US20060212384A1 - Commodity futures index and methods and systems of trading in futures contracts that minimize turnover and transactions costs - Google Patents

Commodity futures index and methods and systems of trading in futures contracts that minimize turnover and transactions costs Download PDF

Info

Publication number
US20060212384A1
US20060212384A1 US11/385,624 US38562406A US2006212384A1 US 20060212384 A1 US20060212384 A1 US 20060212384A1 US 38562406 A US38562406 A US 38562406A US 2006212384 A1 US2006212384 A1 US 2006212384A1
Authority
US
United States
Prior art keywords
allocation
nearby
exchange
futures
nextout
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Abandoned
Application number
US11/385,624
Other languages
English (en)
Inventor
Richard Spurgin
Thomas Schneeweis
Hossein Kazemi
George Martin
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
PFDS Holdings LLC
Original Assignee
Alternative Investment Analytics LLC
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Alternative Investment Analytics LLC filed Critical Alternative Investment Analytics LLC
Priority to US11/385,624 priority Critical patent/US20060212384A1/en
Assigned to ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENT ANALYTICS, LLC reassignment ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENT ANALYTICS, LLC ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST (SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS). Assignors: KAZEMI, HOSSEIN B., MARTIN, GEORGE A., SCHNEEWEIS, THOMAS R., SPURGIN, RICHARD B.
Publication of US20060212384A1 publication Critical patent/US20060212384A1/en
Assigned to PFDS HOLDINGS, LLC reassignment PFDS HOLDINGS, LLC ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST (SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS). Assignors: ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENT ANALYTICS, LLC
Priority to US12/613,356 priority patent/US8447694B2/en
Priority to US13/865,557 priority patent/US20130268424A1/en
Priority to US15/804,704 priority patent/US20180285973A1/en
Abandoned legal-status Critical Current

Links

Images

Classifications

    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING OR CALCULATING; COUNTING
    • G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q40/00—Finance; Insurance; Tax strategies; Processing of corporate or income taxes
    • G06Q40/04—Trading; Exchange, e.g. stocks, commodities, derivatives or currency exchange
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING OR CALCULATING; COUNTING
    • G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q40/00—Finance; Insurance; Tax strategies; Processing of corporate or income taxes
    • G06Q40/02—Banking, e.g. interest calculation or account maintenance

