermore, commodities futures
markets are much smaller than the capital markets, so
multi-billion-dollar allocations to commodities markets will have a
far greater impact on prices. In 2004, the total value of futures
contracts outstanding for all 25 index commodities amounted to only
about $180 billion.16 Compare
that with worldwide equity markets which totaled $44 trillion17,
or over 240 times bigger.
That year, Index Speculators poured $25 billion into these
markets, an amount equivalent to 14% of the total market.18

Commodity Futures
Market Size

Dollar Value of
Commercial Positions
Dollar Vale of Traditional
Speculators' Positions
Dollar Value of Index
Speculators' Positions
1998 1999
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
MAR
Source:
Bloomberg,
CFTC Commitments of Traders
CIT
Supplement, calculations
Chart Two shows this dynamic
at work.
As money pours into the markets, two things happen
concurrently: the markets expand and prices rise.
One particularly troubling aspect
of Index Speculator demand is that it actually
increases the more prices increase.
This explains the accelerating rate at which commodity futures
prices (and actual
commodity prices) are increasing. Rising prices attract more Index
Speculators, whose tendency is to increase their allocation as
prices rise. So their profit-motivated demand for futures
is the inverse of what you would expect from price-sensitive
consumer behavior.
You can see from Chart Two that
prices have increased the most dramatically in the first quarter of
2008. We calculate that Index Speculators flooded the markets with
$55 billion in just the first 52 trading days of this year.19
That’s an increase in the dollar value of outstanding
futures
contracts of more than $1 billion per trading day.
Doesn’t it seem likely that an increase in demand of this
magnitude
in the commodities futures
markets could go a long way in explaining the extraordinary
commodities price increases in the beginning of 2008?
There is a crucial distinction
between Traditional Speculators and Index Speculators:
Traditional Speculators provide liquidity by both buying and
selling futures.
Index Speculators buy futures
and then roll their positions by buying calendar spreads. They
never sell. Therefore, they consume liquidity and provide zero
benefit to the futures
markets.20
It is easy to see now that
traditional policy measures will not work to correct the problem
created by Index Speculators, whose allocation decisions are made
with little regard for the supply and demand fundamentals in the
physical commodity markets. If OPEC supplies the markets with more
oil, it will have little affect on Index Speculator demand for oil
futures.
If Americans reduce their demand through conservation measures like
carpooling and using public transportation, it will have little
affect on Institutional
Investor demand for commodities futures.
Index Speculators’ trading
strategies amount to virtual
hoarding via the commodities futures
markets. Institutional
Investors are buying up essential items that exist in limited
quantities for the sole purpose of reaping speculative profits.
Think about it this way: If Wall
Street concocted a
scheme
whereby investors bought large amounts of pharmaceutical drugs and
medical devices in order to profit from the resulting increase in
prices, making these essential items unaffordable to sick and dying
people, society would be justly outraged.
Why is there not outrage over the
fact that Americans must pay drastically more to feed their
families, fuel their cars, and heat their homes?
Index Speculators provide no benefit
to the futures
markets and they inflict atremendous cost upon society.
Individually, these participants are not acting with
malicious intent; collectively, however, their impact reaches into
the wallets of every American consumer.
Is it necessary for the U.S.
economy to suffer through yet another financial crisis created by new
investment techniques, the consequences of which have once againbeen
unforeseen by their Wall Street proponents?
The CFTC Has Invited Increased
Speculation
When Congress passed the Commodity
Exchange Act in 1936, they did so with the understanding that
speculators should not be allowed to dominate the commodities futures
markets. Unfortunately,
the CFTC has taken deliberate steps to allow certain speculators virtually
unlimited access to the commodities futures
markets.
The CFTC has granted Wall Street
banks an exemption from speculative position limits when these banks
hedge over-the-counter swaps transactions.21
This has effectively opened a loophole for unlimited
speculation. When Index Speculators enter into commodity index
swaps, which 85-90% of them do, they face no speculative position
limits.22
The really shocking thing about the
Swaps Loophole is that Speculators of all stripes can use it to
access the futures
markets. So if a hedge fund wants a $500 million position in Wheat,
which is way beyond position limits, they can enter into swap with a
Wall Street bank and then the bank buys $500 million worth of Wheat
futures.23
In the CFTC’s classification
scheme
all Speculators accessing the futures
markets through the Swaps Loophole are categorized as “Commercial”
rather than “Non-Commercial.” The result is a gross distortion in
data that effectively hides the full impact of Index Speculation.
Additionally, the CFTC has recently
proposed that Index Speculators be exempt from all position limits,
thereby throwing the door open for unlimited Index Speculator
“investment.”24
The CFTC has even gone so far as to issue press
releases on their website touting studies
they commissioned showing that commodities futures
make good additions to Institutional
Investors’ portfolios.25
Is this what Congress expected when
it created the CFTC?
Congress Should Eliminate The
Practice Of Index Speculation
I would like to conclude my
testimony today by outlining three steps that can be taken to
immediately reduce Index Speculation.
Number One:
Congress has closely regulated
pension funds, recognizing that they serve a public purpose.
Congress should modify ERISA regulations to prohibit commodity index
replication strategies as unsuitable pension investments because of
the damage that they do to the commodities futures
markets and to Americans as a whole.
Number Two:
Congress should act immediately to
close the Swaps Loophole. Speculative position limits must
“look-through” the swaps transaction to the ultimate counterparty
and hold that counterparty to the speculative position limits. This
would curtail Index Speculation and it would force
ALL
Speculators to face position limits.
