Regulators Seek To Throw Light On Hedge Fund Impact In Energy Trading

The following is a guest post from Darrell Delamaide for OilPrice.com:



Do hedge funds have an impact on energy trading?

While the answer might seem intuitive, the debate as to whether they actually do has come to resemble the medieval theological dispute about how many angels can dance on the head of the pin.

Because, like angels, many trades in energy futures are invisible, and it is often not possible to pinpoint where they take place.

And yet, for most of us, including lawmakers on Capitol Hill, it seems obvious that when hedge funds buy and sell billions of dollars worth of oil and gas futures, it must be having an impact on energy prices. While hedge funds and other speculative traders would never dream of taking delivery of a barrel of oil, their trading activity affects the prices for actual consumers of oil and gas and their downstream customers – or so it would seem.

When Gary Gensler, a former Goldman Sachs banker and Treasury Department official, was nominated last year as chairman of the Commodity Futures and Trading Commission – the chief regulator for energy futures trading – he reversed the CFTC party line that speculators don’t have an impact on energy trading.

“I believe that excessive speculation in commodity futures can cause sudden or unreasonable fluctuations or unwarranted changes in commodity prices,” Gensler said in a written response to lawmakers’ questions ahead of his nomination hearing.

Gensler went on to pledge that if confirmed, he would have the CFTC guard against such speculation.

While he stopped short of saying that excessive speculation had taken place in the run-up of energy prices in 2008, he did express the opinion that the rapid growth of commodity index funds and increased hedge fund allocation to commodity assets contributed to the “bubble in commodities prices that peaked in mid-2008.”

He noted that non-commercial investors sometimes account for up to 90% of open interest in a contract. (Open interest is a calculation of the number of active trades for a particular market, and is used as an indicator whether trading is becoming more or less active.)

Gensler’s answer, enshrined in draft legislation currently before Congress, is to make trades more visible by requiring all over-the-counter derivatives to trade through an approved clearing house. While the thrust of new legislation is to get a better handle on financial derivatives such as credit default swaps, it will give regulators a better picture of all derivatives trading, including energy contracts.

At the same time, the CFTC and the Securities and Exchange Commission both are beefing up their ability to monitor hedge fund activity. The SEC for the first time will require hedge funds to register as investment advisors, and Gensler has pledged closer oversight of the funds that it supervises as commodity pool operators.

The industry, predictably, is pushing back. In congressional testimony on the new legislation, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, the largest futures exchange in the world, and other exchange operators presented studies based on CFTC data to show that large positions held by index funds and other managed money were not “routinely detrimental” to the commodity markets in the period January 2005 to June 2008.

“All of the trader groups displayed instances of non-optimal behavior (including small traders), but none were consistently harmful to the studied markets,” they said. A task force of the International Organization of Securities Regulators (IOSCO) released a report last March that came to a similar conclusion.

“While reports reviewed by the task force concluded that fundamentals rather than speculative activity was the plausible explanation for price changes, the task force has made a number of recommendations to improve the transparency and supervision of these markets,” IOSCO said.

These included suggestions regarding information about the underlying commodities, access to and sharing of information about trading positions, beefing up enforcement powers, and improving global coordination.

The spectacular collapse of the Amaranth Advisors hedge fund in 2006 when it lost $6 billion on natural gas futures did pull back the veil on hedge fund activity in energy markets. Amaranth built up its huge position in natural gas futures through OTC contracts that exactly mirrored the contracts on the New York Mercantile Exchange but remained hidden from regulators, who were unable to enforce position limits designed to rein in speculative trading.

In hearings about Amaranth before various House and Senate committees as well as at the CFTC itself, it became clear, at least to many lawmakers, that contracts on unregulated trading venues can influence prices.

The case was so straightforward that it prompted the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to flex its new post-Enron mandate to stop manipulation of energy prices by pursuing disciplinary action against Amaranth.

This led to a turf war with the CFTC, which claimed exclusive jurisdiction over futures trading and argued that FERC’s mandate extended only to spot trading. FERC countered that when activity in the futures market affected spot prices, it was authorized to act.

Those proceedings ended in a joint settlement last August, before either CFTC or FERC held their administrative hearings and before an appellate court could decide the jurisdictional issue.

But the Amaranth case remains as a reminder of what a hedge fund can do in energy markets if these trades are not more transparent. Legislation bringing more visibility to the market and strengthening the hand of regulators will ensure that hedge fund activity in the energy markets will be more closely monitored and limited.