Definitions

  • the present invention relates to financial services and more particularly to the trading, i.e. buying and selling, of securities and/or commodities.
  • the present invention provides a Commodity Futures Index.
  • Embodiments of the present invention also provide methods and systems for trading commodity futures contracts.
  • the Goldman Sachs Commodity Index was 1023%, as measured in round turns (a round turn is a purchase and sale of a commodity futures contract).
  • a portfolio of futures contracts that is designed to track the GSCI generally costs over 1% per year (100 basis points) in transactions costs.
  • a portfolio of stocks that tracks the S&P 500 Index can usually be managed for less than 10 basis points per year.
  • the costs described above are associated with simply holding the index and do not include costs associated with making any additional trades. If the investor desires to hold more or less of a particular stock or commodity futures contract then the costs associated with a given futures index, the transactions and turnover costs are increased further.
  • the present invention provides financial products that are advantageous for use in the financial services industry and particularly advantageous for use by traders of commodities.
  • the present invention provides an Index that may be used in the trading of commodity futures.
  • the present invention also provides methods and systems for trading financial instruments, that are particularly advantageous for commodity trading.
  • Use of an embodiment of a method and/or system of the present advantageously allows a commodity trader active asset allocation while minimizing transaction costs generally associated with active asset allocation.
  • a user of a method and/or system of the present invention has the ability to actively manage a portfolio to maximize return on investment, and/or take advantage of trading opportunities without markedly increasing transaction costs. As a result, a user of a method and/or system of the present invention is placed in a position to make more money from their investments.
  • the instant invention allows an investor to employ an active trading strategy using futures contracts that will, within certain boundaries, result in lower transactions than a passive strategy.
  • the instant invention uses a TMS (Transaction Minimizing Strategy) approach, which fixes the maximum roll quantity (described below) in a given market so that it is within 20% of, typically within 5% of, and in certain embodiments equal to the daily roll quantity (also described below). This differs from other published futures strategies. Other published strategies roll from 20% to 100% of their positions on a particular date, which means that these other strategies tend to be more expensive due to the higher transaction costs relative to the present invention. Accordingly, in an embodiment, the instant invention provides a trading approach that utilizes the innovation of the instant invention as well as methods, computer readable media, and systems for using this innovation.
  • embodiments of the present invention relate to methods and systems for reducing transaction costs and minimizing turnover in the trading of futures contracts.
  • the present invention further provides an algorithm whose output is a method of investing in futures contracts that may reduce the rate of turnover, and thus the cost of trading, of certain common trading strategies.
  • a method of the present invention may be applied to a class of strategies referred to as indexing strategies that incorporate a dynamic asset allocation approach using futures contracts.
  • the instant invention may reduce the turnover (i.e., the number of transactions) in futures trading thereby reducing the costs of futures trading by employing a unique method of investing in futures contracts.
  • the method of the instant invention employs a transactions minimizing strategy (TMS) against indexing strategies and uses a dynamic asset allocation approach using futures contracts.
  • TMS transactions minimizing strategy
  • the transactions minimizing strategy (TMS) of the instant invention can result in lower turnover and lower transactions costs.
  • TMS transactions minimizing strategy
  • GSCI Goldman Sachs Commodity Index
  • the TMS may result in total turnover that is up to 30% lower.
  • the resulting cost savings on an investment of $100 million may amount to $300,000 per year or more (e.g., a 30% reduction of 1% transactions costs).
  • FIG. 1 shows a flowchart of a method in one embodiment of present invention.
  • FIG. 2 is the hypothetical performance statistics for the NCCI (Northhampton Capital Commodity Index) versus the long only index.
  • FIG. 3 shows a graph of the value of 1000 invested commodities for the NCCI-TP and long only return indexes from January 1991 to December 2004.
  • FIGS. 4 - 10 are the hypothetical performance statistics from 1991 until 2004 for a series of commodities in the NCCI and the long only index.
  • FIG. 11 is a Numerical Example for cattle in August 2004 showing how the NCCI values for total return index and the target allocation are calculated.
  • FIG. 12 is a Numerical Example for cattle in August 2004 showing how the NCCI values for the actual allocation to each contract, the daily turnover, and the daily return are calculated.
  • FIG. 13 shows the Underwater Curve for NCCI-TR and Long Only Indexes from January 1991 to December 2004.
  • FIG. 14 shows the hypothetical performance of the AIA Global Index versus the Long, Unhedged Index and the MSCI Global Index.
  • FIG. 15 shows the Underwater Curve for the AIA Global Index and Unhedged Long Indexes from Dec. 31, 1990 through Dec. 31, 2004.
  • FIG. 16 shows the composite performance for each country allocation using a 50/50 stock/bond allocation.
  • FIGS. 17 - 23 are hypothetical performance statistics from 1991 through 2005 for each foreign market.
  • FIG. 24 shows the return for hedges against each foreign currency.
  • the present invention provides an Index comprising at least one commodity futures contract.
  • an index of the present invention will comprise a plurality of commodity futures contracts traded accorded to a method of the present invention.
  • an index refers to a statistical indicator providing a representation of the value of the commodity futures contracts which constitute it. Indices often serve as barometers for a given market or industry and benchmarks against which financial or economic performance is measured. An index may be used to measure the percent change in return.
  • a return may comprise one or more of a spot return; a collateral return; and/or a roll return.
  • spot return,’ ‘collateral return,’ and ‘roll return’ are used consistent with their usage by those of skill in the art.
  • the term commodity is often used to refer to a product which trades on a commodity exchange; including, for example commodities, foreign currencies and financial instruments and indexes. More traditionally, the term commodity generally refers to a physical substance, such as food, grains, and metals, which is interchangeable with another product of the same type, and which investors buy or sell, usually through futures contracts. As the price of the underlying commodity fluctuates due to changes in supply and demand, the return on a corresponding futures contract fluctuates in price based at least in part on the difference between the prices of the futures contract the underlying commodity.
  • a futures contract generally refers to a standardized, transferable, exchange-traded contract that requires delivery of a commodity, bond, currency, or stock index, at a specified price, on a specified future date. Unlike options, futures convey an obligation to buy. The risk to the holder is unlimited, and because the payoff pattern is symmetrical, the risk to the seller is unlimited as well. Dollars lost and gained by each party on a futures contract are equal and opposite. In other words, futures trading is a zero-sum game. Futures contracts are forward contracts, meaning they represent a pledge to make a certain transaction at a future date. The exchange of assets occurs on the date specified in the contract.
  • Futures are distinguished from generic forward contracts in that they contain standardized terms, trade on a formal exchange, are regulated by overseeing agencies, and are guaranteed by clearinghouses. Also, in order to insure that payment will occur, futures have a margin requirement that must be settled daily. Finally, by making an offsetting trade, taking delivery of goods, or arranging for an exchange of goods, futures contracts can be closed. Hedgers often trade futures for the purpose of keeping price risk in check.
  • the instant invention uses a Transaction Minimizing Strategy (TMS) that fixes the maximum roll quantity in a given market as a multiple of the daily roll quantity.
  • TMS Transaction Minimizing Strategy
  • An investor or Index Committee may choose this TMS Multiple to be set to 3, may be set to 2, may be set to 1, or set some fraction between 1 and 3. This differs from other published futures strategies. Because, in an embodiment of the present invention in which the Multiple is equal to 1, the daily roll quantity may not exceed 5% for any of the futures contracts currently traded on major exchanges (because there are no periods of time where the days between expirations is less than 20 days), the maximum roll quantity of an investor using the TMS may not exceed 5% in any market and will often be much less. An additional benefit of this method is a reduction in market impact from rollovers.
  • An embodiment of the present invention may employ a maximum nearby allocation (MNA).
  • the MNA is equal to the product of the daily roll quantity (DRQ) and the number of days until the last roll date (LRD).
  • DRQ daily roll quantity
  • LRD last roll date
  • the MNA may be set to a value that is different than the product of the DRQ and the LRD.
  • the MNA feature will not be utilized at all. However, if the MNA is eliminated, the MRQ will occasionally exceed the DRQ.
