Connect with us

Mining

Commodities: To Short, or Not to Short?

Published

on

Commodities: To Short, or Not to Short? [Chart]

Commodities: To Short, or Not to Short? [Chart]

Comparing “Dogs of the Dow” inspired strategies over the last decade

The Chart of the Week is a weekly Visual Capitalist feature on Fridays.

Over the last week, we have received a wide variety of reactions from our audience regarding the Periodic Table of Commodity Returns that we published last Thursday from our friends at U.S. Global Investors.

The most interesting email came from Brad Farquhar, the Executive Vice President and CFO of Input Capital, a Canadian-based agricultural streaming company. In his email, Brad attached a chart summarizing the cumulative returns using a long/short commodity strategy where he imagined going long on the worst performing commodity of the previous year, while shorting the best performing commodity.

For example, the long-only portfolio would have invested in natural gas in 2007, because gas was the worst performing commodity in 2006 with a -43.9% return. The short-only strategy would have shorted nickel in 2007 (betting that nickel would drop in price) because it was the best performer of 2007 with 145.5% returns.

On a cumulative basis (re-investing money from each year), the long-only strategy returned -0.9% compound annualized growth between 2007 and 2015, while the short-only strategy brought in 12.4% annualized returns.

A 50/50 hybrid (50% long, and 50% short) gave us the equivalent of 9.6% returns each year.

Our Variation

Inspired by Brad’s analysis, we did our own variation of this “Dogs of the Dow” type of exercise to look at these long and short commodity portfolios in a slightly different light.

We analyzed five portfolios (100% long, 75% long, 50% long/short, 75% short, and 100% short) for the average annual return, volatility, and number of years with positive returns.

Here’s the results:

Portfolio
Return
Standard Deviation
# of Positive Years
100% long
9.0%
54.9%
4
75% long
10.3%
39.7%
6
50% long/short
11.7%
25.8%
5
75% short
13.1%
16.9%
7
100% short
14.5%
20.9%
7

The best performing portfolio was 100% short, with an average annual return of 14.5%. The 75% short portfolio had nearly as good of returns at 13.1%, with the lowest volatility (using standard deviation) at +/- 17%.

Both the 100% short and 75% short portfolios provided positive returns in 7 of the last 9 years. Meanwhile, going long was much more risky. A 100% long portfolio had gains in only 4 of 9 years, with a huge standard deviation of +/- 55%.

Over the time period in question, energy commodities killed portfolios with “long” exposure. In 2011 and in 2015, the worst performer of the previous year (natural gas and oil respectively) was also the worst performer the following year, creating terrible returns for the long-heavy portfolios.

Oil, for example, was down -45.6% in 2014 and then was also down -30.5% in 2015. Not a very effective strategy.

What will be a better trade in 2016: shorting the best performing commodity of last year (lead), or going long on nickel, the worst performer of 2015?

Click for Comments

Mining

White Gold: Mapping U.S. Lithium Mines

In this graphic, Visual Capitalist partnerered with EnergyX to explore the size and location of U.S. lithium mines.

Published

on

Teaser graphic of a map that shows the sizes of the top U.S. lithium mines.

Published

on

The following content is sponsored by EnergyX

White Gold: Mapping U.S. Lithium Mines

The U.S. doubled imports of lithium-ion batteries for the third consecutive year in 2022, and with EV demand growing yearly, U.S. lithium mines must ramp up production or rely on other nations for their supply of refined lithium.

To determine if the domestic U.S. lithium opportunity can meet demand, we partnered with EnergyX to determine how much lithium sits within U.S. borders. 

U.S. Lithium Projects

The most crucial measure of a lithium mine’s potential is the quantity that can be extracted from the source.

For each lithium resource, the potential volume of lithium carbonate equivalent (LCE) was calculated with a ratio of one metric ton of lithium producing 5.32 metric tons of LCE. Cumulatively, existing U.S. lithium projects contain 94.8 million metric tons of LCE.

RankProject NameLCE, million metric tons (est.)
1McDermitt Caldera21.5
2Thacker Pass19.1
3Tonopah Flats18.0
4TLC Lithium10.7
5Clayton Valley (Century Lithium)6.3
6Zeus Lithium6.3
7Rhyolite Ridge3.4
8Arkansas Smackover (Phase 1A)2.8
9Basin Project2.2
10McGee Deposit2.1
11Arkansas Smackover (South West)1.8
12Clayton Valley (Lithium-X, Pure Energy)0.8
13Big Sandy0.3
14Imperial Valley/Salton Sea0.3

U.S. Lithium Opportunities, By State

U.S. lithium projects mainly exist in western states, with comparatively minor opportunities in central or eastern states.

StateLCE, million metric tons (est.)
Nevada88.2
Arkansas4.6
Arizona2.5
California0.3

Currently, the U.S. is sitting on a wealth of lithium that it is underutilizing. For context, in 2022, the U.S. only produced about 5,000 metric tons of LCE and imported a projected 19,000 metric tons of LCE, showing that the demand for the mineral is healthy.  

The Next Gold Rush?

U.S. lithium companies have the opportunity to become global leaders in lithium production and accelerate the transition to sustainable energy sources. This is particularly important as the demand for lithium is increasing every year.

EnergyX is on a mission to meet U.S. lithium demands using groundbreaking technology that can extract 300% more lithium from a source than traditional methods.

You can take advantage of this opportunity by investing in EnergyX and joining other significant players like GM in becoming a shareholder.

You may also like

Subscribe

Continue Reading

Subscribe

Popular