This article was written by Darrell Delamaide for OilPrice.com who focus on Fossil Fuels, Alternative Energy, Metals, Oil Prices and Geopolitics. To find out more visit their website at: http://www.oilprice.com.

The Future of Energy: New Technologies, New Opportunities & Crude Oil's Role

While we normally don't cover these topics since our time is consumed by hedge fund activity, we welcome a guest post courtesy of MoneyMorning. Since energy will undoubtedly be a big talking point now and into the future, it makes sense to start to examine things.

---

Renowned Oil Expert Dr. Kent Moors details shortages of oil, the impact of higher prices, the promise of new technologies and the opportunities for investors. Dr. Kent Moors is one of the world’s foremost experts on oil, energy policy, finance, risk management and new technologies. Moors advises the leaders of six oil-producing countries, including the United States, as well as global corporations and banks operating in 25 countries.

Moors is the founder and director of the Energy Policy Research Group, which conducts analyses and makes recommendations on a range of energy-related issues. He is also the president of ASIDA Inc., a worldwide advisor on the oil-and-natural-gas markets.

In an interview with Money Morning Executive Editor William Patalon III this week, Dr. Moors detailed the top current energy challenges in the global economy, and also provided investors with a look at some of the looming new technologies, as well as a future in which China is a dominant global energy player.

Some of these issues are already at work. Although oil prices remain well below the all-time record of $147 a barrel set in July 2008, crude prices have been on the march of late. Just yesterday (Wednesday), in fact, supply concerns pushed oil futures up above $81 a barrel, their highest level in more than a year.

“If you think the run up to July 2008 was a wild ride, you haven’t seen anything yet,” Dr. Moors told Money Morning. “In the next five years, investors who focus on medium- to small-sized producers and oil-field-service companies having a well-developed specialty niche will outperform the overall energy sector.”

Money Morning (Q): In an earlier discussion, you said that the successful energy investor of the future wouldn’t be a person who just goes out and invests in ExxonMobil Corp. (NYSE: XOM). Can you explain?

Dr. Kent Moors: We are entering a period of rising prices. There is still some play left in the large verticals (vertically integrated oil companies or VIOCs) such as ExxonMobil, but the primary profits will be made with smaller, leaner exploration-and-production (E&P) outfits, field-service companies and specialized producers (unconventional gas producers – shale gas, coal bed methane, tight gas, hydrates – heavy oil and biodiesel).

(MM): How will investors have to play this future? What types of companies should they be looking for, and where should they look?

Moors: The market rapidly approaching will be more volatile with valuation often more difficult to determine than in the past, even with prices increasing. How much of the increases result from actual product margins and how much results from oil becoming a financial asset rather than just a commodity is a major concern. It requires some careful homework. The types of categories mentioned above – smaller producers, new developments in field services and technology (especially those providing ways to decrease wellhead and operational costs, increase productivity, use associated gas, treat and utilize produced water, increase efficiency per barrel … there is a long list here) as well as the specialized producers and providers of their technical needs are the main targets.

(MM): When we look at the U.S. economy, you said that investors would be stunned to discover how much of our oil is produced by small players. In that discussion, in fact, you even described the type of firm that could be the “savior” of the U.S. energy sector, and perhaps even the economy. Could you take a moment to describe that situation and explain what that means for the economy?

Moors: The United States remains one of the top five producers of crude and will shortly ramp up production of natural gas (once the current glut has moved through the system). Sixty percent of crude produced in the U.S. market is at stripper wells providing less than 10 barrels of crude a day, but more than 20 barrels of water, a major byproduct. As America enters an accelerating field maturity curve (and an intensifying decline in well debit – well production), the efficiency of production declines. Therein lies a significant area for innovation and leaner companies. And that spells greater profitability at lower entry prices. Some offshore and Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) production will be done at scale, but that is not where the future of U.S. production will be. It will be the result of greater profitability at existing depleting wells with the new technology rolled out (on the oil side) and unconventional gas production.

(MM): Let’s take a look at the global markets, too. China’s global shopping spree has been well chronicled. As China locks up suppliers and supplies of oil and natural gas, what are the chances there could end up being what’s almost a two-tiered market, where China has access to oil and natural gas at lower prices levels, creating a shortage of non-captive supplies and leading to Western countries having to pay much higher prices?