  • the present invention 100 it may be advantageous to determine a change that should be made in a nearby position and/or a nextout position. For example, in an embodiment of the present invention, it may be advantageous to adjust a nearby position and/or a nextout position based at least in part on an actual allocation of futures contracts and a target allocation of futures contracts.
  • an allocation difference can be calculated 101 .
  • the allocation difference can be calculated 101 by subtracting the actual allocation from the target allocation.
  • the allocation difference may be compared with the maximum roll quantity.
  • the allocation difference may also be compared with 0 to determine whether the allocation difference is positive or negative. In such an embodiment, there are 5 potential states for courses of action that may result from the two comparisons, though only one may be performed:
  • An embodiment of the present invention may further comprise the step where, if there has been a change in the nextout position and/or the nearby position 112 , and if the nearby allocation exceeds the maximum nearby allocation 112 , then the amount by which the nearby allocation exceeds the maximum nearby allocation is rolled in the usual way 113 (i.e., nearby contracts are sold out of the nearby position and nextout contracts are purchased for the nextout position).
  • the total turnover may not be larger than a system that employs a different rollover strategy and will, in almost every instance, be lower.
  • the turnover may not be higher than the simply rolling a long position because:
  • the instant invention is directed to methods of performing the above enumerated steps in trading futures.
  • the above-enumerated steps can also be part of an algorithm, which in turn can be a computer program or a part of a computer program.
  • a computer readable media and systems employing the algorithm and/or a computer program are considered to be within the scope of the instant invention.
  • the instant invention contemplates the use of any computer program that comprises one or more of the above steps, wherein such computer program is independent software, may be either web accessible, or is part of a network that may or may not be accessible by the web.
  • any computer program that performs the above-enumerated steps may be used in concert with any other computer program, whether or not the other computer program is commercially available.
  • any computer program that comprises the above-enumerated steps may be linked to any market or market index that will allow trades or rollover to occur per trader's instruction or to occur automatically.
  • embodiments of the present invention may be stored as instructions, code or programs on computer-readable media.
  • Systems in communication with such computer-readable media may execute the instructions stored within the computer-readable media to perform the steps described herein as carried out, or assisted, by a processor, computer or server.
  • Embodiments of computer-readable media may comprise, but are not limited to, an electronic, optical, magnetic, or other storage or transmission device capable of providing a processor, such as the processor in a web server, with computer-readable instructions.
  • media comprise, but are not limited to, a floppy disk, CD-ROM, magnetic disk, memory chip, ROM, RAM, ASIC, configured processor, all optical media, all magnetic tape or other magnetic media, or any other medium from which a computer processor can read.
  • various other forms of computer-readable media may transmit or carry instructions to a computer, such as a router, private or public network, the Internet or through a website, or other transmission device or channel.
  • the processor, and the processing, described may be in one or more structures, and may be dispersed through one or more structures.
  • the processor may be in communication with a market or market index that may allow trades or rollover transactions, wherein such transactions or trades may occur by manual instruction or automatically.
  • the processor may comprise code for carrying out one or more of the methods (or parts of methods) described herein.
  • the actual allocation and the target allocation are for any of a number of given individual commodities.
  • commodities include energy such as crude oil (CL), heating oil (HO), gasoline (HU), natural gas (NG), metals such as gold (GC), copper (HG), or aluminum (AL), grains such as corn (C), wheat (W), soybeans (S), livestock such as cattle (LC), lean hogs (LH), softs such as cotton (CT) and coffee (KC), and dairy products such as milk (MJ).
  • the instant invention includes allocations of any present day commodities that are actively traded and/or any commodities that may be actively traded in the future including but not limited to futures contacts for delivery of equity indexes, bonds, and foreign exchange.
  • the approach of the instant invention will result in reduced transactions costs relative to a passive strategy or a very actively traded system as long as the trading system or strategy satisfies two criteria:
  • An embodiment of the present invention uses a momentum-based trading rule to determine a target allocation for a commodity. Some embodiments of the present invention may use different methods for determining a target allocation for a commodity. Some embodiments of the present invention may use a momentum-based trading rule in combination with one or more other methods, or may not use a momentum-based trading rule at all in determining a target allocation for a commodity.
  • the target allocation can be based on one or more lookback indicators.
  • a lookback indicator according to an embodiment of the present invention may give a positive or a negative signal for a specified period for a commodity. Such a signal may be based at least in part on a difference between a total return index on a first date and second date, wherein the second date occurred one or more days prior the first date.
  • the signal is positive if the total return index on the second date is less than the total return index on the first date, otherwise the signal is negative.
  • a lookback indicator because it looks back one or more days, but ignores dates in between the first and second dates.
  • one or more lookback indicators may be used to compute a target allocation.
  • a total return index for a date may be calculated before evaluating one or more lookback indicators.
  • a total return index may be calculated using the following steps: calculating a proportion of an investment held in a nearby contract on a first date (P t ), calculating a spot index (S t ), calculating a one-day spot profit/loss (SpotPL t ), calculating roll profit/loss (rollPL t ), calculating a total profit/loss (totalPL t ), calculating a daily return (r t ), and calculating the total return index (TRI t ).
  • the total profit/loss may be set equal to the spot profit/loss plus the roll profit/loss as shown:
  • Total PL t Spot PL t +roll PL t
  • the total return index may be computed from the daily returns.
  • TRI t TRI t-1 (1 +r t )
  • a lookback indicator for a first date, t, and a second date, t-x may have a positive signal if the total return index for date t (TRI t ) is greater than the total return index for date t-x (TRI t-x ).
  • a lookback indicator, L x may have a value of 1, if TRI t >TRI t-x , and a value of 0 otherwise.
  • An embodiment of the present invention may employ one or more lookback indicators to determine a target allocation.
  • a target allocation may be based on three lookback indicators according to the following equation, wherein L 15 is a lookback indicator for a date 15 days preceding the present date, L 27 is a lookback indicator for a date 27 days preceding the present date, and L 55 is a lookback indicator for a date 55 days preceding the present date.
  • TA t [L 15 +L 27 +L 55 ]*100%]/3
  • a target allocation may be based on three lookback indicators according to the following equation, wherein 40% is the minimum percentage allocation for the target allocation.
  • TA t 40%+20%*( L 15 +L 27 +L 55 )
  • a more general equation for determining a target allocation based upon one or more evenly-weighted lookback indicators may be expressed as follows, wherein TA min % is the minimum percentage for the total allocation, n is the number of lookback parameters to be used, and L 1 through L n are the lookback parameters to be used (n.b. the subscripts, 1 and n, used here denote a series of lookback parameters, rather than dates related to the lookback parameters), and wherein 100% ⁇ X % ⁇ TA min % ⁇ 0%.
  • T ⁇ ⁇ A t T ⁇ ⁇ A min ⁇ % + X ⁇ % + T ⁇ ⁇ A min ⁇ % n * ( L 1 + ... + L n )
  • T ⁇ ⁇ A t 40 ⁇ % + 100 ⁇ % - 40 ⁇ % 3 * ( L 15 + L 27 + L 55 )
  • An embodiment of the present invention may determine a target allocation based at least in part on one or more unevenly weighted lookback parameters. For example, a total allocation may be based on three lookback parameters with uneven weights.
  • TA t 40%+[(10%* L 15 )+(20%* L 27 )+(30%* L 55 )]
  • L 15 has the least weight
  • L 27 has twice the weight of L 15
  • L 55 has triple the weight of L 15 .
  • Still other embodiments may comprise more or fewer lookback parameters, different weights, or a different minimum percentage allocation.
  • W % is a weighting percentage
  • n ⁇ 1 p denotes one of a set of lookback parameters, wherein the set of lookback parameters comprises one or more lookback parameters; and 100% ⁇ X % ⁇ 0%.
  • the TMS is employed using a given commodities index by applying the following generic steps:
  • NCCI Northhampton Capital Commodity Index
  • This Index has been used for trading either 13 or 14 commodity futures contracts.
  • Table 1 shows the futures contracts that have been selected to be components of the index.
  • the allocations to each commodity and the contract months traded are also provided. There is the assumption that allocations will be made on an unleveraged basis and based on market prices for the various contracts at the time of investment. This implies a re-allocation of risk each day due to the daily roll methodology employed in the index.
  • NCCI Northhampton Capital Commodity Index
  • spot index (equation (2) below).
