|
The
Commitments of Traders Report:
What is it? What do you do with it?
by Wayne N.
Krautkramer
printer-friendly version
Now Playing: Technical
analysis
The Commitments of Traders report is now being referred to as a conspiracy
by some writers. Others are claiming the Commercials are wrong, and that the
Speculators are correct. Another camp claims the Large Commercials (Hedgers)
are never wrong. A quick analysis should assist us in resolving this
controversy.
WHAT IS THE COMMITMENT OF
TRADERS REPORT?
The first Commitments of Traders (COT) report was published for 13
agricultural commodities as of June 30, 1962. At the time, this report was
proclaimed as "another step forward in the policy of providing the public
with current and basic data on futures market operations." Those original
reports were compiled on an end-of-month basis and were published on the
11th or 12th calendar day of the following month.
Over the years, in a
continuous effort to better inform the public about futures markets, the
Commodity Futures Trading Commission has improved the COT in several ways.
The COT report is published more often—switching to mid-month and month-end
in 1990, to every 2 weeks in 1992, and to weekly in 2000. The COT report is
released more quickly—moving the publication to the 6th business day after
the "as of" date (1990) and then to the 3rd business day after the "as of"
date (1992). The report includes more information—adding data on the numbers
of traders in each category, a crop-year breakout, and concentration ratios
(early 1970s) and data on option positions (1995). The report also is more
widely available—moving from a subscription-based mailing list to fee-based
electronic access (1993) to being freely available on the Commission's
internet website (1995).
The COT reports provide a
breakdown of each Tuesday's open interest for markets in which 20 or more
traders hold positions equal to or above the reporting levels established by
the CFTC. The weekly reports for Futures-Only Commitments of Traders and for
Futures-and-Options-Combined Commitments of Traders are released every
Friday at 3:30 p.m. Eastern time.
Reports are available in both
a short and long format. The short report shows open interest separately by
reportable and nonreportable positions. For reportable positions, additional
data are provided for commercial and non-commercial holdings, spreading,
changes from the previous report, percents of open interest by category, and
numbers of traders. The long report, in addition to the information in the
short report, also groups the data by crop year, where appropriate, and
shows the concentration of positions held by the largest four and eight
traders.
Current and historical
Commitments of Traders data are available on the Internet at the
Commission's website:
http://www.cftc.gov. Also available at that site are historical COT data
going back to 1986 for futures-only reports and to 1995 for
option-and-futures-combined reports.
We now know that the COT is a
government generated report that publicizes the total commoditity futures
positions held by each of the two main categories (Commercial, and
Non-Commercial). This report is issued weekly by the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission (CFTC). This allows one to see the changes in their
holdings.
It is very questionable that
the COT report represents a conspiracy of some kind, given the source, and
the continual updates of the information. This would require a massive
government conspiracy, covering numerous agencies.
HOW DOES ONE INTERPRET THE
COT REPORT?
This part of the study becomes murky. It appears that there are three
differing opinions. The basic argument comes down to their belief in a
"battle" between the Large Commercials (Hedgers), and the Large Speculators.
Each side either believes that their "team" is the superior in terms of
success, or that the COT is irrelevant. In the interest of objectivity, I
will present all positions.
The Forecasting Methodology By
William L. Jiler COMMODITY RESEARCH BUREAU
Basically, we tried to
determine the "forecasting" performance of the major identifiable groups of
market participant—Large Hedgers, Large Speculators, and Small Traders. It
was logical to assume that the larger and more sophisticated traders should
have market insights that would enable them to predict futures price
movements, if not infallibly, at least more accurately than the small
traders who presumably included the "uninformed public." We also thought it
was possible that the sizes of the various market positions, at different
times, could well result in a type of self-fulfilling prophecy.
From the statistics in the
"Commitments if Traders" report, we were able to approximate the net
positions at the end of each month for Large Hedgers, Large Speculators, and
Small Traders. We averaged their month-end statistics over a number of years
to find out what their normal positions would be at any given time of the
year. We then compared each group's actual position with their so-called
normal position. Whenever their positions deviated materially from the norm,
we took it as a measure of their bullish or bearish attitude on the market.
By studying subsequent price
movements, we were able to establish "track records" for each of the groups.
As anticipated, we found that Large Hedgers and Large Speculators had the
best forecasting records, and the Small Traders the worst, by far. We were
somewhat surprised to find that the Large Hedgers were consistently superior
to the Large Speculators. However, the predictive results for the Large
Speculators varied widely from market to market.
