By Alexander Osipovich
Negative oil prices threaten to tarnish the image of West Texas
Intermediate, the U.S. crude benchmark, and hurt the company that
has long relied on it as a key source of revenue: exchange giant
CME Group Inc.
Chicago-based CME is home to the WTI futures contract, which is
a popular way for oil drillers to protect themselves against price
drops or for hedge funds to speculate on the direction of energy
markets.
Futures are contracts that let traders bet on the future price
of commodities like oil and gold, or on financial indexes like the
S&P 500. Unlike stocks, futures can sometimes drop below zero,
particularly in physical commodity markets when storage facilities
fill up and producers pay to get rid of their excess
inventories.
Negative prices have occurred in futures on natural gas,
electricity and some obscure regional grades of crude oil, but
until this week they had never happened in a flagship oil contract
like WTI. On Monday, WTI futures for May delivery slid to minus
$37.63. They later rebounded to $10.01 Tuesday when the May
contract expired.
CME had just changed its computer systems earlier this month to
allow negative pricing in WTI, anticipating such a scenario, and
many traders had discussed it as a possibility. But for many casual
investors, the move was puzzling and appeared to be the latest sign
of market mayhem unleashed by Covid-19.
CME Chairman and Chief Executive Terrence Duffy said in an
interview that WTI futures worked as designed, and their foray into
negative territory was a signal of real market forces at work.
"It's not a price that makes you feel good," he said. "But the
reality is, there is oversupply, there is under-demand that's
virus-driven, and there is nowhere to put the stuff."
While CME doesn't specify how much money it makes from
individual contracts, UBS analysts estimate that about 14% of its
revenue this year will come from energy, which includes oil,
natural gas and other contracts. Last year CME posted $4.9 billion
in total revenue.
CME's WTI franchise could also be hurt if investors sour on
oil-focused exchange-traded funds. This week's price plunge caused
hefty losses for investors in ETFs like the United States Oil Fund,
a popular vehicle for betting on oil prices. Known by its ticker
USO, the fund holds WTI futures and sometimes accounts for a
significant chunk of activity in the contract, lifting CME's fee
revenue.
Last week, USO held more than a quarter of outstanding contracts
for June WTI futures, following massive inflows from investors.
USO's operator, United States Commodity Funds LLC, said Tuesday
that it issued all its registered shares, an unusual event that
effectively turns USO into a closed-end fund and could lead to
further deviations between USO and oil prices.
If WTI futures turn negative again, such deviations could
continue, for the simple reason that an ETF--as a security--can't
trade at prices below zero.
"If the ETF is tied to the futures and the futures go negative
while the ETF can't, there will be dislocations," Mr. Duffy said.
"People should know that before they invest in these
instruments."
Speaking Tuesday afternoon, Mr. Duffy said the WTI expiration
had gone smoothly and CME didn't anticipate any defaults by its
clearing firms, the futures brokerages that act as intermediaries
between traders and the exchange.
Still, it is possible those brokerages' clients, such as
oil-trading firms, suffered big losses. In futures markets, when
contracts are settled, the exchange and its clearing firms move
money from traders with losing bets to traders with winning bets.
If a losing trader can't pay up, the trader's clearing firm must
eat the loss. In extreme cases, client losses can push a clearing
firm into default, which can force other clearing firms to cover
its losses.
That doesn't appear to have happened in the oil market this
week. Still, some fallout from the wild price moves emerged Tuesday
as Interactive Brokers Group Inc., an online brokerage popular with
day traders, reported a provisionary loss of $88 million due to
several clients that blew up because of Monday's collapse in WTI
prices.
After WTI's foray into negative territory, some analysts
suggested trading volumes could migrate from WTI to its main
competitor: the Brent futures contract listed on CME's archrival,
Atlanta-based Intercontinental Exchange Inc., or ICE for short.
"While both products will likely see ramped up volumes because
of crude oil's volatility, we believe Brent, because of its
stability, could gain traction as a stronger benchmark," Piper
Sandler analysts wrote in a Tuesday research note.
CME and ICE have long bickered over which is the better
barometer of the energy market. At stake in the fight are millions
of contracts that change hands each day and the fee revenue that
brings to both exchange operators. Much of that trading is by
investors who want energy in their portfolios and are indifferent
to the arcane details of the WTI and Brent contracts, including
individuals who invest in ETFs linked to oil prices.
WTI futures are tied to the price of oil delivered each month to
the storage hub of Cushing, Okla. Meanwhile, Brent futures track
the price of seaborne crude, relying on an index calculated by ICE.
Even though the two benchmarks have their respective home turf--WTI
is U.S.-focused while Brent is more relevant elsewhere--they tend
to move in tandem.
CME has long argued that WTI is the better benchmark because of
its tighter link to the physical oil market. But its link to the
world of drillers, refiners and shippers of physical crude oil was
also behind this week's plunge into negative prices.
"What's usually the virtue of the WTI contract, its physical
settlement, has actually turned out to be a drawback," said Craig
Pirrong, a finance professor at the University of Houston. "It
demonstrated that there are circumstances when physical settlement
doesn't work well. Granted, these are exceptional
circumstances."
Against the backdrop of the coronavirus pandemic, which has
sharply reduced energy demand, excess oil supplies flooding into
Cushing led storage there to fill up this month. The approaching
expiration of the May WTI futures forced buyers of the contracts to
either take delivery of oil or exit their trades by selling.
With storage hard to find, many sold the futures and found few
others willing to buy them, causing Monday's record drop into
subzero prices. ICE's front-month Brent futures also fell sharply
that day, but settled at the more comprehensible price of $25.57 a
barrel.
Write to Alexander Osipovich at
alexander.osipovich@dowjones.com
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
April 22, 2020 05:44 ET (09:44 GMT)
Copyright (c) 2020 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
CME (NASDAQ:CME)
Historical Stock Chart
From Jun 2024 to Jul 2024
CME (NASDAQ:CME)
Historical Stock Chart
From Jul 2023 to Jul 2024