The Ripple Effects of Commodity Disruption
The material below was prepared by Millburn Ridgefield Corporation (“Millburn”). Please see the important disclosures appearing here (https://www.millburn.com/disclosures) and at the bottom of this page. PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS. THE POTENTIAL FOR PROFIT IS ACCOMPANIED BY THE RISK OF LOSS.
Want access to other occasional items or updates? Just provide your information below.
The Ripple Effects of Commodity Disruption
Millburn’s co-CEO and Executive Director of Trading Barry Goodman sat down recently with a group of institutional investors at Brown’s Hotel in London to discuss disruption in the commodity markets, including the spillover into other sectors and how investors may want to think about this new environment. The Q&A below was adapted from some of the discussions that resulted from that event.
Commodities have been a big story over the past year or two, for a range of reasons. How do you view this in light of Millburn’s 50+ years trading commodities, and your 40+ years of experience in these markets?
[Barry Goodman] Our firm has always been a big believer in commodity investing as a diversifier, but in terms of market forces I have never seen the factors line up in the way they are now, and never in such a global way. There are some parallels here and there in history, but really few when you think of the connected world we live in today. That is really amplifying the impact.
Of course some of the volatility is certainly specific to recent events—like the spillover effects of the war in Ukraine and ongoing COVID-driven supply-chain disruptions—but the overall pressure on commodity markets has actually been building for years.
What are the main drivers or factors that you have seen lining up?
[BG] First, the general theme around green energy and the global push for carbon neutrality is certainly one of the main drivers.
A simple example is the Paris Agreement on climate change. Nearly 200 countries adopted it back in 2015 to try to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and keep global warming somewhere below 2%. This type of coordination is truly without precedent, and the ambitious target has potentially massive implications for the way the world will consume commodities.
It may lead to increasing demand for the raw inputs that are needed to achieve this goal. Just as one example, to get to a “net zero” emissions goal by 2050, we may need to get to 60% electric car adoption by 2030. At the moment we are not even at 2% in the US, and globally we are less than 5%. Getting from 5% today to 60% by 2030 will require significant effort and support from governments, corporations, and consumers. But it will also lead to more consumption of minerals. Electric vehicles require about six times the amount of minerals of conventional cars, including metals common to all cars like copper and manganese, but also those specific to EVs like lithium, cobalt, nickel, and graphite. So this demand for these metals will accelerate.
“...the general thematic around green energy and the global push for carbon neutrality is putting pressure on commodity markets...”
Couple this with other sustainability practices and ESG efforts—a related but even broader global effort—and the result is an underinvestment in so called “brown” commodities. It’s hard to find financing for a project these days to drill for more oil. But the reality is we need these brown commodities to help us make the transition to green. So there is a notable disconnect between sustainability goals and practical implementation.
China is another theme that has been building for a while. China itself is undergoing a major transition as it takes its place on the global stage.
And of course inflation makes all of this much more expensive to finance, acting as a headwind.
Add to all this the impacts of a global pandemic and, now, significant geopolitical conflict in Ukraine, each of which resulted in a terrible human toll but also disruption in supply chains for food, materials and certain commodities. Before the pandemic, most countries and corporations just took it for granted that global supply chains and so-called “just-in-time” production was the correct strategy.
And before the conflict, few of us probably realized that Russia, Ukraine and Belarus supply an average of about 20% of certain energy, metals and food to the world.
So what does this mean for commodity pricing?
[BG] Because of all these forces lining up, we’ve been left with some severe imbalances in the commodity supply/demand equation, and as a result an increased fragility of the entire system—this can mean heightened sensitivity to shocks. And again, this is playing out globally, not just in certain regions.
Already we’ve seen moves in commodity markets that can only be described as extreme. Much of it has been to the upside, and I believe that we may be seeing just the first leg-up in pricing. Competition will intensify for the procurement of strategic metals. New, more localized alignments will form, with the resource “haves” aligning with the resource “have-nots.”
But setting up more robust supply chains takes time, and also requires additional investment in raw materials in many cases. So the driving forces are simply too strong for the markets to ignore.
We are setting up for, in my view, a multi-year or even potentially a multi-decade cycle of upward pressure on commodity prices, depending on how things play out.
But that doesn’t mean that the ride up will be smooth. Because the markets are so fragile at the moment, I believe we’ll see a lot of volatility, some attempts at substitution, violent short squeezes like we saw in the LME Nickel markets, and even shifts in political and societal opinion along the way. Geopolitical risk seems to be growing, not receding. And the uncertainty around both demand and supply will remain. All this could mean some large periodic corrections in commodity markets along the way, which we think points to the need for an active, tactical approach rather than a passive one.
Given the scale of some of these market themes, will there be spillover to other asset classes?
[BG] There will certainly be ripple effects across a range of different asset classes—we are already seeing it. And there will also be a whole range of other drivers that maybe aren’t so directly related to commodities but will nonetheless act to amplify the impact on those other asset classes.