Moors: Price rises for Westerners will occur anyway, and not just because of China (where a rising energy bubble resulting from the recent acquisitions is a concern). The competition for available energy sources will usually result in those regions prepared to pay more, increasing the overall aggregate price for most others. China, India, a resurgent East Asia, Japan and even regions such as West Africa will occupy important positions moving forward in this regard. Also, rising demand will center in places other than OECD countries. The new oil market emerging can hardly discount the developed countries, but the primary demand spikes are going to come from elsewhere.

(MM): After some significant turmoil in recent years, you said that Russia is finally opening up to foreign investment. Will that last, and what effect will that have on global energy prices?

Moors: To offset a more rapidly declining traditional production base (primarily Western Siberia), Russia must move north of the Arctic Circle, into Eastern Siberia and out on the continental shelf. These moves are technologically sensitive and very expensive. Moscow needs the outside investment and that will remain. However, projects must be carefully structured. Foreigners cannot own 50% of “strategic fields” under new laws or anything on the shelf. This means watch out for the smaller, focused operators and oilfield service companies. They will include companies currently trading on the Alternative Investment Market (AIM) in London: The AIM and London Stock Exchange (LSE) are the sources of the new external investment phase in Russia.

(MM): From a global perspective, which markets show promise? And which ones – either because of overly restrictive investment policies, or because of the risk of nationalization – are markets to be avoided?

Moors: Many markets show promise or telegraph restraint. Let’s look at some of the more noticeably promising markets, organized by energy category:

• Conventional Oil: Sub-Saharan Africa, Brazil, Kazakhstan, Russian Eastern Siberian and Far East smaller fields.

• Conventional Natural Gas: Turkmenistan (if recent government overtures to outside investment remain genuine), Uzbekistan, Northwestern Australia (region of the Gorgon project) and New Guinea.

• Unconventional Oil: Tatarstan (Russia) for bitumen and heavy oil, Alberta for oil sands (assuming an average and multi-year sustainable crude price of $72 [USD] a barrel or above).

• Unconventional Gas: The United States for shale (especially Marcellus Shale) and coal bed methane (Powder River Basin, Wyoming, also basin into Montana – if that state reduces regulations), Poland, Turkey and Germany for shale, south central Russia and Ukraine for coal bed methane. If Baghdad and Erbil can finalize central Iraqi and regional Kurdish oil legislation – and if security is maintained – Iraq will become a major play in both oil and gas.

• TO BE AVOIDED: Iran (sanctions and buyback contract frustrations), Mexico (collapsing infrastructure and nationalization), Venezuela (significant technical shortcomings, concerns over productivity assessments, and absence of Western operators).

(MM): If an investor were to divide the energy market into short/intermediate/and long-term segments, what will be the dominant energy plays (oil, natural gas, solar, coal-bed methane, for example) in each of those three time segments? What time periods would you tack onto the short-term, intermediate-term, and long-term segments? And which energy plays will be the real winners?

Moors: To make this easier to see, let’s divide this into short-term, intermediate and long-term segments and look at the key players, issues and technologies in each category.

• Short-Term (five years out): Here we’ll see an increasing efficiency at existing oil wells; Marcellus Shale natural gas; an extension of large fields into known deeper production layers – for example, BP-led (NYSE ADR: BP) multinational plays such as the Azeri-Chyrag-Guneshli and Shah Deniz deposits offshore Azerbaijan. Other developments to watch are the huge Chevron-led (NYSE: CVX) Tengiz field in Western Kazakhstan, initiatives in the central Gulf of Mexico and all satellite fields operated by other companies.

• Intermediate-Term (five to 15 years out): All U.S. and Canadian shale plays, Wyoming, Montana, New Mexico and Russian coal bed methane, selected wind power Western U.S. and Baltic Sea region (Denmark, Germany, Poland).

• Long-Term (20 years or more): All alternative and renewable energy (by this point, crude oil will be too volatile with supply problems and natural gas from whatever source will be the main power source both for conventional applications and for new technologies – fuel cells will obtain most of their price-sensitive hydrogen from natural gas).

Moors: Here’s the bottom line. Looking forward, successful energy investors will be those who: (1) weigh volatility as well as opportunities; (2) understand the rapidly changing supply/demand balance; (3) hedge within a focused time-frame; (4) watch the development of new technology to improve production, processing or transport; and (5) have a flexible approach to the market.

