Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A
R
E
S
H
C
O
P
T
O
N
Submitted
By
SUDHEER REDDY
Reg.No.05XQCM6095
OF
Prof.B.V.Rudra Murthy
Professor, MPBIM
DECLARATION
This has not been submitted in part or full towards any other degree
or Diploma of Bangalore University or any other University
Date: Sudheer M
Reddy
PRINCIPAL’S CERTIFICATE
GUIDE’S CERTIFICATE
This has not formed the basis for the award of any Degree/Diploma
by Bangalore University or any other University.
I also certify that he has fulfilled all the requirements under the
covenant governing the submission of dissertation to the Bangalore
University for the award of MBA Degree.
Date : Prof.B.V.Rudra
Murthy
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
A teacher is a perennial source of inspiration and guidance in all the
academic activities of his students throughout. I whole-heartedly extend
my deep and sincere gratitude to Dr.T.V.Narasimha Rao, faculty for
Finance, MPBIM, for his continuous guidance and help provided for
completing this research study.
I also express my gratitude to all friends and family members for extending
their helping hand whenever I approached them. Without their help this
research could not have been presented in a proper manner.
A
T
B
E
L
O
F
C
N
S
ABSTARCT 01
1. INTRODUCTION
Introduction and Background of the study 02
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Past literature 09
3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Hypothesis statement 19
Methodology 21
Theory of stationarity 23
Gangers co-integration test 26
5.CONCLUSION 40
BIBLIOGRAPHY 41
ANNEXURES 42
ABSTRACT
This paper addresses the Efficiency of commodity futures market of soy bean, chana and
sugar. Whether, the Futures contracts trading has significant impact on the spot prices or
not. Using unit root test it is confirmed that the data is stationary. The residual based
Ganger co-integration test also indicates that the spot prices have co-integrated, with the
NCDEX Futures prices. After doing unit root test for the first order difference data, when
we found data is stationary then this data is tested for residual values. Then once again
the residual values are tested for unit root test to see the both the future series and spot
series are co-integrated with each other. The unit root test conducted for residual values
also found that the data is stationary. Hence the unit root tests conducted for both the
values are stationary, we can say that the market is efficient in these three commodities.
The volatility in the short run prices has corrected over a period in the long run.
In India, the first commodity futures exchange was set up in 1875, in Mumbai, under the
aegis of Bombay Cotton Traders Association. A clearing house for clearing and
settlement of these trades was set up in 1918. In oilseeds, a futures market was
established in 1900. Wheat futures market began in Hapur in 1913. Futures market in raw
jute was set up in Calcutta in 1912 and the bullion futures market in Bombay in 1920.
During the post Independence period commodity trading saw various regulatory
decisions. The Forward Contract (Regulation) Act was enacted in 1952 and the FMC or
the Forward Markets Commission was established in 1953 under the Ministry of
Consumer Affairs. FMC acts as a regulatory body, which regulates the commodity
markets in India. The mid-1960s witnessed an unprecedented rise in the prices of major
oils and oilseeds as a result of a sharp fall in output. Futures trade was banned in most
commodities to contain speculation, which the government attributed to rising inflation.
In 2002-03, The Government of India took two steps that gave a fillip to the commodity
markets. The first one was setting up of nation wide demutualized multi commodity
exchanges and the second one was expansion of list of commodities permitted for
trading. Today we have three nationalized exchanges in India viz. MCX, NCDEX and
NMCE; and more than 21 regional exchanges in India.
In May 2006, the commodity futures markets have average daily volumes of more than
Rs.4000 crores at NCDEX and MCX each and have surpassed that of the Bombay Stock
Exchange (BSE) which has a volume of Rs.2500 crores. The total volume of commodity
The study aims at testing the efficiency of the commodity markets, specifically in soy
bean, chana and sugar. An efficient market is one in which the spot market —fully
reflects“the available information and no one can consistently make profits and futures
eliminate the possibility of guaranteed profits. An efficient market would provide reliable
forecasts of spot prices in future. This would also provide export-import oriented firms
with better risk management capabilities.
