Research Paper

Relation between Commodity Futures & Spot Prices, and Inflation
Semester IV PGDM Batch 2011-13

Submitted by: Avishek Singh Roll 113 PGDM Finance

futures trading in some of the banned commodities were restored subsequently as market conditions stabilized. Persistent inflationary pressures in global commodity prices in the recent past sparked a debate over its nature with speculation in commodity markets being singled out as the primary factor behind rising prices. The persistent inflation in such commodities in fact point to a more structural problem on the supply side rather than speculation in the commodities market. FMC is yet to reintroduce futures in urad. Rather than stoke inflation. even leading to a demand for a ban on futures trading for several important commodities. several agricultural commodities including rubber.Abstract Commodity futures have increasingly come under attack from various quarters for their supposed role in stoking up inflationary pressures. Indian commodity futures markets have registered a CAGR of 90% from 2004 to 2011. It may be recalled that in 2008 and 2009. imposed higher margin and reduced position limits in several agri-commodities. Commodity futures market has developed at a phenomenal rate in India ever since its introduction in 2002. Despite this growth rate. tur. the findings of this research paper suggest that there is little empirical evidence to support such an idea. rice and wheat were banned by the government as the inflation was running high. we see that atleast the authorities in India believe that curbing futures trading in these commodities can help reduce inflationary trends. Thus. there is skepticism about the effect of commodity futures on its underlying assets in India. futures trading has reduced the price volatility and improved price discovery. However. The Forwards Market Commission (or the FMC-regulator of forward& futures market in India) temporarily suspended the trading in guar seed and guar gum futures and directed exchanges not to launch new contracts. tur and rice. urad. However. .

By 1996 there was almost a complete ban on Futures Trading. and Forward Contracts (Regulation) Act. viz. Last but definitely not the least. interest bearing securities or investments and real estate. particularly. research with respect to Indian Futures market is still limited as the market is still in its nascent stage. with several institutional investors entering the market in a big way. cotton. Literature Review Plenty of literature exists in this field. Here. Futures’ trading has evoked considerable interest in the academic fraternity and a lot of work has been done by various scholars. Government of India took the landmark decision in April 1999 to remove all the commodities from the restrictive list for Futures Trading. National Multi Commodity Exchange of India Limited (NMCE) was the first such exchanges to be granted permanent recognition by the Government. 1952 was enacted. pepper and turmeric. Some of the key points of the paper can be summarized as under: . oilseeds and bullion was at its peak during this period. The full list of research papers referenced is available in the References section of the paper.Introduction While there is a viewpoint that Futures Trading has existed in India for thousands of years. following the scarcity in various commodities. These led to the re-introduction of futures trading in commodities. NMCE commenced futures trading in 24 commodities on 26th November 2002 on a national scale. Traders & Exporters from Price fluctuations of Commodities and to serve as an efficient ‘Price Discovery’ mechanism. The Role of Futures Market in Aggravating Commodity Price Inflation and the Future of Commodity Futures in India: Sushismita Bose This paper by Sushismita Bose explores the role and behavior of different types of market participants in the futures market. it is an efficient mechanism to protect themselves against price fluctuations. Capital inflows into the commodity futures market all over the world have increased manifold in the past few years. demutualised. modern. futures trading in most commodities were again prohibited in midsixties. Post-independence. Commodity Futures is a very efficient Price discovery as well as Price recovery mechanism. and seek to discover if there are linkages between futures market and inflation. the subject of futures trading was placed in the Union list. Nation-wide multi-commodity Exchanges with investment support from public and private institutions. the first organized futures market was established only in 1875 by the Bombay Cotton Trade Association to trade in cotton contracts. In the early 1990s the Forex Crisis and liberalization of the economy lead to policy changes in India. for the farmers. For Traders & Exporters. However. Literature review of these research papers have suggested that the authors have failed to identify any empirical relationship between futures trading and inflation in a particular commodity. This paper will primarily focus on the Indian futures market. some of the key points from relevant papers have been presented in a concise manner. There was a time when trading was permitted only two minor commodities. However.. Commodity futures can be looked upon as an option for those who want to diversify their portfolios beyond equities. With a view to protect Farmers. Futures trading in commodities. Government also allowed setting up of new.