  • the weights are determined by the Index Committee and changes in weights are announced by June 30 of any year for implementation on January 1 of the following year.
  • a different mix (of 14 commodities) may be used, including the following areas of trade and commodities that fall into these areas (with the respective maximal percentages being recited in the parentheses):
  • the NCCI utilizes a momentum-based trading rule to determine the target allocation to a given commodity.
  • a momentum-based trading rule to determine the target allocation to a given commodity.
  • the target allocation is based on the momentum-based trading rule described in Spurgin (Spurgin, R., A Benchmark for Commodity Trading Advisor Performance, The Journal of Alternative Investments, Fall, 1999), which is herein incorporated in its entirety, and as described above.
  • Spurgin Purgin, R., A Benchmark for Commodity Trading Advisor Performance, The Journal of Alternative Investments, Fall, 1999
  • a target allocation can be derived from many of the publicly available trading rules.
  • a momentum-based trading rule evaluates three signals for each commodity; a short term signal, a medium term signal, and a long term signal. Each signal can be positive or negative. Based on these signals and a minimum target allocation of 40%, the target allocation takes on one of four possible values: 40%, 60%, 80%, and 100% of the maximum allocation.
  • the position in each commodity will never be more than 100% or less than 40%.
  • corn is given a 5% maximum allocation, so the target allocation for corn as a percentage of the total value of the index can be 2% (i.e., 40% of the maximum allocation), 3% (i.e., 60% of the maximum allocation), 4% (i.e., 80% of the maximum allocation), or 5% (i.e., 100% of the maximum allocation).
  • the target allocation can be determined by means of a lookback strategy.
  • the target allocations in the NCCI are based on the lookback strategy described above.
  • An x-day lookback strategy gives a positive signal if the total return index on date t is higher than it was on date t-x. Otherwise, the strategy gives a negative signal.
  • the number of days used to compute the lookback indicators in the NCCI are 15 days for the short-term (L 15 ), 27 days for the medium-term (L 27 ), and 55 days for the long-term (L 55 ) momentum-based trading strategy.
  • the total return index may be computed before the lookback signals can be evaluated. Note that this total return index may only be used to evaluate trading signals and generate the target allocation. It may not actually traded in the index. This may be because the total return index may be based on a full long position in the underlying commodity futures contract and uses a slightly different rollover strategy than the traded portion of the NCCI.
  • the NCCI total return index for each commodity may be a weighted average of the return of the position in both the nearby and the nextout contracts.
  • the NCCI uses a continuous roll strategy. It holds positions in the two nearest active futures contracts, and each day sells some of the front contract and rolls the position into the next-out contract.
  • the roll strategy incorporated in the total return index may be linear—if there are 90 days between the last roll dates of the nearby and nextout contract, then 1/90 of the position will be rolled each day ( 3/90 will be rolled over the weekend). Rollovers will be based on calendar day with weekend/holiday rolls taking place on the day after the weekend/holiday.
  • This strategy may be employed in order to provide the smoothest possible return series from which to generate a trend-following system.
  • Other embodiments may comprise non-linear or other total return indexes. Mathematically, the strategy can be summarized as described above in the “Momentum-Based Trading Rule” section.
  • Other embodiments may comprise trading rules that have positive values based on other or additional considerations.
  • the NCCI evaluates three lookback signals to determine the target allocation: L 15 , L 27 , and L 55 .
  • the target allocation will be 100%.
  • the target allocation would be 5% (or 100% of 5%). Changes in the NCCI trading rule are implemented with a 1-day lag, which may reduce ambiguity.
  • a quicker way of evaluating the signal may be to look for the Number of Positive Signals Target Allocation as % of Maximum Allocation:
  • the average target allocation may be 70%, as each signal will have a 50% chance of being positive on any given day.
  • the average target allocation may be less than 70%, or may comprise a different lookback strategy or parameters.
  • the average target allocation data derived from historical data can likely be used advantageously to decide what futures contracts to hold and in what amounts.
  • the instant invention can advantageously be used to further increase profits.
  • the futures that perform well are given a higher target allocation and are thus, held in higher amounts.
  • the commodity futures that perform less well may be held in lower amounts, or alternatively, can be used in a decision to not hold the commodity at all when the index is being set.
  • the average target allocation data derived from historical data can aid in this decision.
  • the Transactions Minimizing Strategy incorporates many of the features of the daily rollover strategy described above, but with modifications to allow for dynamic asset allocation based on the trading rule while still minimizing transactions costs.
  • the basic insight may be the connection between the rollover strategy and the asset allocation strategy.
  • the daily rollover strategy involves selling a small portion of the position in the nearby contract each day and buying a similar quantity of the deferred contract (i.e., the nextout contract). However, if the intent is to reduce the overall exposure to the contract, this can be accomplished by selling a small portion of the nearby contract as planned, but not buying the deferred (i.e., nextout) contract. The result is a lower overall allocation. Similarly, increasing the allocation can be accomplished by slightly increasing the position in the deferred contract but not selling the front contract. Thus, within certain boundaries, active asset allocation can be accomplished without increasing the transactions costs.
  • the hypothetical annual performance of the NCCI for the years 1991 to 2004 is shown in the table (Table 3) below.
  • Table 3 The hypothetical annual performance of the NCCI for the years 1991 to 2004 is shown in the table (Table 3) below.
  • the NCCI Long-Only index shows the hypothetical performance of the NCCI without the dynamic asset allocation strategy (i.e., it does not apply the lookback strategy and assumes a target allocation of 100% throughout for each commodity).
  • the difference between the NCCI and the NCP Long-Only indexes reflects the performance of the asset allocation strategy.
  • the other comparison index, called the Target Allocation Index assumes that the actual allocation is moved to the target allocation each trading day.
  • the difference between the NCCI return and the Target Allocation return reflects the performance of the Transactions Minimizing System as described above.
  • the performance table indicates that the NCCI average annual return (10.2%) is about the same as the Long Only return (10.0%), but the compound return of the NCCI (8.9%) may be substantially higher than the compound return of the Long Only index (7.3%). Furthermore, the annualized volatility of the NCCI (11.2) may be significantly lower than the volatility of the Long Only index (14.9%). The higher return and lower volatility result in a Sharpe Ratio for the NCCI of 0.41, about twice as large as the Sharpe Ratio of the Long Only index.
  • the NCCI When compared to the Target Allocation index, the NCCI has an annual return that is a about a half-percent lower than the Target Allocation index and almost the same volatility. However, the annual turnover for the Target Allocation index is more than 50% higher than the NCCI, so it is likely that the additional trading costs would compensate for the higher returns of the Target Allocation index.
  • the low correlation between commodity index products and other major asset classes may make them an attractive diversifier (such as trading currencies in the financial markets).
  • the correlation with other commodity indexes is very high and the correlation with other asset classes is quite low.
  • the correlations between the NCCI and other major commodity indexes are above 93% and are only slightly less than the corresponding correlations with the Long Only index.
  • the correlation between the NCCI and U.S. stock and bond markets are both close to zero.
  • the NCCI also has a low correlation (0.17) with an index of large commodity trading advisors.
  • the momentum-based trading rule incorporated in the NCCI is similar to a portfolio insurance strategy.
  • the NCCI reduced its average position to below 60% of assets, allowing for significantly reduced losses during those periods.
  • the NCCI experienced a peak-to-trough decline of 27% during the 1997-2000 bear market in commodity prices, while the Long Only index experienced a 43% peak-to-trough decline.
  • the subsequent decline that bottomed out in 2001 saw an 18% decline for the NCCI and a 29% decline for the Long Only index.
  • NCCI drawdowns were about 1 ⁇ 3 less severe and about 1 ⁇ 3 shorter on average than drawdowns in the Long Only index. Thus, it may be advantageous to not have large allocations of commodities in periods where they are suffering drawdowns.
  • Average turnover in the NCCI Composite averages about 30% less than the Long Only index.
  • the NCCI turns over about 6.4 times per year versus 9.0 times for the Long Only index. While estimates of transactions costs in commodity markets vary considerably, it is common for investors to pay in excess of 100 basis points per year for a long-only commodity index product, so a reduction of 30% in costs can mean substantial savings. Furthermore, because the NCCI trades a little each day rather rolling the entire position on a few days each roll period, there is less impact on liquidity. This can result in substantial savings by employing the NCCI.