There has also been a debate in Indian Parliament regarding commodity futures markets
affecting inflation in economy. After the reintroduction of commodity markets in 2002-
03, there have been a few studies on commodity futures market in India. With
tremendous growth in commodity markets, it would be desirable to test the efficiency of
the commodity futures markets.
As a result of the revival of commodity futures in a big way in 2003, the nature of
commodity trade in India has undergone a sea change. Going by trade volume and also
possibly as an identifiable influence on the price-making processes with respect to the
India has three national level multi commodity exchanges with electronic trading and
settlement systems. The National Commodity and Derivative Exchange (NCDEX). The
Multi Commodity Exchange of India (MCX) and the National Multi Commodity
Exchange of India (NMCE) the National Board of Trading in Derivatives (NBOT), offers
trading on a national level, but is not completely online. Currently, the annual value of all
commodity futures traded in India is $135 billion, far less than the potential $ 600 billion.
What is significant, however, is the speed at which the gap is being narrowed.Volumes in
commodity futures have perked up from Rs 20,000 crore to 30,000 crore per annum
before the liberalization of futures trading to around Rs 5.71 lakh crore per annum by the
end of 2004.
Commodities’ trading is now one of the hottest games in town. Volumes grew by 900
percent between financial years 2005-2006 and 2006-2007. The growth of the
The commodity market is a market where forwards, futures and options contracts are
traded on commodities. Commodity markets have registered a remarkable growth in
recent years. The stage is now set for banks to trade in commodity futures. This could
help producers of agricultural products bankers and other participants of the commodity
markets. Banks have started acknowledging the commodity derivatives market. In this
context the Punjab National Bank and the Corporation Bank have sanctioned loans worth
Rs 50 crore to commodity futures traders over the past six months. However, the loans
are not given to pure speculators. A precondition for the loans is that the futures contract
must result in the delivery of the commodity.
Sugar
With over 450 sugar mills, India is the largest sugar producer in the world. Over 11
million tons of refined sugar is produced, accounting for 60% of the total sugar cane
cultivated. Following is the Indian export statistics for sugarcane that counts to about
811027.5 M. Tonnes in the year 2000- 2001.
Regular options trade on futures contracts having March, May, July and October delivery
periods as well as a January expiration option which is based upon the March futures
contract. Serial options are short-life options contracts providing additional option
expirations on existing futures contracts. Perhaps the greatest change in the international
sugar trade has been the trend toward price stabilization. Historically at the mercy of
everything from war to weather, the price of sugar has always been extremely volatile.
Soy bean
In India Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Andhra Pradesh are the major
producers of soybeans. Madhya Pradesh tops the list. Nearly 88% of soyabean is
produced in the state. During 1997-98 total soyabean production in the state was 49.19
metric tonnes which was about 84.2% of the total produce. The domestic market is
improving a lot. Some years back, the (DOC) De-oiled Cake consumption of the soybean
was 10% of the total production. But now it is 25%. It is increasing because of the rise in
cattle population in the country, which in turn results in high consumption. The
remaining 75% is exported and the industry is earning nearly Rs 3,000 crore annually
through exports. Futures trading in soy bean commenced on National Commodity &
Derivatives Exchange Limited (NCDEX) on December 15, 2003.
Chana
India accounted for 60-70% of world production during this period. Production in India
was variable, which was the main reason for the large range in world production.
On average, world production consisted of about 75% desi type and 25% kabuli type.
Production of the kabuli type is more dispersed and therefore less variable than for the
desi type. Futures trading in chana commenced on National Commodity & Derivatives
Exchange Limited (NCDEX) on April 12, 2004.
Trading in commodity futures took place just the way the physical commodities
themselves have always traded, through an “open outcry” system. Of late, however, there
is a distinct move towards “de-materialization” or online electronic trading. Three of the
four major national-level exchanges use screen-based electronic trading and the oldest
(NBOT) is moving towards it as well. In most of the other regional exchanges, trading
takes place primarily through an open outcry system.
Apart from the trading that goes on in the exchanges, there is a significant gray market
outside the exchanges where futures change hands. According to some estimates, trading
in the gray market may account for as much as 25-30% of the total futures trading in
India.