For example. when the price of oil rises. where their trading activity may be relatively unchanged from its current level Statistics tell us that institutional investments in energy products total about 3. If speculators really have driven up the world price of oil above the level justified by the fundamentals.e. i. For this kind of situation to occur.1% of food and fiber production  . commodities have outperformed the stocks This increases the attractiveness of commodities as an asset class especially with pension funds Institutional investors don’t employ margin in their commodity portfolio. of this $219. The Role of Institutional Investors in Rising Commodity Prices: Keith H. a 5 per cent allocation in oil futures. if a fund has decided on. On the other hand. commodity futures have earned returns similar to stocks with comparable risks Commodities have low. If the price hike has not changed the fund’s underlying views about the future of the market. Herding of investors has been observed to deviate asset prices from the fundamentals in the short term. the fund’s total value increases. with the remainder due to the appreciation of the underlying commodities. $98. it cannot be concluded that speculation has led to an increase in prices.    The overall assets under management (AUM) of commodity indices have risen from negligible size in 2003 to an estimated $76. it will become a net seller. but the share of oil futures rises disproportionately. if there is no hoarding. it is likely that they would simply move their positions to the unregulated over-the-counter markets. then during the next rebalancing the fund will reduce its holdings of commodity futures. say. so that the allocation is now higher than the desired 5 per cent. Even for passive investors the needs of portfolio management require that a fund adjust its allocation on the commodity futures as and when price changes occur (Murphy. the markets have to be in contango or futures price above spot and sufficiently so to make storage worthwhile.7 billion in January 2006 and ballooned to $297 billion by June 2008. Black Some important observations of the author:       Over the 45-year period analyzed by the author. if speculative activity drives market prices above the level at which supply and conventional demand are matched. according to its portfolio needs. The paper has cited Murphy & Krugman. according to an estimate by Lehman Brothers. then the higher price is justified by the fundamentals.3 billion increase since 2006. However. 2008).1 billion has been new financial inflow.7% of worldwide production. or sometimes negative correlation with the stock prices During the inflationary periods. The paper has denounced the theory that passive investors have also played a part in spurt in commodity prices. while coming in at 8. meaning that commercial consumers are purchasing all the output. In effect. then the data should indicate a growing stockpile of excess supply (or restricted output). 2008 to argue that since there has been no increase in physical hoarding of the commodities in question. most institutional investors are fully collateralized Should institutions be regulated out of the futures markets. then world output should be exceeding world consumption leading to physical hoarding in the longer run.

 Commodity markets are inelastic: demand does not decline significantly during times of rising prices. and consumption growth has exceeded supply growth for many years.Supply increases significantly (such as discovery of a large oil field) . which has caused declines in the inventory of many commodities to record low levels. When supply closely matches consumption. we would hope that prices would increase commodity supply while lowering the demand. Supply and demand for physical commodities determine prices.  Commodity prices will decline only when: . If supply continues to be tight. demand in North America fell less than 1% in the one year period ending 2008. as well as the trend toward biofuels. In many markets. Ideally. No amount of institutional investment in commodity markets can support the current level of prices if supply increases and demand declines. the trend toward higher prices is directly related to rising demand and constrained supply.Demand drops sharply (such as recession in the emerging market) Demand for all types of commodities has soared due to increased income in emerging markets. and demand from emerging markets continues to rise. consumption of commodities exceeds supply. Supplies can decline quickly due to adverse weather conditions or political changes that make it illegal or dangerous to engage in commodity export activity. restrictions on the structure of institutional . with falling exports and dwindling inventories. Conversely. Even in the face of doubling energy prices. markets become vulnerable to supply shocks.