(MM): Spotlighting and providing detail and in-depth analysis of the specific winners would require a much-more-detailed category breakdown than we have here. But stay tuned: Dr. Moors will delve into these topics in future issues of Money Morning.

---

Thanks to MM for the guest post on what surely will be a hot topic going forward.

Seasonality Of Crude Oil

The guys over at MarketClub came out with a new video on crude oil yesterday that examines how seasonality typically effects the price of oil. And, their findings are interesting in that crude oil seasonally heads a bit lower this time of year, yet the market seems to want to head higher. The chart on crude oil has been pretty similar to that of the stock market in that it made lows in February/March and has trended higher. The main difference is that while the overall stock market has continued to head higher, crude oil has kind of traded sideways in a consolidation pattern since June.

There is a clear area of resistance around $75 a barrel and a nice triangle-like formation is setting up so that you can easily draw the lines to identify a breakout to the upside or a breakdown to the downside and trade it either way. Since the market just jumped up on the $75 level for the first time in over a year, it definitely seems like it wants to breakout to the upside as it has setup in a similar pattern to what gold was in before breaking out to above $1000. Also, if you run fibonacci retracements on crude oil from the highs in July of last year to the lows in February of this year, the retracements identify $83 a barrel and $95 a barrel as potential upside targets. You can check out their technical analysis video here.

Boone Pickens' BP Capital Investors Withdraw Money

In what seems like an endless cycle of hedge fund withdrawals and redemptions, it should come as no surprise that investors in Boone Pickens' BP Capital hedge funds are seeking their money back. Let the redemption bloodbath begin. And, it seems as if BP Capital is partly responsible for the massive sell-off in energy equities.

We first got word of Boone's poor performance towards the end of September, when we noted that his equities fund was -30% through august, and his commodities fund was -84% through the same period. In his recent appearance on "60 Minutes," Boone noted that he and his firm had lost around $2 billion since the peak in June. And, in a recent WSJ article, they note that nearly 50% of investors are withdrawing their money from the fund, which has seen losses of nearly 60% now. They also note that Boone moved nearly everything into cash a few weeks ago, to protect from further downside risk.

So, its clear that Boone was one (of I'm sure many) hedge funds who were selling off entire positions over the past few weeks. As we detailed in our most recent look at BP's portfolio holdings, Boone runs an energy-centric equities fund. So, some of his holdings such as Transocean (RIG), Suncor (SU), Occidental Petroleum (OXY), Schlumberger (SLB), Halliburton (HAL), Chesapeake (CHK), and many more listed here have undoubtedly seen selling over the past few weeks due to Boone moving to cash. Obviously Boone wasn't solely responsible for the drop-off, but it looks like he was definitely one of the culprits. We won't know for sure which, if any, of his positions he is still holding until the next 13F filing is released in the coming weeks. But, it sounds as if he has hardly any positions right now as he prepares to meet investor redemptions/withdrawals.

The cycle of hedge fund redemptions/withdrawals undoubtedly will provide ample opportunities, which I recently detailed here. But, they will require patience and discipline to scale into the names as there is absolutely no way to gauge when the carnage will pass. Energy equities are by far some of the biggest casualties of the sell-off and are thus some of the most attractive for longer term investors. And, for once, I actually agree with the analyst community, who point out attractive opportunities in the energy sector. But, then again, those opportunities could get even more attractive as we undoubtedly face strong waves of continued forced selling.

Boone Pickens' BP Capital Funds Down Big

If you are unfamiliar with T. Boone Pickens, he is an energy maverick and his fund returned 300% in 2005. He is a big advocate of Peak Oil Theory and runs an energy-centric hedge fund (BP Capital) based in Dallas, Texas. His energy stock fund has a compounded annual return of 37% over seven years. Although he typically holds numerous positions in oil, he is also big on alternative energy (except ethanol) and has numerous holdings there as well. He most recently advocated a large natural gas position and has additionally made a big bet on wind energy. Some of his thoughts can be seen here from one of my posts. And, if you live under a rock, he's pushing for energy independence with his Pickens Plan.

But, it seems as if the maverick himself has had a rough last few months. We already knew that BP Capital had a rough July, where he was down almost 35%. And, it gets even worse. His hedge fund that focuses on energy stocks is down 30% through August. Additionally, his commodity fund is down 84% and is a poster child of leverage gone bad. (His commodity fund relies heavily on leverage, hence the larger losses). Ouch. All things considered, he has lost around $1 billion this year, $270 million of which is his own money.