A complex and potentially problematic part of futures trading is the settlement of futures
contracts. It must be borne in mind, that a relatively small fraction of the futures traded
actually come up for delivery – most are “squared off” before maturity. For those sellers
who intend to deliver on their contracts exchanges follow more or less the same system.
Usually about a week before the maturity of the futures contract, the sellers and buyers
have to notify the exchange whether they want to deliver/take delivery on the contract or
“square it off” on maturity, i.e. pay/accept cash. The exchange then matches up the
buyers and sellers intending on making delivery. The actual delivery almost always takes
the form of warehousing receipts. A warehousing receipt is a receipt issued by a
government recognized warehouse, certifying that a certain quantity of an agricultural
Margins in India typically fall in the 5-10% range and one can start trading in
commodities with as low a balance as Rs. 5,000. In addition there are brokerage and other
fees. Brokerage charges usually range from 0.10-0.25 per cent of the contract value and
generally higher for a contract resulting in delivery. There are also transaction charges of
approximately Rs 6 to Rs 10 per contract. The brokerage varies from commodity to
commodity and is below maximum limits set by the relevant exchange.
PAST STUDIES
Abstract
The paper aims to study the commodity futures market efficiency in India and analyzing
its effect on social welfare and inflation in the economy. The wheat futures market at
National Commodity & Derivatives Exchange Ltd. (NCDEX) has been studied and
efficiency has been estimated through Johansen‘s Co-integration approach for different
futures forecasting horizons ranging from one week to three months. The commodity
futures market is not efficient even in the short run. The social loss statistic also indicates
poor price discovery. The growth in commodity futures markets volumes also has a
significant impact on the inflation in the economy.
Methodology
A non-stationary time series is said to be integrated in order one, often denoted by I(1), if
the series is stationary after the first-order differencing. The theory of co-integration
applies to the study of testing the efficiency of a futures market where, St is the spot price
at time t and Ft-i is futures price taken at i periods before the contract matures at time t
If both St and Ft-i are I(1), the co-integration of the vector (St,Ft-i) is a necessary
condition for market efficiency (Lai and Lai, 1991). Co-integration ensures that there
exists a long-run equilibrium relationship between the two series, spot and futures. If St
and Ft-i are not co-integrated, they will move without bound, as a result futures price
would provide no or little information about the movement of the spot price. In addition
to co-integration, tests of market efficiency also requires that futures price must be an
unbiased predictor of spot price i.e. a=0 and b=1 in equation (1).
In effect, the market efficiency should be tested in two steps; first to examine the co-
integration between the two price series St and Ft-I; if co-integration exists then the
parameters restriction a=0 and b=1 is tested. The second step may consist of multiple
tests: a=0 and b=1 jointly or individually for different time series. The constraint b=1 is
more important indicator for market efficiency, because a is non-zero under the existence
of risk premium and/or transportation costs even when the market is efficient. The co-
integration relationship and the parameter restrictions can be tested using Johansen‘s
approach and standard likelihood ratio test.
Initially each individual price series is examined for stationarity. The stationarity is
checked using the Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) unit root tests. If both the
futures price and spot prices are I (1), then Johansen‘s co-integration tests are
th
conducted. Consider a general k order VAR model.
The co-integration relationship can be detected by examining the rank of the coefficient
matrix x, because the number of co integration vectors equals the rank of x. In particular,
the 0 rank i.e. x= 0 ---implies no co integration. In a bi-variable case, i.e., n=2, the two
variable are co integrated only if the rank of = equals 1 (Johansen and Juselius, 1990).
Johansen (1988) suggested two test statistics to test the null hypothesis that there are at
most r co integration vectors. The null hypothesis can be equivalently stated as the rank
of x is at most r, for r = 0,1..,n-1. The two test statistics are based on trace and maximum
eigenvalues, respectively,
where 1…… r are the r largest squared canonical correlations between the residuals
obtained by regressing ΔYt and Yt-1 on ΔYt-1, ΔYt-2… ΔYt-k-1 and 1 respectively.