Commodity prices may give forewarning signals of an inflationary swell in aggregate demand. However. an increase in commodity prices should sooner or later be passed through to final goods prices. Acharya. because of this. In particular. the WPI permits a wider . prices of most final goods and services are restrained by contractual arrangements and other market frictions. Even though the inflation momentum may start in final goods markets. This implies that the CRB index can still be used as an early indicator of inflation. Examining the CRB index as a leading indicator for US inflation: Ram N. is much higher in the Consumer Price Indices. Because of this. the more likely the investors are to turn to them in anticipation of inflation. these commodity prices can dash ahead quickly in response to actual or expected changes in supply or demand. the model results show that there is one-way relationship between commodity price index and inflation. Among these. slowly gaining ground on commodity prices Linkages between commodity prices and broad inflation: 1. Commodity prices and broad inflation may be directly connected because commodities are an important input to production. rice and wheat have significant weight while weight of other items is individually very small. particularly of foodgrains.94% and pulses 3. Thus.39%. Food & foodgrains’ contribution to inflation varies widely depending on weights assigned. 2. the first visible increase in prices may be in the flexi-price commodity markets. with 5. all else being equal. Paul F. Because commodity prices respond quickly to wide-ranging inflation pressures. In particular. The CPI-AL assigns a weight of 69. of which the weight of cereals is 40. unlike the CPIs. precious metals have been signaled out as the most convenient commodities for hedging inflation The relationship between commodity price and inflation is still significant. 3. Higher demand for final goods increases the demand for commodity inputs.investment in commodity markets will not be effective in meeting the goal of reducing commodity prices. the results from the impulse response function show that an increase in commodity price index by 1 SD would increase inflation nearly by one unit in the second year.01% weight. The more the commodities are seen as an effective hedge. representing about one-tenth of the value of output in the United States. The Expert Committee to Study the Impact of Futures Trading On Agricultural Commodity Prices: Abhijit Sen 2008 Contribution of Agricultural Commodities in WPI & CPI Inflation There are 12 ‘food grain’ items in the basket of WPI index. being highest in CPI-AL which is pertinent for the poor and lowest in the WPI. This view tends to be self-fulfilling. investors may see them as a useful inflation hedge. Moreover. the contribution of foodgrains to overall WPI inflation is relatively small and much less than to CPI inflation. Usually. So they respond gradually and steadily to supply and demand pressures. By contrast. Gentle and Krishna P. The weight of food items. the WPI also includes intermediate and capital goods which do not enter directly into consumption.15% to food items. This is because. Paudel The price change signaling role for commodities rests on the fact that commodity prices are set in auction or flexi-price markets.

viz.3% of the total futures trading volume and have a weight of 1. chillies.73% in the WPI basket and account for less than half the weight of the processed and unprocessed agricultural commodities included in the WPI   Price Increase The author has divided the analysis into pre-trade and post-trade basis. raw jute and rice These commodities account for 48.look at agricultural goods since many of these do not directly enter the food basket but are used as intermediates. rape seed/mustard seed.6% of the traded value. tur. among these 24 commodities with preponderant trade share in volume of futures trade.2% of the total futures trading volume and have a weight of 10. soy oil. Guar gum. pepper. 3 DO NOT feature in the WPI basket at all.e. jeera. wheat. In both the cases. Volatility Anticipated benefits of futures trading in agro-commodities are:   Reduction in price volatility(i. Some of the significant excerpts of his observations are: Annual trend growth rate was HIGHER in the post-futures period in 14 commodities. but not represented in the WPI This shows that a very significant share of futures trading in agricultural commodities is accounted for by commodities that are insignificant for the overall price level in the economy Even the remaining 21 commodities have a weight of only 11. chana. rubber. turmeric. raw cotton. maize. the problem is that period during which futures markets have been in operation is much too short to discriminate adequately between the effects of opening up futures market and what might simply be normal cyclical adjustments. cardamom. guar seed and menthe oil accounted for 29.7% of the total value of futures trading of agricultural commodities in 2006-07 Top 8 agro-commodities account for 84% of the total value of trade However. castor seed and gur These commodities account for 21. extent of fluctuations in price around trend) Better price discovery . potato. urad. soy bean.7% in the WPI 6 of these commodities had suffered unusually high inflation in the pre-futures period      The author concludes that what is being observed is simply reversion to a more normal level of inflation. viz.. Important points from the analysis:     43 agricultural commodities notified for futures trading 24 of them accounted for 98.1% in the WPI 10 of these commodities had suffered negative inflation in the pre-futures period Annual trend growth rate was LOWER in 7 commodities in the post-futures period. sugar.