But at the highest level, the movement towards deglobalization and the acceleration of sustainability adoption will impact practically all asset classes and create a range of different opportunities beyond commodities. We expect to see global capital reposition itself to take advantage of both short- and long-term opportunity sets.
In currency markets, for example, the effects are likely to be pretty clear. Deglobalization, demographic shifts and fear of weaponizing the dollar will lead to new currency and trade blocs, alternative payment systems (like CIPS as a replacement for SWIFT), and more impetus for currency digitization. The dominance of the US dollar as a reserve currency, which has already been steadily eroding, is likely to continue to fall with this new realignment of blocs, and as we see producers of strategic commodities demanding payment in specific (non US dollar) currencies.
So whereas global currencies have moved pretty much in unison over the last decade or more, I’d expect to now see some pretty significant and sustained cross-border flows, which will impact exchange rates.
“...there will certainly be ripple effects across a range of different asset classes...”
Will there be an impact on fixed income and equity markets?
[BG] Yes. It is already happening. In fixed income, despite a lot of focus on inflation in some of the developed world, there is actually now some pretty meaningful global rate dispersion.
There has certainly been a move towards unwinding of the COVID-19 pandemic liquidity in certain countries, coupled with inflationary pressures (in many cases correlated to the rise in commodity prices), that has led to significant rate rises.
Those inflationary pressures depend a lot on reliance on food and energy, which can differ significantly by country, depending on typical diet and traditional sources of power, for example.
So we will have central banks in some countries with high inflation seeking to keep rates low, to support local growth initiatives. Other countries will see higher levels of inflation due to their reliance on specific foodstuffs that are scarce at the moment or specific energy sources that have been cut off. And in the end, decarbonization will need to be financed, so we’ll see capital seeking the lower rates.
In equities, we are seeing, and I believe we will continue to see, investment from both government and corporate sectors as these “next gen” initiatives move ahead.
While relatively slower to the game perhaps than its Western peers, the US is now moving on some fairly large climate initiatives and funding them to the tune of many billions per year. Meanwhile traditional “brown energy” companies like ExxonMobil are spending big to make a transition to green; ExxonMobil recently announced it will invest 15 billion dollars in carbon capture technologies, grid storage and bio-fuels.
All-in-all, McKinsey thinks “net zero” by 2050 will cost more than $250 trillion. This means massive capital flows, which I believe will lead to the emergence of new industries, and in turn to new opportunities for investors.
What about some of the less traditional asset classes?
[BG] The evolving space of carbon mitigation (and carbon trading) is one sort of “bridge” asset class that is likely to see significant development. There’s been some false starts in this area over the years but with better transparency and with China coming on board, there are opportunities here.
I mentioned the Paris Agreement earlier—the carbon markets could play an important role here as governments and financial engineers figure out the best pricing transparency and off-take mechanisms to accomplish goals. We are seeing some interesting solutions that leverage the blockchain sprout up already.
You mention blockchain. What are the implications for Cryptocurrencies?
[BG] I mentioned briefly before the changes we might expect in the FX markets as a whole and the general impetus towards alternate payment systems beyond the dollar. This could certainly play in the favor of cryptocurrency adoption.
But beyond this, while a lot of the specific use-cases for Crypto are still to be worked out, what is clear is the sheer number of groups trying to work it out is growing substantially, and adoption by institutional players is now pretty firmly established. Some of the pillars of traditional finance, like the CME, State Street and even Fidelity are embracing the Crypto and DeFi [decentralized finance] spaces.
Again, it’s a case of prior momentum existing, but the ripple effects of commodity disruption amplifying the momentum—either in terms of speed, or scale, or both. Deglobalization means the potential needs for new ways to lend money, or finance investments, whereas the dollar may have been the standard in the past. Carbon mitigation requires new ways to think about tracking, pricing and oversight in transparent ways.
For us, as traders, we see Crypto as, at the very least, an immense source of volatility and a very interesting opportunity for data-driven approaches. We’re already running our models on it and starting to incorporate it into some of our strategies.
“...yesterday can be a good predictor of tomorrow, unless you are at an inflection point...”
How should investors prepare for this environment?
[BG] I like to say that yesterday can be a very good predictor of tomorrow, unless you are at an inflection point…and I think that is exactly where we are.
So how should you behave in periods of uncertainty? Putting aside investing for the moment and just thinking about life in general, when faced with uncertainty it’s probably best to try and gather as much relevant information as possible, do your best to make good decisions based on this information, stay away from “big bets” or putting all your eggs in one basket, and, maybe most importantly, be willing to change your view as you learn more, or as the environment changes.
I think investments should be approached the same way. What we have done at Millburn is develop an investment framework that allows us to process large quantities of data in a very rigorous way, including fundamental data, quantitative price data, and other sources. We trade many markets, as many as 150 or more globally (including China), with the idea that one never knows where the opportunities may arise. And we built a framework that trades these markets frequently and can change views quickly if needed.