Y = (S ,F )
In our test for efficiency of futures market, , n = 2, and the null hypothesis should
be tested for r =
0 and r = 1. If r = 0 cannot be rejected, we will conclude that there is no cointegration
vector, and therefore, no cointegration. On the other hand, if r = 0 is rejected, and r = 1
cannot be rejected, we conclude that there is a cointegration relationship.
vector Y. For example, the hypothesis of a=0 and b=1 can be expressed as . We can then
apply the standard likelihood ratio test in this case. The test statistics is twice the negative
log ratio of the two maximum likelihood values under the restricted model versus the full
model. Specifically, the test statistics can be expressed by the canonical correlations as
(Johansen and Juselius, 1990):
λ λ
where 1….. r are the r largest squared canonical correlations under the null hypothesis,
i.e., the restricted model; and 1… are the r largest squared canonical correlations under
2
the full or unrestricted model. The test statistic follows an asymptotic { distribution with
degree of freedom equaling the number of restrictions imposed. When we fit the VECM
model, in case the price series are cointegrated, and weak exogeneity test is performed to
determine whether {i=0, Weak exogeneity means that there is no information about {i in
the marginal model or that one set of variables do not react to disequilibrium.
Stein (1991) has proposed that if the there is mispricing of futures i.e. there is a forecast
error FE where
where FE (i) is i.i.d. with a zero expectation. Then the evaluation of the performance of
such speculative markets is based upon the social welfare generated by different
intertemporal allocations of resources. Welfare is evaluated in terms of the present value
of the utility of per capita consumption.
2
where MSE(i)=E(FE(i)) . MSE (j) is the unavoidable error in pricing the futures. We
believe that for the Indian market one week prior to expiration of contract the participants
will know as much about the expected spot price as they ever will and hence MSE (1
week) will be social loss due to an unavoidable error by the rational participants. MSE (i)
refers to the social loss for the commodity where the futures price has a maturity i months
in the future. Lower the value of SL better is the market functioning. This statistic is
compared with critical value of F statistic to test the null hypothesis that there is no social
loss.
Test of inflation
Subject to the futures market being inefficient and the subsequent mispricing leading to a
social loss in terms of welfare, regression for testing the hypothesis that mispricing of
commodity futures contracts leads to inflation can be performed. For this wholesale price
index inflation can be regressed on the growth in volumes of trade in leading two futures
exchanges in India (NCDEX and MCX), growth in money supply (M3) and growth in oil
prices index. The latter two are perceived to be important determinants of inflation in an
Data
Only three month wheat futures at NCDEX have been included in this study of the
commodity futures market. The spot market rates and the futures prices have been taken
from the NCDEX database. Daily spot and futures prices from July 2004 to July 2006
provided by NCDEX online database have been used for the study. There are three
contracts running simultaneously for wheat futures and twelve contracts each year. The
daily closing prices have been taken to be spot prices. Futures market efficiency has been
tested for five horizons œ one week, two weeks, one month, two months, three months
prior to maturity of each contract. For every horizon, there is one spot price series and
one future price series, a total of ten, five spot price series and five futures prices series
st th
for the study. For NCDEX the contracts start on 21 of a month and end on 20 of the
third month.
For the estimation of inflation, the data for monthly volumes of the commodity traded has
been taken from NCDEX and MCX data. The data for oil index, WPI inflation and M3
money supply has been taken from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) database.
Conclusion
The formal statistical tests on the efficiency of the commodity futures markets show that
it is not even weakly efficient in the short term. The weak exogeneity of the spot price
shows that spot leads the futures price determination and that futures market are not
performing their main role of allowing for price discovery. The social loss statistics for
commodities futures market indicate a poor price discovery process as well. The social
loss statistics for pre-futures and post-futures needs to be determined for further insight.
The regression for inflationary effects of commodity futures markets provides significant
results. It can be said that inflation is persistent as it depends on its past values. The
inflationary effect of rising crude prices has not been observed as its prices are
Abstract
Market efficiency has an influence on the investment strategy of an investor because if
market is efficient, trying to pickup winners will be a waste of time. In an efficient
market there will be no undervalued securities offering higher than deserved expected
returns, given their risk. On the other hand if markets are not efficient, excess returns can
be made by correctly picking the winners. In this paper, an analysis of three popular stock
indices is carried out to test the efficiency level in Indian Stock market and the random
walk nature of the stock market by using the run test and the autocorrelation function
ACF (k) for the period from January 1996 to June 2002. The study carried out in this
paper has presented the evidence of the inefficient form of the Indian Stock Market. From
autocorrelation analyses and runs test we are able to conclude that the series of stock
indices in the India Stock Market are biased random time series. The auto correlation
analysis indicates that the behavior of share prices does not confirm the applicability of
the random walk model in the India stock market. Thus there are undervalued securities
in the market and the investors can always excess returns by correctly picking them.