Concern for farmers Introduction of futures trading should reduce price volatility along a relatively longer period of time. urad and wheat). Price volatility had increased in 10 commodities.NCDEX data for 19 of the 24 traded commodities selected earlier clearly shows that:    Volatility was LOWER in 15 the commodities Higher in 3 commodities Remained the same in one However. Thus little conclusions can be drawn because of conflicting results. . Mechanisms of price discovery and arbitrage should reduce the ratio between the highest and lowest (i. returning partially towards normal only after the inflation subsided in 2007. this decrease in volatility was not reflected in the WPI data for the 21 selected commodities. remained untouched in two and declined in 9 after the introduction of futures trading. Thus. chillies. But in several cases (especially chana. the efficiency of futures market in addressing this concern of farmers is very limited in this respect. harvest) price observed during a crop year.e. this ratio increased after the introduction of futures trading.

domestic production and foreign trade . i.Underlying fundamentals and price behavior: The delisting experience Urad: Tur: rd  Delisted on 23 January 2007   Futures prices in backwardation  indicating a future fall in spot prices  Spot prices in fact declined as predicted  Wheat: Rice:  Delisted on 27th February 2007   Futures prices in backwardation   Spot prices followed the predicted  pattern Delisted on 23rd January 2007 Futures prices in contango except for 1month forward price Spot prices followed the predicted behavior Delisted on 27th February 2007 Futures prices in backwardation Spot prices followed the predicted pattern Conclusions:   Futures prices in all these commodities successfully predicted the future spot prices Thus the price rise in all these commodities can be explained by the supply-side factors.e.

79 4.9 2007(Delisted) .35 2.1 Thus the price movements are largely in line with movements in supply.21 tonnes) Inflation of WPI tur (yoy -10. In particular.2% 94.5% 169.6 94 = 100) 2004-05 1.Tur: Supply & Inflation data 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 Production (in million 2.7 12 11.31 tonnes) Imports ranged between 0.6 2006-07 93.4 tonnes) Government Rice 11.8% 89.4% 87.5% 190.36 2.13 4.34 million tonnes throughout the period Inflation of WPI tur (yoy 10.3 2. Urad: Supply & Inflation data 2003-04 Production (in million 1.9 2005-06 1.1 12.7 Stocks(in mn tonnes) as on January Inflation of WPI tur (yoy -1.8 2005-06 91.35 4.5 2007(Delisted) 1.9% 6.47 tonnes) Imports (in million 0.6% in December) Real WPI of tur (1993-93 96. speculation in futures market cannot be said to have exerted any strong upward pressure on spot prices of rice.7% 90.7 2006-07 1. real prices of tur were lower during 2005 and 2006(when futures trading was significant) than in 2003(before futures) or 2007(after delisting).126.2% in December) Real WPI of urad (1993.7 98.2 = 100) 2007(Delisted) 15.7 = 100) 2004-05 83.08 35.3 Since the real WPI of rice declined throughout the period when futures trading was allowed.25 0.1% 116.8 12.33 41.1% 88.74 2. Rice: Supply & Inflation data 2003-04 Production (in million 88.8 87.3% in December) Real WPI of rice (1993-94 97.8 -28.2% 9.5 87.6 4.5% -4.8% 124.23 to 0.08 -4.53 tonnes) Exports (in million 3. and increased only after de-listing.4 7.42 0.33 0.

7% in 2005-06 and 2006-07. Variance in spot prices is much larger than that of futures(gur. etc. iron ore. Both have been very much in evidence in recent years. Generally.   Thus there is poor integration between the spot and futures market in all the commodities studied and therefore concludes that “futures may not have served the purpose of risk management”. the data shows that:  Prices have risen sharply for many commodities that have neither developed futures markets (e. that is. For example. signaling the need to expand investment in production capacity. the basis risk was significantly high and in a number of them. potato.Thus. In this respect. It also found that in all the futures contracts traded (with the exception of tur). Studies in agriculture and crude oil markets have found that speculators tend to follow trends in prices rather than set them. Key Reports Several researches have been carried out by regulatory bodies all over the world to determine the effect of futures trading on inflation. Indian commodity exchanges have been offering contracts that are highly unsuitable for hedging purposes and thus prone to purely speculative activity.g. sugar and sacking) implying low efficiency of futures in price discovery. Thus. two key reports have been summarized here: Enquiry by US Commodity Futures Trading Commission There is little economic evidence to demonstrate that prices are being systematically driven by speculators in either oil or agricultural commodity markets. data shows that there are almost as many bearish funds as bullish funds in wheat and crude oil. coal. urad inflation did flare up very unusually in the period when futures’ trading was active. and . steel. with government policies also contributing to it. it was higher than the price risk. Bangalore (IIMB) to study the impact of futures trading in some important agricultural commodities.) nor institutional fund investments (Minneapolis wheat and Chicago rice). FMC had commissioned a study by the Indian Institute of Management.7% and 37. The level of speculation in the agriculture commodity and the crude oil markets has remained relatively constant in percentage terms as prices have risen.  It concluded that changes in fundamentals (mainly from the supply side) were primarily responsible for the higher post-futures price rise. or variance of futures price is much higher than of spot(rubber and wheat) implying too much speculation in futures market. and to the extent that speculation is driven by such factors it is playing a proper and indeed important role. But this was a period of below normal production and although imports cushioned supply. Speculators such as managed money traders are both buyers and sellers in these markets. Markets where index trading is greatest as a percentage of total open interest (live cattle and hog futures) have actually suffered from falling prices during the past year. in the sense that it is in anticipation of future supply constraints and robust demand. Durham wheat.     The CFTC maintained that much of the increased inflow is speculative. import unit values rose 48.

