Jump to content
  • 0

Market underlying currency


RichardSmith

Question

7 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

H @JamesIG, thank you for your reply. I indeed am referring to overnight funding costs and can't figure out how it is being calculated for Indices and Commodities.

Say I'm shorting Nickel, Platinum and No Lead Gasoline. I'm being credited for holding Platinum and Nickel positions but being charged (a lot!) for holding the Gasoline positions.

 

I was referred to this page by support that would suggest I should be credited if I have short positions though it isn't so. Any help to figure out the right formula would be appreciated.

https://www.ig.com/en/commodities

Best regards,

Richard

Link to comment

Hi @RichardSmith,  the linked example in the comm page is correct but not well explained.

There is one calc for fx and spot metals, and then another calc for all other assets, see this page;

https://www.ig.com/uk/help-and-support/spread-betting-and-cfds/fees-and-charges/why-is-overnight-funding-charged-and-how-is-it-calculated-

Note that the 'IG rate'  (IG commission +/-  interbank rate) is different for GBP or USD based assets, and is plus or minus for long or short.

Use the approp boxed 'IG rate' to replace the (2.5% +/- Libor)  in the calc below for indices and commodity markets, (the interbank rate has not changed much).

For Long;

image.png.0bcbaa507aac53ea081f903aa6e7de3a.png

For Short;

image.png.ee3c4789883fa87e0629687d7221d0ae.png

So for a long Dow trade it's 5.02% and for a short Dow trade it's -0.02%.

image.png.4c52185c5a036d7d9d6faf48234ec87b.png

So for long Dow;

Size x Closing price x 5.02% / 365

 

 

Link to comment

Thank you for your reply @Caseynotes. I sort of understand how it works for FX and spot metals and read the article you're referring to though what I don't understand is how the overnight charges are being calculated for Commodities. I may be repeating myself here but say why am I being charged for holding a short Gasoline position while being credited for holding a short Nickel position.

I found two topics that come close to the answer, what I'm looking for is a formula say with a current Gasoline price example or a table that @JamesIG shared in the second topic

 

 

Link to comment

@RichardSmith, yes, you are right some of the commodity funding charges are a hand full, my example was based on indices.

The charge isn't automatically debit for longs and credit for shorts though, if you look at the pic you posted just above the longs (blue column) can be either plus or minus, same for the shorts (red column). I believe this is because the commods have the futures factor incorporated into the calculation and the front futures price may be more or less than the next futures price so you may end up with a positive or negative number for the (P3 - P2) part of the calc as in the link you posted above. So the final result for either a long or a short could work out to be positive or negative.

image.png.960d27e06afd4e09da4b81ce75d5157e.png

Link to comment

You're right! It's certainly not an easy calculation, however what we've done here is create a continually traded assets on something which is usually only future traded. Without this every month your position would have to close, roll into the next future, and then open again. 

The reason for the financial gain or debit is down to the way the futures curve is positioned. Some assets get more expensive the further out in time you go, whilst others get cheaper. In other words some assets are more expensive the further out you go (for example oil which suggests people are more willing to pay a little more to have oil delivered in the future - that can be due to expected increase in demand over summer maybe, the fact there is a cost to hold oil in tankers etc, or a number of other things), whilst others are cheaper (for example some soft commodities which may devalue the further out you go). This can be down to a number of things, but primarily the demand for delivery at that point and time. 

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • image.png

  • Posts

    • Soybeans Elliott Wave Analysis  Function - Trend  Mode - Impulse  Structure - Impulse for (5)  Position - Wave 1 of (5) Direction - Wave 2 of (5) Details - Wave 1 of (5) completing with a diagonal. Wave 2 bounce is emerging before the price turns downside for 3 of (5). Invalidation now at 1226’6. Not much has changed since the last update.   Soybean Price Analysis: Elliott Wave Perspective Signals Continued Downward Trend   In the realm of commodity trading, Soybean has recently undergone a significant downturn, marking a nearly 7% drop since March 21st. This decline appears to be part of a broader trend that commenced back in June 2022. However, before this recent descent, there was a brief period of respite characterized by a corrective bounce starting in late February.    Delving deeper into the price action, an Elliott Wave analysis sheds light on the intricacies of Soybean's movement. The daily chart's decline since June 2022 reveals a corrective pattern, delineated into waves A-B-C, as denoted by blue annotations.   The initial wave, labeled as Blue Wave 'A', terminated at 1249 in October 2023, exhibiting a distinct diagonal pattern. Subsequently, a modest rebound ensued, marked by Blue Wave 'B', which concluded at 1398 in November 2023. However, the ascendancy was short-lived as the bears regained control, manifesting in the ongoing development of Blue Wave 'C'. This wave, evolving into an impulse wave, has currently progressed to wave (5) following the completion of wave (4) in March 2024.   Zooming in on the H4 chart, a granular analysis reveals the sub-waves of wave (5). Wave 1 of (5) concluded with a diagonal structure, followed by a corrective phase as the price undergoes a temporary upside correction to complete wave 2. Despite uncertainties regarding whether wave 2 has fully concluded or will undergo another upward leg, the overarching trajectory remains clear – a downward break is anticipated to continue wave 3 of (5), leading to further downside movement.   In light of this analysis, the prevailing sentiment favors sellers, who continue to assert dominance over the commodity market. As long as the price remains below 1226’6, the outlook remains skewed towards further downside potential, with the possibility of reaching the lowest price point since November 2020.   In conclusion, the Elliott Wave perspective offers valuable insights into Soybean's price dynamics, signaling a continued bearish trajectory in the near term. While short-term fluctuations may occur, the broader trend suggests that sellers are likely to maintain control, shaping the commodity's price action in the foreseeable future.   Technical Analyst : Sanmi Adeagbo   Source : Tradinglounge.com get trial here!        
×
×
  • Create New...
us