METHEDOLOGY
Since the test of weak form of EMH, in general, have come from the random walk
literature, so I am interested in testing whether or not successive price changes were
independent of each other. In this paper, I will use Autocorrelation and Runs Test for
testing the efficiency of the stock market.
To test whether ACF (k) is significantly different from zero, the following distribution of
't' is used, i.e. t=ACF (k)/ Se ACF(k). For both random variable series and series with
trends, ACF (k) are very high and decline slowly as the lag value (k) increases. At the
same time the ACF (k) of the first difference series (price changes or returns) are
statistically insignificant when the series is a random walk series. A random walk series
drifts up and down over time. In some situation it may be difficult to judge whether a
trend or drift is occurring. Hence to determine whether a series has significant trend or
whether it is a random walk, the t-test is applied on the series of first differences.
When N is sufficiently large, the sampling distribution of expected number of runs of all
types is approximately normally distributed with mean M and standard error _m .
CONCLUSION
The assumption that the stock prices are random is basic to the Efficient Market
Hypothesis and Capital Asset Pricing Models. The study carried out in this paper has
presented the evidence of the inefficient form of the Indian Stock Market. From
autocorrelation analyses and runs test we are able to conclude that the series of stock
indices in the India Stock Market are biased random time series. The auto correlation
analysis indicates that the behavior of share prices does not confirm the applicability of
the random walk model in the Indian stock market. Thus there are undervalued securities
in the market and the investors can always make excess returns by correctly picking
them.
HYPOTHESIS STATEMENT
COINTEGARTION TEST
HYPOTHESIS STATEMENT
Ho: There is no significant co-integration between spot and futures markets and the
market is not efficient.
H1: There is significant co-integration between spot and futures market and the market is
efficient
DATA COLLECTION
The spot market rates and the futures prices have been taken from the NCDEX database.
Daily spot and futures prices from July 2004 to march 2007 provided by NCDEX online
database have been used for the study. The daily closing prices have been taken to be
spot prices. Futures market efficiency has been tested. To test the efficiency, three
commodities spot prices and futures prices have been taken for the study. For NCDEX
st th
the contracts start on 21 of a month and end on 20 of the third month.
The commodities considered for the study are soy bean, chana, sugar. Both closing and
future prices are obtained from official website NCDEX (www.ncdex.com).
DATA TYPE
The present research makes use of secondary data available in the NCDEX website
pertaining to the daily closing prices data of spot and futures.
DATA SAMPLE
Daily spot and future prices of soy bean, chana, and sugar have been taken.
PERIOD OF SAMPLE
• E views
This software has been used to conduct the Augmented Dickey Fuller Unit root Test,
Johansen Co integration Test.
• SPSS
To test the data for skew ness and kurtosis and to find the data is normally distributed or
not, this software is used.
METHODOLOGY
If the series is stationary after the first-order differencing. The theory of co-integration
applies to the study of testing the efficiency of a futures market where, St is the spot price
at time t and Ft-i is futures price taken at i periods before the contract matures at time t
and i is the number of periods to maturity. If the futures price can prove some prediction
of the spot price i periods ahead, then some linear combination of St and Ft-i is expected
to be stationary, in the sense that there exists a and b such that zt is stationary with mean
0.
(1)
z = S −a −bF
tt t−i
If both St and Ft-i are I(1), the co-integration of the vector (St,Ft-i) is a necessary
condition for market efficiency (Lai and Lai, 1991). Co-integration ensures that there
exists a long-run equilibrium relationship between the two series, spot and futures. If St
and Ft-i are not co-integrated, they will move without bound, as a result futures price
would provide no or little information about the movement of the spot price. In addition
to co-integration, tests of market efficiency also requires that futures price must be an
unbiased predictor of spot price i.e. a=0 and b=1 in equation (1).