The ECFT opined that although this supports the view that the inflation in early 2007 was led by agricultural commodities. and ii) Depending on (i). There is very little evidence that this inflow is manipulative. Enquiry by Indian Expert Committee on Futures Trading The Indian investigations were mainly based on comparison of commodity price trends and volatility pre. iii) Make such other recommendations as the Committee may consider appropriate regarding increased association of farmers in the futures market/trading so that farmers are able to get the benefit of price discovery through Commodity Exchanges. indicate no potentially manipulative hoarding going on in that sector. The terms of reference of the ECFT were as follows: i) To study the extent of impact. it is not possible to conclude that factors particular to these commodities were the only.75 per cent in WPI also recorded inflation of around 6 per cent. . or even major. Low and declining levels of inventory for major food crops. both food and all agricultural commodities show higher inflation than overall WPI inflation (Exhibit 2). of futures trading on wholesale and retail prices of agricultural commodities.providing liquidity to hedgers. if any. as manufactured products with a weight of 63. reason behind the spurt in inflation. for example. to suggest ways to minimize such an impact.and post-futures and also took into consideration the production and supply of the crucial commodities in the relevant years. Thus in early 2007.

The most dramatic result was for a crucial perishable crop like potatoes. it is not possible to make any general claim that inflation accelerated more in commodities with futures trading. the 441 price observations pre-futures showed price volatility of 245. which shows that daily price volatility in wheat less than halved post-futures. that of soy oil was exactly half. while it remained same for chana (Exhibit 4).4 per cent. Although inflation clearly increased post-futures in some sensitive commodities that have a higher weight in consumer prices indices. too. In both cases. .ECFT points out that a revealing feature of this data is that of the 14 commodities in which price acceleration took place in the post-futures period. and for urad it had come down by more than 10 percentage points. More definitive is the ECFT’s analysis of daily volatilities pre-and post-futures. Similarly. which in turn could have been aided by more efficient price discovery. 10 had suffered negative inflation during the prefutures period (Exhibit 3). 6 had unusually high pre-futures inflation at over 10 per cent. of the 7 commodities in which WPI growth was lower post-futures. there is the problem that the period during which futures markets have been in operation is much too short to discriminate adequately between the effect of opening up futures markets and what might simply be normal cyclical adjustments. In these cases. while the same number of observations postfutures showed volatility of 68. It is possible in such cases that the acceleration in the growth rate of WPI in these commodities is simply rebound and catch-up with the trend. it is possible that what is being observed is simply reversion to a more normal level of inflation.9 per cent.