In a way we’ve been preparing for this moment for 50 years. We are hoping we can help our investors navigate what could be some choppy waters over the next several years. ●
Millburn Ridgefield Corporation is the successor to an asset management organization that first began its operations in 1971. The term “Millburn” is used herein to refer to the activities of Millburn Ridgefield Corporation, its predecessors and its affiliated entities, except as indicated otherwise by the context.
PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS. THE POTENTIAL FOR PROFIT IS ACCOMPANIED BY THE RISK OF LOSS.
The investment strategies and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Diversification does not eliminate the risk of experiencing investment losses. The information contained herein is intended for use by sophisticated investors who may be interested in opening separately managed accounts. Prospective managed account clients must be "qualified eligible persons" within the meaning of CFTC Rule 4.7. Commodity accounts are speculative, employ significant leverage, involve a high degree of risk, are not suitable for all investors, and may involve high fees. There can be no assurance that an investment strategy will achieve its objectives. This information is not a solicitation for investment. Such an investment may only be made on the basis of information provided in and representations made in the appropriate written disclosure document.
RISKS OF AN INVESTMENT IN MILLBURN STRATEGIES (the “Strategies”) include but are not limited to the following: (i) The Strategies are speculative. Investors may lose all or a substantial portion of their investments in the Strategies; (ii) The Strategies are leveraged. The Strategies will acquire positions with a face amount of as much as six to eight times or more of its total equity. Leverage magnifies the impact of both profit and loss; (iii) The performance of the Strategies is expected to be volatile; (iv) Investors will sustain losses if the Strategies are unable to generate sufficient trading profits and interest income to offset fees and expenses; (v) A lack of liquidity in the markets in which the Strategies trades could make it impossible for the Strategies to realize profits or limit losses; (vi) A substantial portion of the trades executed for the Strategies take place on foreign exchanges. No U.S. regulatory authority or exchange has the power to compel the enforcement of the rules of a foreign board of trade or any applicable foreign laws.
THE RISK OF LOSS IN TRADING COMMODITIES CAN BE SUBSTANTIAL. YOU SHOULD THEREFORE CAREFULLY CONSIDER WHETHER SUCH TRADING IS SUITABLE FOR YOU IN LIGHT OF YOUR FINANCIAL CONDITION. THE HIGH DEGREE OF LEVERAGE THAT IS OFTEN OBTAINABLE IN COMMODITY TRADING CAN WORK AGAINST YOU AS WELL AS FOR YOU. THE USE OF LEVERAGE CAN LEAD TO LARGE LOSSES AS WELL AS GAINS. IN SOME CASES, MANAGED COMMODITY ACCOUNTS ARE SUBJECT TO SUBSTANTIAL CHARGES FOR MANAGEMENT AND ADVISORY FEES. IT MAY BE NECESSARY FOR THOSE ACCOUNTS THAT ARE SUBJECT TO THESE CHARGES TO MAKE SUBSTANTIAL TRADING PROFITS TO AVOID DEPLETION OR EXHAUSTION OF THEIR ASSETS. THE DISCLOSURE DOCUMENT CONTAINS A COMPLETE DESCRIPTION OF THE PRINCIPAL RISK FACTORS AND EACH FEE TO BE CHARGED TO YOUR ACCOUNT BY THE COMMODITY TRADING ADVISOR (CTA).
The information contained herein is based on information available as of the date indicated. Any markets and other data described herein change over time, but are accurate as of the date indicated herein. This information is not an invitation to invest in any investment strategy managed by Millburn and must be supplemented by certain disclosure when considering an investment, including important information concerning risk factors, conflicts of interest and other material aspects of an investment; this must be read carefully before any decision whether to invest is made. Investors may lose all or a substantial amount of their investments.
The information contained herein is only current as of the date indicated, and may be superseded by subsequent market events or for other reasons. The information in this presentation has been developed internally and/or obtained from sources believed to be reliable; however, Millburn does not guarantee the accuracy, adequacy or completeness of such information. Nothing contained herein constitutes investment, legal, tax or other advice nor is it to be relied on in making an investment or other decision.
This presentation should not be viewed as a current or past recommendation or a solicitation of an offer to buy or sell any securities or to adopt any investment strategy.
The information in this presentation may contain projections or other forward-looking statements regarding future events, targets, forecasts or expectations regarding the strategies described herein, and is only current as of the date indicated. There is no assurance that such events or targets will be achieved, and may be significantly different from that shown here. The information in this presentation, including statements concerning financial and other market trends, is based on current market conditions, which will fluctuate and may be superseded by subsequent market events or for other reasons. Millburn does not assume any duty, nor does it undertake, to update forward looking statements.
There can be no assurance that an investment strategy will be successful. Historic market trends are not reliable indicators of actual future market behavior or future performance of any particular investment which may differ materially, and should not be relied upon as such.