In effect, the market efficiency should be tested in two steps; first to examine the co-
integration between the two price series St and Ft-I; if co-integration exists then the
parameters restriction a=0 and b=1 is tested. The second step may consist of multiple
tests: a=0 and b=1 jointly or individually for different time series. The constraint b=1 is
more important indicator for market efficiency, because a is non-zero under the existence
of risk premium and or transportation costs even when the market is efficient. The co-
integration relationship and the parameter restrictions can be tested using Gangers co-
integration test approach.
^ n
λtrace =−T ∑ln(1−λi) i=r +1 (3)
where 1…… r are the r largest squared canonical correlations between the residuals
obtained by regressing ΔYt and Yt-1 on ΔYt-1, ΔYt-2… ΔYt-k-1 and 1 respectively.
Y = (S ,F )
In our test for efficiency of futures market, , n = 2, and the null hypothesis should
be tested for r = 0 and r = 1. If r = 0 cannot be rejected, we will conclude that there is no
co-integration vector, and therefore, no co-integration. On the other hand, if r = 0 is
rejected, and r = 1 cannot be rejected, we conclude that there is a co-integration
relationship.
STATIONARITY
The empirical works based on time series data assumes that the underlying time series is
stationary. In regressing a time series variable on another time series variables, one often
2
obtains a very high R (residuals) even though there is no meaningful relationship
between the two variables. This situation exemplifies the problem of spurious or
nonsense regression, which arises when data is non stationary.
THEORY OF STATIONARITY
Following are different ways of examining about whether a time series variable Xt is
stationary or has a unit root:
• In the AR (1) model, if ρ =1, then X has a unit root. If ρ |< 1 then X is stationary.
• If X has a unit root, and then its autocorrelations will be near one and will not
drop much as a lag length increases.
• If X has a unit root, and then it will have a long memory. Stationary time series do
not have long memory.
• If X has a unit root, then ΔX will be stationary. For this reason, series with unit
root are often referred to as difference stationary series.
This means that if the appropriate order of the AR process is lag2 rather than lag1, the
term ΔYt-1 should be added to the regression model. A test of whether there is a unit root
can be carried out in the same way as for the ADF test, with the test statistics provided by
the ‘t’ statistics of the ρ coefficient. If ρ = 0 then there is a unit root. The same reasoning
can be extended for a generic AR (p) process.
HYPOTHESIS STATEMENT
Dickey Fuller test involve estimating regression equation and carrying out the hypothesis
test. The AR (1) process is….
Yt = C + ρY + ε
t-1 t
Where c and …..are parameters and is to be white noise. If -1 < ρ < 1, then Y is
stationary series. While if ρ = 1, y is non stationary series. Therefore, the hypothesis of a
stationary series is involves whether the absolute value of b is strictly less than one. The
test is carried out by estimating an equation with Yt-1 subtracted from both sides of the
equation.
The usual t-statistic under the null hypothesis of a unit root does not have the
conventional t-distribution. Dickey and fuller (1979) showed that the distribution under
the null hypothesis is nonstandard and simulated the critical values for selected sample
sizes. More recently, Mackinnon (19991) has implemented a much larger set of
simulations than those tabulated by Dickey and Fuller.
The simple Unit root test is valid only if the series as an AR (1) Process. If the series is
correlated at high order lags, the assumption of white noise disturbances is violated. The
ADF controls for high- order correlation by adding lagged difference terms of the
dependent variable to the right-hand side of the regression
Granger introduced the concept of co-integration when he wrote that two variables may
move together though individually they are non stationary. Co-integration is based on the
long run relationship between variables. The idea arises from considering equilibrium
relationships, where equilibrium is a stationary point characterized by forces that tend to
push the variables back toward equilibrium.
In general, if Yt and Xt are both integrated of order I(d), then any linear combination or
the two series will also be I(d).. That is, the residuals obtained on regressing Yt on Xt are
I(d).
