The Wind And The Leaves: Causality In Commodity Prices

 | Jun 05, 2013 01:58AM ET

Benoit Guilleminot and two colleagues have written a working paper on the impact of index flows on commodities prices, using U.S. traded (agricultural) commodities as their database. Along the way, they encourage thought about the nature of cause and effect in finance.

There are many uses of terms such as “cause.” Sometimes, we use the word to refer to something that is happening at the same time as its effect. As the wind moves through the trees the leaves rustle. As the water rises and falls in the ocean in a wave pattern, a surfer slides toward shore.

At other times though, we use “cause” to refer to an event that clearly preceded its effect in time. One pool ball hit another and stopped: the second ball then moved forward. Penetration by a bullet caused the victim’s death.

It is this second more time-specific sense of causation that has encouraged the notion of “Granger causality.”

Derivatives and their Underlyings

In May 2008, Michael Masters , a portfolio manager himself, testified before the Homeland Security Committee of the U.S. Senate and maintained that a new class of institutional investors had skewed commodities futures markets, causing a rise in the prices not only of the derivatives, but on the underlyings. He called the new class of investors the “index speculators,” because their strategy is to allocate across the 25 key commodities futures covered by most popular indices.

There certainly was a run-up in commodity index flows and prices during the two year period preceding Masters’ testimony. But a number of authors have produced other explanations of those twin run-ups. Perhaps the most obvious alternative explanation is that the rise in prices invited the speculators to move into the indexes, and that Masters simply had reversed the causal arrow.

One of the important items of economics’ jargon here is “Granger causality.” One fact “Granger causes” another if it reliably precedes that other. Granger causality isn’t the same thing as real causality. A virus may infect a human body and cause a variety of symptoms in a certain dependable sequence. The early symptoms then reliably forecast the later symptoms. This doesn’t mean that the early symptoms cause the latter symptoms, that the cough causes the rash. Nonetheless, we would say that the cough “Granger causes” the rash.

Granger causality can be an important though non-decisive clue to full-throated, before-therefore-after causality. If a rise in a certain type of speculative flow preceded the rise in commodity prices, it would support the hypothesis that the one caused the other.

A Misleading Clue
Guilleminot and his colleagues, Jean-Jacques Ohana and Steve Ohana, think that on this issue Granger causality has been a misleading test. They acknowledge that most studies fail to show any Granger causality, any forecasting of price changes by index-oriented flow.

Get The News You Want
Read market moving news with a personalized feed of stocks you care about.
Get The App

But they also contend that the relationship of index flows and commodity prices is not a before-and-after sort of causation. It is a contemporaneous relation. Think of it as akin to the relationship between a wind passing through the trees and the rustling of the leaves. Both events occur at the same time, so neither predicts the other. Neither can be said the “Granger” cause the other. Yet common sense tells us that the wind causes the rustling of the trees, not the other way around.