  • the turnover rate for the Target Allocation index uses some of the TMS methodology (daily rolls, incorporates roll strategy into asset allocation strategy) but does not use the maximum daily quantity. If the Target Allocation increases by 20% at the end of a trading day, the full 20% will be traded rather than spreading the trade over several days as would be the case in the NCCI.
  • the total turnover in the Target Allocation index is a bit lower than the Long Only index (8.6 turns per year versus 9.0 turns for the Long Only index) but is still considerably higher than the NCCI (in all instances). These additional transaction costs are likely to make both the Target Allocation index and the Long Only index considerably more expensive than the NCCI.
  • This invention describes the methodology for constructing the Northampton Capital Commodity Index (NCCI).
  • NCCI Northampton Capital Commodity Index
  • the index uses active asset allocation to reduce the risks inherent in a commodity product while preserving the beneficial return and correlation properties that have made commodities an attractive investment alternative.
  • the technology employed in the construction of the index ensures that transactions costs are minimized, while performance of the NCCI is comparable to or superior to the other indexes.
  • Liquidity is maintained by combining rolls and asset allocation decisions and by trading small quantities of each commodity each day. Products linked to this index may be attractive to investors with concerns about the high costs of maintaining an investment in other commodity indexes or with concerns about the large drawdowns that long-only commodity indexes have experienced over the past decade.
  • the method, system or algorithm employing the Northampton Capital Management Commodity Index provides investors with a platform to generate high returns when commodity prices are rising, moderate losses when commodity prices are declining, and total transactions costs that are about 70% of the cost associated with commodity index products that do not employ the TMS and do not employ a dynamic trading rule.
  • the returns may be comparable to or superior to other trading methods yet do not suffer the drawback of increased transaction costs present in other trading systems.
  • the TMS is employed using a given commodities index by applying the following generic steps:
  • the AIA Global Index comprises an allocation of assets across a plurality of markets.
  • This illustrative embodiment comprises markets in Australia, Canada, Japan, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the European Union.
  • Other embodiments may comprise more or fewer markets, or may comprise some, all, or none of the markets used in this illustrative example.
  • one or more representative indexes is selected. Since futures markets are highly liquid, transparent, and tightly regulated, the Index may be assumed to hold all investment assets through futures markets.
  • the representative indexes are selected based upon two factors, while other embodiments may use fewer or more factors and/or different factors:
  • the following futures contracts have been selected to be components of the index.
  • the allocations to each commodity and the contract months traded are also provided.
  • the maximum allocation is the largest percentage of assets invested in a given market. Because of the momentum-based asset allocation rule, the actual allocation could be less than this.
  • the AIA Global Index is rebalanced daily.
  • the allocation to each futures market is based on the spot index (equation (2) below).
  • the weights are determined by the Index Committee and changes in weights may be announced prior to implementation on January 1 of the following year.
  • the illustrative example of the AIA Global Index utilizes a momentum-based trading rule to determine the target allocation to a given commodity.
  • a momentum-based trading rule to determine the target allocation to a given commodity.
  • there may be a maximum daily position change in each commodity so that the actual allocation to a given commodity may be higher or lower than the target allocation if the target allocation changes by more than this daily maximum turnover.
  • the target allocation is based on the momentum-based trading rule described in Spurgin (Spurgin, R., A Benchmark for Commodity Trading Advisor Performance, The Journal of Alternative Investments, Fall, 1999), which is herein incorporated in its entirety.
  • Spurgin Purgin, R., A Benchmark for Commodity Trading Advisor Performance, The Journal of Alternative Investments, Fall, 1999
  • a target allocation can be derived from many of the publicly available trading rules.
  • three signals may be evaluated for each commodity; a short term signal, a medium term signal, and a long term signal. Each signal can be positive or negative.
  • the target allocation may takes on one of four possible values: 0%, 33.3%, 66.7%, and 100% of the maximum allocation.
  • the position in each commodity will never be more than 100% or less than 0%.
  • Japan is given a 20% maximum allocation, so the target allocation for Japan as a percentage of the total value of the index can be 0% (i.e., 0% of the maximum allocation), 6.66% (i.e., 33.3% of the maximum allocation), 13.33% (i.e., 66.7% of the maximum allocation), or 20% (i.e., 100% of the maximum allocation).
  • the target allocation can be determined by means of a lookback strategy.
  • the target allocations in the NCCI are based on the lookback strategy described above.
  • An x-day lookback strategy gives a positive signal if the total return index on date t is higher than it was on date t-x. Otherwise, the strategy gives a negative signal.
  • the number of days used to compute the lookback indicators in the AIA Global Index are 15 days for the short-term (L 15 ), 27 days for the medium-term (L 27 ) and 55 days for the long-term (L 55 ) momentum-based trading strategy.
  • the total return index may be computed before the lookback signals can be evaluated. Note that this total return index may not be used only to evaluate trading signals and generate the target allocation. It may not be actually traded in the index. This may be because the total return index may be based on a full long position in the underlying commodity futures contract and uses a slightly different rollover strategy than the traded portion of the AIA Global Index.
  • the AIA Global Index total return index for each commodity may be a weighted average of the return of the position in both the nearby and the nextout contracts.
  • the AIA Global Index may use a continuous roll strategy. It may hold positions in the two nearest active futures contracts, and each day may sell some of the front contract and may roll the position into the next-out contract.
  • the roll strategy incorporated in the total return index may be linear—if there are 90 days between the last roll dates of the nearby and nextout contract, then 1/90 of the position will be rolled each day ( 3/90 will be rolled over the weekend). Rollovers will be based on calendar day with weekend/holiday rolls taking place on the day after the weekend/holiday.
  • This strategy may be employed in order to provide the smoothest possible return series from which to generate a trend-following system.
  • the strategy may be non-linear. Mathematically, the strategy can be summarized using steps described above in the “Momentum-Based Trading Rule” section.
  • the AIA Global Index may evaluate three lookback signals to determine the target allocation; L 15 , L 27 , and L 55 .
  • the target allocation may be 100%.
  • the target allocation would be 20% (or 100% of 20%). Changes in the AIA Global Index trading rule are implemented with a 1-day lag, which may reduce ambiguity.
  • FIG. 14 shows the comparison of the return of the AIA Global Index to an index that holds the same index futures contracts as the AIA Global Index but is always fully long and does no currency hedging.
  • the AIA Global Index return (9.1%) is slightly lower than a simple buy-and-hold strategy return (9.5%).
  • the average annualized volatility of the AIA Global Index (4.5%) is lower than the volatility of the Long Unhedged index (7.9%).
  • the lower volatility results in a Sharpe Ratio for the AIA Global Index of 0.91 as compared to the 0.57 Sharpe Ratio of the Long Unhedged index.
  • the MSCI Global Composite Index which was launched in 2001, is a global stock and bond index that does not hedge currency risk.
  • the weights and assets are similar to the AIA Global Index.
  • the MSCI index gives a higher weight to North America (50% for MSCI, 45% for AIA Global Index, larger equity exposure (55% for MSCI, 50% for AIA Global Index) and shorter duration bonds (approximately 40% lower duration in the MSCI index).
  • the Long Unhedged Index has returns that are very close to the MSCI Global Index for the 2001-2005 period.
  • the dynamic asset allocation model in the AIA Global Index allows for returns that are of similar magnitude to fixed-weight indexes with roughly half the volatility.
  • FIG. 15 charts the drawdowns of the AIA Global Index and the Long Only Index.
  • One of the principal benefits of a dynamic asset allocation strategy may be its ability to reduce exposure to an investment asset during a sustained decline.
  • the momentum trading rule incorporated in the AIA Global Index is similar to a portfolio insurance strategy.
  • the AIA Global Index reduced its average position to below 60% of assets, allowing for significantly reduced losses during those periods.
  • the AIA Global Index experienced a peak-to-trough decline of less than 5% during the 2000-2002 bear market in global equity prices, while the Long Only index experienced a 19% peak-to-trough decline.
  • Appendixes A and B which are herein incorporated in their entirety by reference.
  • Appendix A is entitled “The Northampton Capital Commodity Index: A Guide To Index Methodology And Construction” (27 pages) and Appendix B is a Power Point presentation entitled “The Northampton Capital Partners Commodity Index Fund” (35 pages).
  • the references recited herein are incorporated by reference in their entirety.