If two or more series are co integrated then even though the series themselves may be non
stationary, they will move closely together over time and their difference will be
stationary. Their long run relationship is the equilibrium to which the system converges
overtime and the disturbance term Et can be construed as the disequilibrium error or the
distance that the system is away from equilibrium at time t
Y = a + bx e
t t+ t
2. Then testing these residuals from regression equation for stationarity using a
unit root test of ADF.
2000
1500
soybean
1000
500
0
1 49 97 145 193 241 289 337 385 433 481 529 577 625 673 721
No.of observations
0.08
0.06
0.04
soy bean
0.02
0
1 49 97 145 193 241 289 337 385 433 481 529 577 625 673 721
-0.02
-0.04
-0.06
No.of observations
INTERPRETATION
The above graphs show the daily price movements of soy bean in futures market from 1st
sep 2004 to 20th mar 2007. These movements show that the volatility in the series since
they are showing a upward trend as the time changing. This data has been further tested
for stationarity.
2000
1800
1600
1400
soybean
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
1 50 99 148 197 246 295 344 393 442 491 540 589 638 687 736
No.of observations
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
-0.02 1 55 109 163 217 271 325 379 433 487 541 595 649 703
soy bean
-0.04
-0.06
-0.08
-0.1
-0.12
-0.14
-0.16
No.of observations
INTERPRETATION
The above graphs show the daily price movements of soy bean in spot market from 1st
sep 2004 to 20th mar 2007. These movements show that the volatility in the series since
they are showing a upward trend as the time changing. In this the graph shows initially
the prices are highly volatile. This data has been further tested for stationarity.
3500
3000
2500
chana
2000
1500
1000
500
0
1 47 93 139 185 231 277 323 369 415 461 507 553 599 645 691
No.of observations
0.1
0.05
0
-0.05 1 47 93 139 185 231 277 323 369 415 461 507 553 599 645 691
chana
-0.1
-0.15
-0.2
-0.25
No.of observations
INTERPRETATION
The above graphs show the daily price movements of chana in futures market from 21st
oct 2004 to 20th mar 2007. These movements show that the volatility in the series since
they are showing a upward trend as the time changing. This data has been further tested
for stationarity.
3500
3000
2500
chana
2000
1500
1000
500
0
1 47 93 139 185 231 277 323 369 415 461 507 553 599 645 691
No.of observations
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
chana
0
-0.02 1 47 93 139 185 231 277 323 369 415 461 507 553 599 645 691
-0.04
-0.06
-0.08
No.of observations
INTERPRETATION
The above graphs show the daily price movements of chana in spot market from 21st oct
2004 to 20th mar 2007. These movements show that the volatility in the series since they
are showing a upward trend as the time changing. This data has been further tested for
stationarity.
2500
2000
1500
sugar
1000
500
0
1 28 55 82 109 136 163 190 217 244 271 298 325 352 379 406
No.of observations
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
sugar
0.01
0
-0.01 1 28 55 82 109 136 163 190 217 244 271 298 325 352 379 406
-0.02
-0.03
-0.04
No.of observations
INTERPRETATION
The above graphs show the daily price movements of sugar in futures market from 21st
oct 2004 to 20th mar 2007. These movements show that the volatility in the series since
they are showing a upward trend as the time changing. This data has been further tested
for stationarity.
2500
2000
1500
sugar
1000
500
0
1 28 55 82 109 136 163 190 217 244 271 298 325 352 379 406
No.of observations
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
sugar
0
-0.01 1 28 55 82 109 136 163 190 217 244 271 298 325 352 379 406
-0.02
-0.03
No.of observations
INTERPRETATION
The above graphs show the daily price movements of sugar in spot market from 21st oct
2004 to 20th mar 2007. These movements show that the volatility in the series since they
are showing a upward trend as the time changing. This data has been further tested for
stationarity.
AT LEVELS
H0 = Unit root : Non Stationary
H1 = No Unit root : Stationary
Table 1
Table 2
IN
E
T
R
P
A
O
The ADF test has been conducted on both the future and spot time series at their levels.
The first order difference data is taken for the unit root test to test the stationarity. ADF
values for the SOY BEAN future price is -10.82136, spot price is -9.170110. The results
show that the null hypothesis is rejected since ADF calculated values for future and spot
series are lesser than the critical values at all the levels (1%, 5%, 10%). There exists no
unit root in the series. Therefore, both the series are Stationary.
