This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Inventory and Transformation Hedging Effectiveness in Corn Crushing

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Dahlgran, Roger A.
Abstract

In response to the development of the U.S. ethanol industry, the Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT) launched the ethanol futures contract in March 2005. This contract is promoted by the CBOT as allowing ethanol producers to hedge corn crushing using strategies similar to those used in soybean crushing. The similarities end, however, when the lack of short-term correlation between corn and ethanol prices is compared to the strong correlation between soybean and soy product prices. This contrast motivates the examination of the price risk management capabilities of the CBOT’s ethanol futures contract. Standard hedging methodology is applied to weekly cash and futures price data from March 23, 2005 through March 7, 2007. Findings include (1) for two- to eight-week hedging horizons, the ethanol futures contract effectively hedges ethanol inventory price risk. The effectiveness of the hedge increases with the hedging horizon. Thus, ethanol producers and brokers can use the ethanol futures market to reduce the price risk of holding ethanol inventories. (2) Contrary to anecdotal evidence, ethanol futures are not significantly inferior to gasoline futures for hedging ethanol price risk and for a four-week hedge they are significantly superior to gasoline futures. Thus, ethanol producers and brokers get greater price risk protection from hedging with ethanol futures than with gasoline futures. (3) The corn crushing hedge, utilizing corn and ethanol futures contracts, is an effective means to “lock in” a processing margin. The effectiveness of this hedge increases as the hedging horizon increases. Finally, to understand the processing hedge, the corn crush hedge and the soybean crush hedge were compared. I found that (4) the price risk of corn crushing is greater than that of soybean crushing and the effectiveness of corn crush hedging exceeds that of soybean crush hedging. This difference is explained by the high correlations in the soybean complex.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/37557
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by NCCC-134 Conference on Applied Commodity Price Analysis, Forecasting, and Market Risk Management in its series 2007 Conference, April 16-17, 2007, Chicago, Illinois with number 37557.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: Apr 2007
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:nccsci:37557

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 326 Mumford Hall, MC-710, 1301 West Gregory Drive, Urbana, Illinois, 61801
Phone: (217) 333-1810
Fax: (217) 333-5538
Email:
Web page: http://www.farmdoc.uiuc.edu/nccc134/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (AgEcon Search).

Related research
Keywords: ethanol futures; hedging; cross hedging; corn crushing; processing hedge;

Other versions of this item:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Anderson, Ronald W & Danthine, Jean-Pierre, 1980. " Hedging and Joint Production: Theory and Illustrations," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 35(2), pages 487-98, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Garcia, Philip & Roh, Jae-Sun & Leuthold, Raymond M, 1995. "Simultaneously Determined, Time-Varying Hedge Ratios in the Soybean Complex," Applied Economics, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 27(12), pages 1127-34, December.
  3. Dahlgran, Roger A., 2005. "Transaction Frequency and Hedging in Commodity Processing," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 30(03), December. [Downloadable!]
  4. Franken, Jason R.V. & Parcell, Joe L., 2003. "Cash Ethanol Cross-Hedging Opportunities," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 35(03), December. [Downloadable!]
  5. Anderson, Ronald W & Danthine, Jean-Pierre, 1981. "Cross Hedging," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(6), pages 1182-96, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? The yearly budget of IDEAS is exactly $0: it relies entirely on volunteer work.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-11.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.