IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Are Corn and Soybean Options Too Expensive?

Listed author(s):
  • Urcola, Hernan A.
  • Irwin, Scott H.

A growing body of recent evidence suggests that premiums for financial options might be too high. For agricultural options, market participants often make similar claims, however there is very limited scientific literature to prove or disprove such claims. This research investigates the efficiency of corn and soybean options markets by directly computing trading returns. Time effects on market efficiency are also investigated. When the sample period is considered as a whole, risk adjusted returns indicate that no profits can be made by taking either side of the corn or soybean options markets. However, when time effects are analyzed, corn calls appear to have provided excess returns during the 1998--2005 period. This result do not appear to be driven by movements in the underlying futures, since similar differences were not found for corn puts. Based on the evidence presented here, corn puts and soybean options would constitute fairly-well priced insurance tools. Further research should investigate the causes of corn call returns.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by NCR-134 Conference on Applied Commodity Price Analysis, Forecasting, and Market Risk Management in its series 2006 Conference, April 17-18, 2006, St. Louis, Missouri with number 19006.

in new window

Date of creation: 2006
Handle: RePEc:ags:ncrsix:19006
Contact details of provider: Web page:

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ncrsix:19006. 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)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.