The differences between their
current net open interest position and the seasonal norm supply us with a
tangible percentage measure of the degree of bullishness or bearishness of
each group towards a particular market to a certain extent. From these
"net-net" figures, we obtain a configuration of market attitudes of the
principal players. From our research and long experience we have drawn up
some general guidelines:
The most bullish configuration
would show large hedgers heavily net long more than normal, large
speculators clearly net long, small traders heavily net short more than
seasonal. The shades of bullishness are varied all the way to the most
bearish configuration which would have these groups in opposite
positions-large hedgers heavily net short, etc. There are two caution flags
when analyzing deviations from normal. Be wary of positions that are more
than 40% from their long-term average and disregard deviations of less than
5%.
We'd like to present some
examples of how we utilized this open interest analysis in our "Technical
Comments" section of the CRB Futures Chart Service. In late August of 1983,
we turned bearish on sugar when it was over 10¢ a pound. Throughout 1983 and
1984, we advocated a bearish stand even though prices had dropped below 4¢
to 16-year lows. An important reason for our doggedness, in addition to the
bearish chart, was our analysis of the "Commitments" report. For over two,
years, the Large Hedgers' average net short position was over 20% larger
than their previous 6-year average. Small traders, despite tremendous
losses, averaged almost 20% higher net long positions throughout the entire
debacle.
In August of 1983, Chicago
wheat futures soared to new contract highs. The charts were very bullish,
which we acknowledged in our "Comments" of August 12, 1983. However, we
noted that the latest "Commitments of Traders" report sounded a negative
note. Large Hedgers were 36% net short and Small Traders were 24% net long,
both way over their 10-year averages at that time. Subsequently, the market
topped out and prices trended lower for the next 6 months.
A study of the open interest
configuration for corn and soybeans just prior to their spectacular bull
move in the summer of 1983 will show how the analysis "did" and "didn't"
work. It worked for corn, which showed Large Hedgers with net long positions
well above normal and Small Traders net short. This bullish pattern was just
the opposite of the soybean open interest. Here, Large Hedgers were heavily
net short and Small Traders had a net long position of 20% versus a more
normal 10% for June. Yet, both commodities enjoyed similar bull moves. An
unforeseen drought that summer probably accounted for the strange results.
While we have shown only some
relatively recent examples of this kind of open interest analysis, our
experience with the technique goes back over two decades. The performance
patterns are fairly consistent. Yet, we have to admit that there were
exceptions that proved to be quite dramatic. Therefore, it is important also
to utilize other available technical and fundamental tools to arrive at a
high probability of success in forecasting prices. The nature of the events
that shape price trends of futures contracts should keep even the most
proficient of technical and fundamental analysts on their guard and flexible
at all times. International developments, weather, and politically-motivated
legislation are among the unpredictable forces that can change the direction
of the markets in an instant. There is no master key that can unlock all the
doors to successful price forecasting. Nevertheless, we believe that the
proper interpretation of the Commitments of Traders" reports is valuable and
belongs on the analyst's key ring.
Jim Bianco, President of
Bianco Research
Looking at things from a
different angle (as he is wont to do), Jim Bianco, president of Bianco
Research in Barrington, Ill., focused on the Commercial hedger's vs. Large
speculators rather than hedgers vs. small traders. Why? Because "small
traders" refers specifically to the volume of activity rather than style
(hedgers or speculators), Bianco explained. Large speculators are just that,
he said, "trend-following technical types" with no position in the
underlying asset, in this case the S&P 500 cash. In the latest report, the
large speculators were net long 10,721 contracts -- near-record levels as
well.
Historically, "commercial
hedgers have been right the vast majority of time and the speculators
wrong," Bianco said plainly. How wrong? Large speculators were net short S&P
500 futures every week except five for the six years ending May 16, while
commercial hedgers were net long roughly 95% of the time, or all but about
16 weeks, he reported. (Given that the S&P 500 went from roughly 300 to 1500
in that span and these are "naked shorts," Bianco wondered how speculators
managed to stay in business. He mused that there probably has been a big
turnover in their ranks.)
Bianco offered two caveats to analysis of the report:
One, when commercial hedgers
get it wrong, it's usually in a "major way" where they miss a major secular
change. For example, commercial hedgers were net short crude futures for
much of 1998 and 1999 as the commodity plunged to $10 a barrel, but remained
so during the initial phase of its recovery to above $30 this year.
"Eventually, they got back in synch, but struggled in the beginning."
Two, May 16 is significant because the hedgers and speculators swapped
positions (the former getting short, the latter long) in conjunction with a
change in the reporting requirements by the CTFC. Previously, trades above
600 contracts were considered "large" vs. small. Since May 16, the threshold
has risen to 1000."The CTFC is not going to recalculate [the reports] going
back in time so we effectively have six months of history and can't read
into this either way," Bianco said.