In fact. predicting a future fall in spot prices. involving domestic production and foreign trade. 3. April and May 2007 were running. 1. The ECFT also found that price movements are broadly in line with the movements in supply. predicting a rise in spot prices. except the February 2007 contract. 2007 to Rs. futures prices in all contracts were in backwardation at the point of delisting. indicating that spot prices were predicted to fall on the arrival of the new harvest in April-May and rise moderately thereafter. 2007. spot prices did fall after delisting from Rs. The urad futures prices as on January 23. In fact. Hence the ban has also underplayed the need to respond to supply constraints or increased demand by adjusting production. found that futures prices were in fact indicating price movements in the correct direction. which were quite liquid on the NCDEX platform. spot prices continued their upward trend even after delisting. February. were delisted on January 23. futures prices at the time of delisting were in contango.000 per quintal in July and August even though there were no new futures trade in this commodity. In contrast with the view of critics of futures markets who argue that speculative activity increased with the introduction of such markets and that this in turn led to unusual price movements. neither the volumes of turnover in particular commodities nor their returns are such that one may suspect abnormal levels or directions of speculative activities bordering on market . The post-delisting spot prices recorded by the NCDEX show that after a brief decline in prices in the post-harvest period of April and May prices started firming up to above Rs. Finally.The ECFT. the ECFT report concluded that “the Committee has been unable to determine any conclusive causal relationship (between futures trading and inflation) in view of the short time period during which futures markets have functioned and the complexities that arise because a large number of variables impact spot prices”.551 on January 23. four delivery-month contracts. Ban on Futures Trading in select commodities in India The ban has been quite ineffective in consistently softening prices in some commodities like wheat and rubber (Exhibit 6). The ban may have in fact deprived Indian consumers of the benefit of global price declines (rice and soy oil) as it has blocked the global price signals. As regards tur. 2007 were in backwardation. the Commodity Exchanges have argued that the price rise that occurred in these commodities before delisting can largely be explained by supply-side factors. Futures trading in urad and tur. 2.553 on August 4. March. In India. notably. 2007. In the case of rice. On the date of delisting. with the extent of backwardation lower in further contracts.

the movement of prices also does not seem to justify the move. Conclusion The current evidence available does not provide any conclusive evidence about whether there is any causal relationship between futures trading and rise in prices of the agricultural commodities. In fact. Despite the ban on trading of urad and tur. These conclusions suggest some other factor behind the persistent inflation. Thus. . in the absence of liquid futures markets. In fact. However. if speculation was the reason behind inflation. all the research papers have concluded that the futures trading has led to a better price discovery and decreased volatility in prices. as well as reduced information asymmetry. prices may give the wrong signals and lead to further misallocation of resources and intensify the supply side constraints that have already been pointed out as a very important cause of the present spate of wide and persistent inflation. Thus it would be erroneous to blame futures trading for inflation. there is no such instance in reality. Post-futures. these commodities witnessed another round of high inflation since 2011.manipulation in them. physical hoarding of such commodities would be inevitable. supply has not been able to match the demand and that has been the root cause of persistent high inflation in these commodities. As argued by Sushismita Bose.

Paul F. “Futures Trading Activity and Commodity Cash Price Volatility”. David S. “The Role of Institutional Investors in Rising Commodity Prices”. Debashis Acharya and M. UN Report (1996). NY). Money & Finance. Applied Economics Letters. “Populists versus theorists: Futures markets and the volatility of Prices”. November 2011. Government of India. Ram N. Leatham (2005). Acharya.References       Sushimita Bose (2009). Keith H. IMF Working Paper. Jatinder Bir Singh. “The Role of Futures Market in Aggravating Commodity Price Inflation and the Future of Commodity Futures in India”. Mantu Kumar Mahalik.       . Elyse Tanouye (1991). Reichsfeld and Shaun K. Bangalore. Ministry of Consumer Affairs. NY). Indian Institute of Management. “The Impact of Futures Trading on Agricultural Commodity Prices”. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting”. Jacks (2005). “Do Commodity Futures Help Forecast Spot Prices?”.R. Wall Street Journal (New York. “Price Discovery and Volatility Spillovers in Futures and Spot Commodity Markets: Some Empirical evidence from India”. Wall Street Journal (New York. Paudel (2010). Black (2009). Science Direct. McKay (1999). Suresh Babu (2009). 9-12 August 2009. Fourth Annual International Conference on Public Policy and Management. “Futures Market and Price Stabilization: Evidence from Indian Hessian Market”. David A. 06 Oct 1999. “Commodities: Are Indexes Flashing Alert on Inflation?”. January/March 2005. 6 June 2006. Peter A. Gentle and Krishna P. Abhijit Sen led Expert Committee Report (2008). Food & Public Distribution. The Journal of Investing. ICRA Bulletin. 21 Oct 1991. Roache (2011). Jian Yang. November 1996. 2008. “Commodities' Role as Inflation Harbinger Ebbs”. “Managing Price Risks in India’s Liberalized Agriculture: Can Futures’ Market Help?”. “Examining the CRB index as the leading indicator for US inflation”. Brian Balyeat and David J.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful

Master Your Semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer: Get 4 months of Scribd and The New York Times for just $1.87 per week!

Master Your Semester with a Special Offer from Scribd & The New York Times