Number Three:
Congress should further compel the
CFTC to reclassify all the positions in the Commercial category of
the Commitments of Traders Reports to distinguish those positions
that are controlled by “Bona
Fide” Physical Hedgers from those controlled by Wall Street banks.
The positions of Wall Street banks should be further broken
down based on their OTC swaps counter-party into “Bona
Fide” Physical Hedgers and Speculators.
There are hundreds of billions of
investment dollars poised to enter the commodities futures
markets at this very moment.26 If
immediate action is not taken, food and energy prices will rise
higher still. This could have catastrophic economic effects on
millions of already stressed U.S. consumers. It literally could mean
starvation for millions of the world’s poor.27
If Congress takes these steps, the
structural
integrity of the futures
markets will berestored. Index Speculator demand will be virtually
eliminated and it is likely that food and energy prices will come
down sharply.
APPENDIX: HOW TO CALCULATE INDEX
SPECULATORS’ POSITIONS
If someone knows how much money is
invested in the total index then it is easy to calculate how much
must be in each commodity in dollars and in futures
contracts.
Total Dollars Invested
X Weight Of Individual
= Dollars In Individual
In Index Commodity Commodity
Total Dollars Invested
X Weight Of Individual
/ Dollar Value Of A
= # Of Contracts In An
In Index Commodity Commodity Contract Individual Commodity
And therefore if someone knows how
many contracts are in an individual commodity along with the dollar
value of a contract and the weight of that commodity in the index
then you can calculate the total dollars invested in the index as
follows:
# Of Contracts In An Dollar Value
Of A Weight Of Individual Total Dollars Invested
Individual Commodity
X Commodity Contract
/ Commodity
= In Index
The CFTC starting in January 2006
has been publishing the Commodity Index Trader Supplement to the
Commitments Of Traders report.
This supplemental report shows the reported positions of
Index Speculators in 12 different agricultural
commodities. Of the 12,
two commodities:, KC Wheat and Feeder Cattle, are part of the S&P
GSCI (and not the DJ-AIG)
and one commodity: Soybean Oil, is part of the DJ-AIG
(and not the S&P-GSCI). Note that 95% of dollars indexed to
commodities are replicating either the S&P-GSCI or DJ-AIG.
Both
the S&P-GSCI and DJ-AIG
publish on a daily basis the individual weights of their constituent
commodities. Also futures
market data providers like
Bloomberg
publish daily closing prices for the commodities. Since the futures
contract terms do not change that enables someone to calculate the
daily dollar values of the individual commodity contracts.
So with these three data points it
is simple to calculate the total dollars invested in the S&P-GSCI
and the DJ-AIG
on a weekly basis. And once the total dollars invested in these two
indices is known then that results in the ability to calculate the
number of contracts held by Index Speculators in the other 13
non-agricultural
commodities.
A detailed example of this 3 step
process follows.
Step One - Estimate Total Amount
Invested In S&P-GSCI and DJ-AIG
According to the CFTC’s January 17,
2006 CIT
report, Index Specualtors had positiions in KC Wheat, Feeder Cattle
and Soybean Oil of 21366 , 5613 and 59264 contracts respectively.
Plugging in the weights and contract values from the
appropriate sources yields the following calculations:
21,366 X $18,762.50 / 0.82% =
$48,887,753,049 5,613 X $56,137.50 / 0.68% = $46,338,204,044 59,264
X $12,732.00 / 2.77% = $27,240,045,054
So the S&P-GSCI had somewhere
between $46 and $49 billion invested in it and the DJ-AIG
had around $27 billion invested in it. This corresponds well to the
figures published by Goldman Sachs and Dow Jones.
CALCULATIONS OF INDEX SPECULATORS’
POSITIONS (JANUARY
17, 2006)
|
|
PERCENTAGE WEIGHTS
|
POSITIONS (in millions)
|
Contract Dollar Value
|
POSITIONS (in contracts)
|
Combined Position
Estimate
|
CFTC Actual
Positions
|
|
|
S&P-GSCI
|
DI-AIG
|
S&P-GSCI
|
DI-AIG
|
S&P-GSCI
|
DI-AIG
|
|
Cocoa
|
0.2%
|
0.0%
|
$95.5
|
$0.0
|
$15,710
|
6,081
|
0
|
6,081
|
9,390
|
|
|
Coffee
|
0.8%
|
2.9%
|
$373.2
|
$799.0
|
$46,425
|
8,039
|
17,201
|
25,240
|
28,777
|
|
|
Corn
|
2.0%
|
5.9%
|
$954.0
|
$1,600.0
|
$10,438
|
91,398
|
153,292
|
244,689
|
305,264
|
|
|
Cotton
|
0.9%
|
3.2%
|
$444.9
|
$862.0
|
$27,995
|
15,891
|
30,777
|
46,668
|
53,741
|
|
|
Soybean Oil
|
0.0%
|
2.8%
|
$0.0
|
$753.0
|
$12,732
|
0
|
59,173
|
59,173
|
59,264
|
|
|
Soybeans
|
1.4%
|
7.8%
|
$672.5
|
$2,116.0
|
$28,563
|
23,543
|
74,073
|
97,617
|
103,304
|
|
|
Sugar
|
1.9%
|
3.0%
|
$884.9
|
$808.0
|
$17,438
|
50,742
|
46,352
|
97,094
|
124,487
|
|
|
Wheat
|
2.1%
|
4.8%
|
$1,009.1
|
$1,300.0
|
$16,438
|
61,393
|
79,082
|
140,475
|
181,986
|
|
|
Wheat KC
|
0.8%
|
| |