Landscapes

  • Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
  • Accounting & Taxation (AREA)
  • Finance (AREA)
  • Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Development Economics (AREA)
  • Economics (AREA)
  • Marketing (AREA)
  • Strategic Management (AREA)
  • Technology Law (AREA)
  • Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
  • General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
  • Financial Or Insurance-Related Operations Such As Payment And Settlement (AREA)
US11/385,624 2005-03-21 2006-03-21 Commodity futures index and methods and systems of trading in futures contracts that minimize turnover and transactions costs Abandoned US20060212384A1 (en)

Priority Applications (4)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US11/385,624 US20060212384A1 (en) 2005-03-21 2006-03-21 Commodity futures index and methods and systems of trading in futures contracts that minimize turnover and transactions costs
US12/613,356 US8447694B2 (en) 2005-03-21 2009-11-05 Commodity Futures Index and methods and systems of trading in futures contracts that minimize turnover and transactions costs
US13/865,557 US20130268424A1 (en) 2005-03-21 2013-04-18 Commodity Futures Index and Methods and Systems of Trading in Futures Contracts that Minimize Turnover and Transaction Costs
US15/804,704 US20180285973A1 (en) 2005-03-21 2017-11-06 Commodity Futures Index and Methods and Systems of Trading in Futures Contracts that Minimize Turnover and Transaction Costs

Applications Claiming Priority (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US66364805P 2005-03-21 2005-03-21
US11/385,624 US20060212384A1 (en) 2005-03-21 2006-03-21 Commodity futures index and methods and systems of trading in futures contracts that minimize turnover and transactions costs

Related Child Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
US12/613,356 Division US8447694B2 (en) 2005-03-21 2009-11-05 Commodity Futures Index and methods and systems of trading in futures contracts that minimize turnover and transactions costs

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
US20060212384A1 true US20060212384A1 (en) 2006-09-21

Family

ID=37024506

Family Applications (4)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
US11/385,624 Abandoned US20060212384A1 (en) 2005-03-21 2006-03-21 Commodity futures index and methods and systems of trading in futures contracts that minimize turnover and transactions costs
US12/613,356 Active 2026-10-18 US8447694B2 (en) 2005-03-21 2009-11-05 Commodity Futures Index and methods and systems of trading in futures contracts that minimize turnover and transactions costs
US13/865,557 Abandoned US20130268424A1 (en) 2005-03-21 2013-04-18 Commodity Futures Index and Methods and Systems of Trading in Futures Contracts that Minimize Turnover and Transaction Costs
US15/804,704 Abandoned US20180285973A1 (en) 2005-03-21 2017-11-06 Commodity Futures Index and Methods and Systems of Trading in Futures Contracts that Minimize Turnover and Transaction Costs

Family Applications After (3)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
US12/613,356 Active 2026-10-18 US8447694B2 (en) 2005-03-21 2009-11-05 Commodity Futures Index and methods and systems of trading in futures contracts that minimize turnover and transactions costs
US13/865,557 Abandoned US20130268424A1 (en) 2005-03-21 2013-04-18 Commodity Futures Index and Methods and Systems of Trading in Futures Contracts that Minimize Turnover and Transaction Costs
US15/804,704 Abandoned US20180285973A1 (en) 2005-03-21 2017-11-06 Commodity Futures Index and Methods and Systems of Trading in Futures Contracts that Minimize Turnover and Transaction Costs

Country Status (3)

Country Link
US (4) US20060212384A1 (fr)
EP (1) EP1869631A4 (fr)
WO (1) WO2006102286A2 (fr)

Cited By (29)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US20040148236A1 (en) * 2003-01-27 2004-07-29 J. Peter Steidlmayer Leveraged supply contracts
US20050171884A1 (en) * 2004-02-04 2005-08-04 Research Affiliates, Llc Non-capitalization weighted indexing system, method and computer program product
US20070136180A1 (en) * 2005-12-14 2007-06-14 David Salomon System and methods for creating, trading, and settling currency futures contracts
US20080059358A1 (en) * 2006-09-01 2008-03-06 Lehman Brothers Inc. Systems and methods for providing a liquidity-based commodities index
WO2008041997A1 (fr) * 2006-10-02 2008-04-10 Liffe Administration And Management Système et procédé permettant de faciliter la négociation dans un marché électronique
WO2008039904A3 (fr) * 2006-09-27 2008-05-15 American Int Group Inc Procédé pour générer des indices de sélection de contrats à terme actifs selon des règles
US20080306821A1 (en) * 2007-02-12 2008-12-11 Pricelock, Inc. System and Method of Driving Commodity Consumers to Selective Retail Locations
US20080306777A1 (en) * 2007-04-09 2008-12-11 Pricelock, Inc. System and method for providing an insurance premium for price protection
US20080306858A1 (en) * 2007-02-12 2008-12-11 Pricelock, Inc. System and method for enabling hedging customers to lock forward positions with customer-friendly payment options
US20080306861A1 (en) * 2007-04-09 2008-12-11 Pricelock, Inc. System and method for index based settlement under price protection contracts
US20080306833A1 (en) * 2007-04-09 2008-12-11 Pricelock, Inc. System and method for constraining depletion amount in a defined time frame
US20080313067A1 (en) * 2007-02-12 2008-12-18 Pricelock, Inc. Management and decision making tool for commodity purchases with hedging scenarios
US20080313070A1 (en) * 2007-02-12 2008-12-18 Pricelock, Inc. System, method and apparatus for consumer purchase and future distributed delivery of commodity at predetermined prices
US20080313013A1 (en) * 2007-02-12 2008-12-18 Pricelock, Inc. System and method for estimating forward retail commodity price within a geographic boundary
WO2009017696A1 (fr) * 2007-07-30 2009-02-05 Ubs Ag Procédés et systèmes pour fournir un indice de marchandises de maturité constant
US20090181777A1 (en) * 2008-01-14 2009-07-16 Michael Gerard Christiani Network computer game linked to real-time financial data
US7587352B2 (en) 2002-04-10 2009-09-08 Research Affiliates, Llc Method and apparatus for managing a virtual portfolio of investment objects
US7747502B2 (en) 2002-06-03 2010-06-29 Research Affiliates, Llc Using accounting data based indexing to create a portfolio of assets
US20100306096A1 (en) * 2008-09-26 2010-12-02 William Edward Gorman Cross-Border Trading System using existing market structures
US8005740B2 (en) 2002-06-03 2011-08-23 Research Affiliates, Llc Using accounting data based indexing to create a portfolio of financial objects
US8156022B2 (en) 2007-02-12 2012-04-10 Pricelock, Inc. Method and system for providing price protection for commodity purchasing through price protection contracts
US8160952B1 (en) 2008-02-12 2012-04-17 Pricelock, Inc. Method and system for providing price protection related to the purchase of a commodity
US8374937B2 (en) 2002-04-10 2013-02-12 Research Affiliates, Llc Non-capitalization weighted indexing system, method and computer program product
US8374951B2 (en) 2002-04-10 2013-02-12 Research Affiliates, Llc System, method, and computer program product for managing a virtual portfolio of financial objects
US8589276B2 (en) 2002-06-03 2013-11-19 Research Afiliates, LLC Using accounting data based indexing to create a portfolio of financial objects
US8694402B2 (en) * 2002-06-03 2014-04-08 Research Affiliates, Llc Using accounting data based indexing to create a low volatility portfolio of financial objects
US20150073972A1 (en) * 2013-03-15 2015-03-12 Nyse Mkt Llc Systems and methods for trades priced relative to a reference benchmark value associated with an underlying index future
US20180350004A1 (en) * 2017-06-06 2018-12-06 Efficient Alpha Capital LLC Systems and methods for generating an enhanced index portfolio by disaggregating a total return of an investment instrument
US10984471B1 (en) * 2018-07-31 2021-04-20 Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. Apparatuses, methods and systems for a tracking platform for standardized instruments