Table 3
Table 4
IN
E
T
R
P
A
O
The ADF test has been conducted on both the future and spot time series at their levels.
The first order difference data is taken for the unit root test to test the stationarity. ADF
values for the CHANA future price is -11.40149, spot price is -12.47645. The results
show that the null hypothesis is rejected since ADF calculated values for future and spot
series are lesser than the critical values at all the levels (1%, 5%, 10%). There exists no
unit root in the series. Therefore, both the series are Stationary.
Table 5
Table 6
IN
E
T
R
P
A
O
The ADF test has been conducted on both the future and spot time series at their levels.
The first order difference data is taken for the unit root test to test the stationarity. ADF
values for the SUGAR future price is -8.060243, spot price is -8.193794.The results
show that the null hypothesis is rejected since ADF calculated values for future and spot
series are lesser than the critical values at all the levels (1%, 5%, 10%). There exists no
unit root in the series. Therefore, both the series are Stationary.
After obtaining the stationarity of the series at their first order difference, next residual
based granger’s co integration test has been conducted at their levels to know the long
run relationship between the future prices and spot prices. The residuals are obtained by
following the granger’s Ordinary Least Square method.
e S -α - β F
t= t t ------------------------(1)
e F -α - β S
t= t t ----------------------(2)
In the above equations α and β are the regression coefficients which are obtained by
regressing the spot prices against the futures prices. The regression coefficient β is
positive for both the series which gives a some idea that they are positively co integrated.
After obtaining the regression coefficients, the residuals are obtained form the equation
(1) and (2). But this relationship has been further studied by following ADF test.
AT LEVELS
Table 7
Table 8
IN
E
T
R
P
A
O
The above Table 7&8 shows the results regarding the ADF test statistics obtained for
residuals obtained from the Granger’s Co integration Test .The ADF Test has been
conducted to check the unit root in the series. The ADF test statistics calculated for soy
bean spot prices are -9.620079, future prices are -8.340894. These calculated values are
lesser than the Mac Kinnon Critical values at all the levels (1%, 5%, and 10%). This
shows that the null hypotheses of Unit root is rejected at all the levels. Therefore the both
the series are Stationary which shows that the series are co integrated.
Table 10
IN
E
T
R
P
A
O
The above Table 9&10 shows the results regarding the ADF test statistics obtained for
residuals obtained from the Granger’s Co integration Test .The ADF Test has been
conducted to check the unit root in the series. The ADF test statistics calculated for chana
spot prices are -10.42985, future prices are -11.18795. These calculated values are lesser
than the Mac Kinnon Critical values at all the levels (1%, 5%, and 10%). This shows that
the null hypotheses of Unit root is rejected at all the levels. Therefore the both the series
are Stationary which shows that the series are co integrated.
Table 12
IN
E
T
R
P
A
O
The above Table 9&10 shows the results regarding the ADF test statistics obtained for
residuals obtained from the Granger’s Co integration Test .The ADF Test has been
conducted to check the unit root in the series. The ADF test statistics calculated for sugar
spot prices are -8.060243, future prices are -8.214633. These calculated values are lesser
than the Mac Kinnon Critical values at all the levels (1%, 5%, and 10%). This shows that
the null hypotheses of Unit root is rejected at all the levels. Therefore the both the series
are Stationary which shows that the series are co integrated.
The empirical results of the study show that the there exists a long run equilibrium
relationship between NCDEX Spot and futures. This long run relationship between
the prices of these three commodities is evidenced by the Granger’s Co integration
Test. These tests show positive results towards co integration between NCDEX
Spot Prices and Futures prices for the three commodities.
So finally we can conclude that the Future market is efficient in discovering the
Future Spot price compared to Spot market.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
REFERNCE BOOKS
9 Basic Econometrics - Damodar N.Gujarati, (fourth edition)
9 Options and Futures . H C Hull
WEBSITES
9 www.ncdex.com
9 www.finance.yahoo.com
9 www.google.com
9 www.mcx.com
REFERNCE ARTICLES
Annexures
Table1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6
Table 7
Table 8
Table 9
Table 10
Table 11
Table 12