Author
Abstract
The aim of the paper is to assess the hedging potential of grain, metal, and fossil energy commodities for investments in green energy instruments for the period from January 2, 2020, to September 30, 2025. Specifically, the study seeks to provide new evidence on which commodity group mitigates volatility in green energy portfolios most effectively. The results provide insights for investors and policymakers regarding hedging mechanisms between traditional and green markets through a comparative analysis of the impact of three key commodity groups on green-energy instruments. Minimum-variance portfolios were constructed using the Markowitz portfolio methodology. The analysed period includes major market disruptions, including the COVID-19 pandemic and the conflict in Ukraine, so we additionally applied the Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) model to assess tail risk. The results show that the portfolio structures are nearly identical in both cases, indicating that extreme losses are not significantly more asymmetric than overall variance. The results indicate that metal commodities have the highest potential to protect investments in green energy, with gold emerging as a main contributor. Grain commodities rank second in terms of hedging potential in protecting investments in green energy. Within the grains sector, soybeans have the highest hedging potential. Fossil energy commodities have a lower potential to protect investments in green energy due to their high volatility of returns and the strong positive correlation between Brent oil and its derivatives. The general conclusion is that, alongside gold, the best protection for investments in green energy is provided by commodities that are related to its production, particularly soybean and aluminium.
Suggested Citation
Željko Račić, 2026.
"Do Commodities Hedge Investments in Green Energy? Minimum-Variance Portfolio Analysis,"
The European Journal of Applied Economics, Singidunum University, Belgrade, vol. 23(2), pages 60-71.
Handle:
RePEc:sng:ejae01:262
DOI: 10.5937/EJAE23-63864
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sng:ejae01:262. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: EJAE Editorial Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journal.singidunum.ac.rs/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.