Families Citing this family (9)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
AU2006297063B2 (en) * 2005-09-28 2010-07-15 Extabs Pty Ltd Exchange traded asset based security
EP2191432A4 (fr) * 2007-08-21 2011-05-18 Aqua Index Ltd Indice d'eau
US8244624B2 (en) * 2008-07-15 2012-08-14 Ran Gorenstein Establishing standardized diamond profiles and pricing
GB0904909D0 (en) * 2009-03-23 2009-05-06 Gorenstein Ran A method for calculating an index
WO2012018569A1 (fr) * 2010-07-26 2012-02-09 Nyse Group, Inc. Appareils, procédés et systèmes destinés à un moteur dtmc
US8660935B2 (en) * 2010-10-14 2014-02-25 Morgan Stanley Computer-implemented systems and methods for calculating estimated transaction costs for transactions involving tradable financial products
US8458079B2 (en) 2010-10-14 2013-06-04 Morgan Stanley Computer-implemented systems and methods for determining liquidity cycle for tradable financial products and for determining flow-weighted average pricing for same
US20130110691A1 (en) * 2011-10-31 2013-05-02 Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Inc. Futures Contracts Spread Packages
US10776868B2 (en) * 2015-03-20 2020-09-15 Trading Technologies International, Inc. Dynamic strategy management tool

Citations (3)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US5799287A (en) * 1994-05-24 1998-08-25 Dembo; Ron S. Method and apparatus for optimal portfolio replication
US6321212B1 (en) * 1999-07-21 2001-11-20 Longitude, Inc. Financial products having a demand-based, adjustable return, and trading exchange therefor
US20030126069A1 (en) * 1999-02-24 2003-07-03 Min-Ho Cha Automatic ordering method and system for trading of stock, bond, item, future index, option, index current and so on

Family Cites Families (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US8180698B2 (en) * 2000-07-18 2012-05-15 Lerner Julie A System for physicals commodity trading

Patent Citations (3)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US5799287A (en) * 1994-05-24 1998-08-25 Dembo; Ron S. Method and apparatus for optimal portfolio replication
US20030126069A1 (en) * 1999-02-24 2003-07-03 Min-Ho Cha Automatic ordering method and system for trading of stock, bond, item, future index, option, index current and so on
US6321212B1 (en) * 1999-07-21 2001-11-20 Longitude, Inc. Financial products having a demand-based, adjustable return, and trading exchange therefor