The Myth of Commercial
Superiority in the Futures Markets Dan Norcini
Once again we see that many in the gold community are anxiety-laden with
dread over the prospects for poor "ol Yeller. As can be expected, the "I
never met a gold rally I could not pick a top in" expert advisors are
warning of impending disaster for gold bugs. Some of these gold perma-bears,
and I hate to sound too piquant, remind me of roaches that emerge as soon as
the lights go out in the kitchen. They run hither and thither defiling
everything they come in contact with only to scurry back into the cracks and
crevices as soon as the lights come back on. "Gold is finished". ""The top
is in and we are looking for gold to move back down in earnest". "The nth
super-cycle has combined with the xth sine wave that has harmonized with the
zth multi-year squiggly whatever to tell me that the golden goose is
cooked". And so on and so on and so they pontificate, ad infinitum, ad
nauseam!
To buttress their claims, they
trot out the war-wearied, old soldier argument that the Commercial category,
comprised of the "genius, boy wonders, miracle working, epitome of wisdom
and knowledge" traders have amassed a sizeable net short position against
the poor, dumb, ignorant, hapless, witless speculators who have moved over
to the net long side of the market. Obviously, the "smart" money is betting
on declining gold prices while the dim-witted speculators are long and wrong
or so the argument goes.
Is this really the case
however? Are the commercials the superior traders? Do they always make
money? Can the hapless speculators, especially the feeble small traders ever
hope to beat the commercials? If the answer to this last question is, "NO",
then I submit the futures markets might as well be shut down since no small
trader should ever attempt to defy the powerful commercial interests.
Happily for us, the answer is not, "NO", but is rather the opposite. The
small specs and the large specs are quite capable of regularly taking money
out of the market and right out of the commercial category's pocketbooks if
they trade smart.
We find no reason to believe
that Commitments of Traders Report is manipulated by the CFTC or the FDA.
However, the increasing frequency of the COT Reports may be having a
deleterious effect on its usefulness. The historical value of the COT Report
was based on the monthly cycle. We are now using a weekly report. We may be
comparing apples to oranges. A monthly chart is more reliable than a weekly
chart for trend determination!
Another problem is the
interpretation of a Large Commercial's (Hedgers) activites. They are long
the commodity by definition. Their primary concern is to avoid a price break
which would reduce the value of their inventories. A rising market is not a
major focus of their trading activites. Therefore, it seems likely that the
Large Commercials (Hedgers) will be the best guide for predicting bear
markets. The very size of their positions preclude trading for quick
profits.
The question of proper
interpretation of the COT must be addressed.Fortunately,various authors have
shared their perspective on the value and use of the COT report.
Jim Bianco found that the
Commercials (Hedgers) were almost always right, and the Large speculators
were almost always wrong. (Given that the S&P 500 went from roughly 300 to
1500 in that span and these are "naked shorts," Bianco wondered how
speculators managed to stay in business. He mused that there probably has
been a big turnover in their ranks).
William L. Jiler "We were
somewhat surprised to find that the Large Hedgers were consistently superior
to the Large Speculators. However, the predictive results for the Large
Speculators varied widely from market to market".The Commodity Research
Bureau studies validate the Large Commercial's superiority in market
forecasting.However, one would have to use the interpretative rules
developed by the CRB.
Dan Norcini finds that the COT
is a secondary input to his trading activites Mr. Norcini is adamant that
the following the trend is the primary approach, and all other factors are
for confirmation only.
Jim Sinclair gave this
response to a question about the COT. "I put more attention on the price
movement of gold and the MACD 3,7 & 9 plus Momentum 14 than I would now on
COT. Therefore, I make nothing of COT either bullishly or bearishly on gold.
Also, do not look at static numbers on anything but rather look for trend.
COT is more important on Cotton than it is say for gold."
George Paulos volunteered the
following observation; "I watch the COT myself for gold and silver. There
seems to be some correlation with intermediate trends, but the other markets
don't make sense to me.".
Summation
The readers will have to make their own minds from the evidence presented.
My personal opinion is that Mr. Sinclair, Mr. Norcini, and Mr. Paulos have
the best of this argument Perhaps it's time to downplay the COT Report. It
appears to be needlessly complicating our trading strategies! Most of the
time the markets are in a trading range, or trending upward. The COT is the
most useful only a small percentage of the time, but we must trade most of
the time. Let's rely on tools that work most of the time!
FORGET THE DRAMA! TRADE WITH
THE TREND!
Author
Wayne N.
Krautkramer is a former Fortune 100 financial manager with 30 years
experience in commodities and stocks.
http//onlypill.tripod.com
printer-friendly version
More Bear Market Reader
|