IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

To What Surprises Do Hog Futures Markets Respond?


  • Frank, Julieta
  • Garcia, Philip
  • Irwin, Scott H.


We re-assess the effect of new information contained in the Hogs and Pigs Reports (HPR) focusing on the rationality of the announcements. We find that HPR preliminary numbers are irrational estimates of the final numbers and market expectations before the announcements are also irrational estimates of HPR numbers. Based on these results we modify the conventional measure of new information entering into the market (i.e., announcement - market expectation), and incorporate final estimates and the market’s best forecast into the analysis. Results show modest statistical differences between the conventional and modified measures of surprise; however some economic differences, as large as 27 cents/cwt, emerged. We also find that, as expected, marketings information has a larger effect on short-term price changes and breedings information has a larger effect on long-term price changes.

Suggested Citation

  • Frank, Julieta & Garcia, Philip & Irwin, Scott H., 2007. "To What Surprises Do Hog Futures Markets Respond?," 2007 Conference, April 16-17, 2007, Chicago, Illinois 37573, NCCC-134 Conference on Applied Commodity Price Analysis, Forecasting, and Market Risk Management.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:nccsci:37573
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.37573

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Koontz, Stephen R. & Hudson, Michael A. & Purcell, Wayne D., 1984. "The Impact Of Hog And Pig Reports On Live Hog Futures Prices: An Event Study Of Market Efficiency," 1984 Annual Meeting, August 5-8, Ithaca, New York 278981, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    2. G.S. Maddala & Forrest D. Nelson, 1975. "Specification Errors in Limited Dependent Variable Models," NBER Working Papers 0096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Philip Garcia, 2004. "A selected review of agricultural commodity futures and options markets," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 31(3), pages 235-272, September.
    4. Falk, Barry L. & Orazem, Peter, 1989. "Measuring Market Responses to Error-Ridden Government Announcements," Staff General Research Papers Archive 11096, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    5. Meyer, Steve R. & Lawrence, John D., 1988. "Comparing USDA Hogs and Pigs Reports to Subsequent Slaughter: Does Systematic Error Exist?," Working Papers 256649, University of Missouri Columbia, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    6. Carter, Colin A., 1999. "Commodity futures markets: a survey," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 43(2), pages 1-39, June.
    7. Jeffrey B. Mills & Ted C. Schroeder, 2004. "Are cattle on feed report revisions random and does industry anticipate them?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(3), pages 363-374.
    8. Hurd, Michael, 1979. "Estimation in truncated samples when there is heteroscedasticity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2-3), pages 247-258.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Karali, Berna & Isengildina Massa, Olga & Irwin, Scott H., 2018. "Does Noise in Market Expectations Dilute Price Reactions to USDA Reports?," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 273973, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Isengildina-Massa, Olga & Karali, Berna & Irwin, Scott H., 2016. "Market Reaction to Inefficiencies in USDA Crop Production Forecasts," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235507, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. R. Karina Gallardo & B. Wade Brorsen & Jayson Lusk, 2010. "Prediction markets: an experimental approach to forecasting cattle on feed," Agricultural Finance Review, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 70(3), pages 414-426, November.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C24 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Truncated and Censored Models; Switching Regression Models; Threshold Regression Models
    • Q13 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Markets and Marketing; Cooperatives; Agribusiness


    Access and download statistics


    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:ags:nccsci:37573. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.