Cited By (52)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US8374951B2 (en) 2002-04-10 2013-02-12 Research Affiliates, Llc System, method, and computer program product for managing a virtual portfolio of financial objects
US7587352B2 (en) 2002-04-10 2009-09-08 Research Affiliates, Llc Method and apparatus for managing a virtual portfolio of investment objects
US8374937B2 (en) 2002-04-10 2013-02-12 Research Affiliates, Llc Non-capitalization weighted indexing system, method and computer program product
US8005740B2 (en) 2002-06-03 2011-08-23 Research Affiliates, Llc Using accounting data based indexing to create a portfolio of financial objects
US8374939B2 (en) 2002-06-03 2013-02-12 Research Affiliates, Llc System, method and computer program product for selecting and weighting a subset of a universe to create an accounting data based index and portfolio of financial objects
US7747502B2 (en) 2002-06-03 2010-06-29 Research Affiliates, Llc Using accounting data based indexing to create a portfolio of assets
US8694402B2 (en) * 2002-06-03 2014-04-08 Research Affiliates, Llc Using accounting data based indexing to create a low volatility portfolio of financial objects
US8589276B2 (en) 2002-06-03 2013-11-19 Research Afiliates, LLC Using accounting data based indexing to create a portfolio of financial objects
USRE44362E1 (en) 2002-06-03 2013-07-09 Research Affiliates, Llc Using accounting data based indexing to create a portfolio of financial objects
USRE44098E1 (en) 2002-06-03 2013-03-19 Research Affiliates, Llc Using accounting data based indexing to create a portfolio of assets
US8380604B2 (en) 2002-06-03 2013-02-19 Research Affiliates, Llc System, method and computer program product for using a non-price accounting data based index to determine financial objects to purchase or to sell
US20040148236A1 (en) * 2003-01-27 2004-07-29 J. Peter Steidlmayer Leveraged supply contracts
US7792719B2 (en) 2004-02-04 2010-09-07 Research Affiliates, Llc Valuation indifferent non-capitalization weighted index and portfolio
US20050171884A1 (en) * 2004-02-04 2005-08-04 Research Affiliates, Llc Non-capitalization weighted indexing system, method and computer program product
US20070136180A1 (en) * 2005-12-14 2007-06-14 David Salomon System and methods for creating, trading, and settling currency futures contracts
US20080059358A1 (en) * 2006-09-01 2008-03-06 Lehman Brothers Inc. Systems and methods for providing a liquidity-based commodities index
US7958033B2 (en) * 2006-09-01 2011-06-07 Barclays Capital Inc. Systems and methods for providing a liquidity-based commodities index
WO2008039904A3 (fr) * 2006-09-27 2008-05-15 American Int Group Inc Procédé pour générer des indices de sélection de contrats à terme actifs selon des règles
WO2008041997A1 (fr) * 2006-10-02 2008-04-10 Liffe Administration And Management Système et procédé permettant de faciliter la négociation dans un marché électronique
US7689500B2 (en) 2006-10-02 2010-03-30 Liffe Administration And Management System and method for facilitating trading in an electronic market
US20080313013A1 (en) * 2007-02-12 2008-12-18 Pricelock, Inc. System and method for estimating forward retail commodity price within a geographic boundary
US8156022B2 (en) 2007-02-12 2012-04-10 Pricelock, Inc. Method and system for providing price protection for commodity purchasing through price protection contracts
US20080306821A1 (en) * 2007-02-12 2008-12-11 Pricelock, Inc. System and Method of Driving Commodity Consumers to Selective Retail Locations
US8538795B2 (en) 2007-02-12 2013-09-17 Pricelock, Inc. System and method of determining a retail commodity price within a geographic boundary
US20080306858A1 (en) * 2007-02-12 2008-12-11 Pricelock, Inc. System and method for enabling hedging customers to lock forward positions with customer-friendly payment options
US20080313067A1 (en) * 2007-02-12 2008-12-18 Pricelock, Inc. Management and decision making tool for commodity purchases with hedging scenarios
US8019694B2 (en) 2007-02-12 2011-09-13 Pricelock, Inc. System and method for estimating forward retail commodity price within a geographic boundary
US20080313070A1 (en) * 2007-02-12 2008-12-18 Pricelock, Inc. System, method and apparatus for consumer purchase and future distributed delivery of commodity at predetermined prices
US20080306833A1 (en) * 2007-04-09 2008-12-11 Pricelock, Inc. System and method for constraining depletion amount in a defined time frame
US20080306861A1 (en) * 2007-04-09 2008-12-11 Pricelock, Inc. System and method for index based settlement under price protection contracts
US7945500B2 (en) 2007-04-09 2011-05-17 Pricelock, Inc. System and method for providing an insurance premium for price protection
US20080306777A1 (en) * 2007-04-09 2008-12-11 Pricelock, Inc. System and method for providing an insurance premium for price protection
US7945501B2 (en) 2007-04-09 2011-05-17 Pricelock, Inc. System and method for constraining depletion amount in a defined time frame
US8065218B2 (en) 2007-04-09 2011-11-22 Pricelock, Inc. System and method for providing an insurance premium for price protection
US8086517B2 (en) 2007-04-09 2011-12-27 Pricelock, Inc. System and method for constraining depletion amount in a defined time frame
US20090132411A1 (en) * 2007-07-30 2009-05-21 Jerome Drouin Methods and systems for providing a constant maturity commodity index
WO2009017696A1 (fr) * 2007-07-30 2009-02-05 Ubs Ag Procédés et systèmes pour fournir un indice de marchandises de maturité constant
US8175949B2 (en) * 2007-07-30 2012-05-08 Ubs Ag Methods and systems for providing a constant maturity commodity index
US20090181777A1 (en) * 2008-01-14 2009-07-16 Michael Gerard Christiani Network computer game linked to real-time financial data
US8160952B1 (en) 2008-02-12 2012-04-17 Pricelock, Inc. Method and system for providing price protection related to the purchase of a commodity
US20100306096A1 (en) * 2008-09-26 2010-12-02 William Edward Gorman Cross-Border Trading System using existing market structures
US12112379B2 (en) 2013-03-15 2024-10-08 Nyse American Llc Systems and methods for trades priced relative to a reference benchmark value associated with an underlying index future
US10430879B2 (en) 2013-03-15 2019-10-01 Nyse Mkt Llc Systems and methods for trades priced relative to a reference benchmark value associated with an underlying index future
US11756118B2 (en) * 2013-03-15 2023-09-12 Nyse American Llc Systems and methods for trades priced relative to a reference benchmark value associated with an underlying index future
US11941699B2 (en) 2013-03-15 2024-03-26 Nyse American Llc Systems and methods for trades priced relative to a reference benchmark value associated with an underlying index future
US20150073972A1 (en) * 2013-03-15 2015-03-12 Nyse Mkt Llc Systems and methods for trades priced relative to a reference benchmark value associated with an underlying index future
US12321988B2 (en) 2013-03-15 2025-06-03 Nyse American Llc Systems and methods for trades priced relative to a reference benchmark value associated with an underlying index future
US20250259237A1 (en) * 2013-03-15 2025-08-14 Nyse American Llc Systems and methods for trades priced relative to a reference benchmark value associated with an underlying index future
US12406304B2 (en) * 2013-03-15 2025-09-02 Nyse American Llc Systems and methods for trades priced relative to a reference benchmark value associated with an underlying index future
US20180350004A1 (en) * 2017-06-06 2018-12-06 Efficient Alpha Capital LLC Systems and methods for generating an enhanced index portfolio by disaggregating a total return of an investment instrument
US10984471B1 (en) * 2018-07-31 2021-04-20 Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. Apparatuses, methods and systems for a tracking platform for standardized instruments
US11887189B2 (en) 2018-07-31 2024-01-30 Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. Apparatuses, methods and systems for a tracking platform for standardized instruments

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
WO2006102286A3 (fr) 2007-11-22
US20100121755A1 (en) 2010-05-13
EP1869631A4 (fr) 2010-05-05
US20130268424A1 (en) 2013-10-10
WO2006102286A2 (fr) 2006-09-28
EP1869631A2 (fr) 2007-12-26
US8447694B2 (en) 2013-05-21
US20180285973A1 (en) 2018-10-04

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US8447694B2 (en) Commodity Futures Index and methods and systems of trading in futures contracts that minimize turnover and transactions costs
Covitz et al. Liquidity or credit risk? The determinants of very short‐term corporate yield spreads
Jares et al. Japan and Hong Kong exchange-traded funds (ETFs): Discounts, returns, and trading strategies
Litzenberger Swaps: Plain and fanciful
US20060224492A1 (en) Trading and settling enhancements to the standard electronic futures exchange market model leading to novel derivatives including on exchange ISDA type interest rate derivatives and second generation bond like futures based in part or entirely on them
US20070288351A1 (en) Method, system, and computer program for an electronically traded synthetic exchange traded coupon
US20030028468A1 (en) Customized derivative securities
US20060253360A1 (en) Methods and systems for replicating an index with liquid instruments
US20110004568A1 (en) Methods and systems for providing swap indices
Ranciere Credit derivatives in emerging markets
Batten et al. Expanding long-term financing through bond market development: A post crisis policy task
Randall How Do Inventory Costs Affect Dealer Behavior in the US Corporate Bond Market?
Damodaran Finding the right financing mix: The capital structure decision
Dufey et al. An introduction to credit derivatives
Wu et al. The Valuation of Certificates of Deposits
Fabozzi et al. Investing in emerging fixed income markets
RH et al. Missing Factors in Tracking Errors of Etfs
Choudhry Global repo markets: Instruments and applications
Nikbakht et al. Exchange-traded funds
Figlewski Lecture Notes on Futures and Options Part I: Forwards and Futures
McLaughlin Foreign Exchange Liquidity in the Americas
Griffiths et al. Re-examining the small-cap myth: problems in portfolio formation and liquidation
Arak et al. I Bonds versus TIPS: should individual investors prefer one to the other?
Ammer et al. Regulation and the cost of capital in Japan: a case study
Gönüllü HEDGING WITH INDEX FUTURES: A STUDY OF TURKEY

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
AS Assignment

Owner name: ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENT ANALYTICS, LLC, MASSACHUSET

Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:SPURGIN, RICHARD B.;SCHNEEWEIS, THOMAS R.;KAZEMI, HOSSEIN B.;AND OTHERS;REEL/FRAME:017659/0924

Effective date: 20060522

AS Assignment

Owner name: PFDS HOLDINGS, LLC, NEW YORK

Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENT ANALYTICS, LLC;REEL/FRAME:018669/0218

Effective date: 20061115

STCB Information on status: application discontinuation

Free format text: ABANDONED -- FAILURE TO RESPOND TO AN OFFICE ACTION