Pickens said,

"It's my toughest run in 10 years.... We missed the turn in the market, there's nothing fun about it. I'm not willing to accept that [the downturn] was due to a global slowdown. When there's deleveraging in markets it will affect everything."

Additionally, he thinks oil prices will climb again due to oil demand outpacing supply and will maintain this view until he sees evidence of a true global slowdown. But, in a cautious move, he has shifted his portfolios to a more neutral stance. Curious as to what BP Capital had in their portfolio that was causing them so much pain? Well, then check out my analysis of their most recent portfolio holdings, found in their latest 13f filing. We'll have to see if ole Boone can turn his ship around in the next few months.

Source: WSJ

Transocean (RIG) Added to Goldman Sachs Conviction Buy List

I forgot to post this up on Friday since there was so much going on. Amidst all that news, we saw that Transocean (RIG) was added to Goldman Sachs Conviction Buy List. They removed Halliburton (HAL) and swapped RIG in its place. Goldman's new price target on RIG is $178 due to its tie to oil, where they see strong long term fundamentals (obviously).

I definitely agree with them on this call as I believe oil will face big supply/demand issues as we go forward many years into the future. And, I believe Transocean (RIG) is an excellent proxy for this (besides just owning oil in the commodities markets or the etf USO for the long term). The reason I say that is because there is an increasing demand for deepwater rigs. As evidenced by Petrobras' desire to lock up nearly 80% of offshore rigs, the demand for RIG's services is very strong. As oil companies shift from shallow water searches to deep water finds, RIG becomes all the more attractively positioned.

The only problem I have with RIG right now is the technicals. The chart looks horrible right now and the name looks to be breaking down. I've drawn a line in the sand at $120. If RIG can hold onto this level (typically past support), then I think its safe to enter RIG here. But, if it begins to trade lower yet again, I think it would be safer to stay away as it will have broken down on the technicals. RIG trading lower is a real possibility simply due to the fact that it is tied to the price of crude. And, since crude has been selling off recently, it doesn't look good. As crude approaches the very important psychological level of $100 a barrel, things could get interesting. Add in the speculation regarding hedge fund liquidations and you've got a recipe for a wild ride. The point is that both crude oil and RIG are around pretty significant levels in terms of technicals. As you can see from the chart below, $120 has typically been an area of support for RIG. If it breaks through this support level, it looks to be heading lower.

(click to enlarge)

This is a simple case of "trade the perception, not the reality." In reality, Transocean (RIG) is poised to rake in major dollars as their new rigs come out of production down the road. And, they are constantly seeing rising day rates on their existing deepwater rigs. But, everyone seems to be concerned with the "here and now" and thus the technicals are on the verge of a major breakdown. So, you've got to respect the action and step aside if you get stopped out below $120. Long term, this should be an excellent name to own. So, if you're one of those Buffett-buy-and-hold investors, then go for it. I am simply painting a picture for those who like to take a more active role in their positions.

Fundamentally, RIG is one of the best buys out there. Their trailing PE of 7.8 and forward PE of 7.4 is very compelling, especially considering that they trade at some of the cheapest multiples in the drilling sector, despite being one of the largest companies. They have a PEG ratio of 0.55, indicating they are primed for earnings growth. Where the company really becomes attractive though, is in its operating margins and returns on equity. I like to call this the "bread and butter" of any given company. With operating margins of 46.17% and a return on equity of 38.54%, Transocean is cranking out some of the highest numbers out there. Their merger with Global Santa Fe has certainly paid off in terms of increasing their fleet and extending their dominant market share. The only real negative with Transocean fundamentally would be its massive debt. They currently have $976 million in cash and over $15.2 billion in debt. The majority of this debt is from financing the merger of Global Santa Fe and Transocean and a special dividend that the company paid shareholders upon completion of the merger. So, the massive debt load is a concern. But, when you think about how much money the company is making, it becomes less of a worry.

Fundamentally, RIG looks very strong. But, you've got to worry about oil too since this name is tied to the price fluctuations of the underlying commodity. If we are indeed seeing a global slowdown, then the price of oil will obviously suffer, affecting RIG's shares in a negative manner. Still though, RIG remains attractive due to their dominant market share and positioning, their rising day rates, the rising demand for their deepwater rigs, and the fact that they have many new rigs scheduled to be completed in the coming years. This is a great long term buy (3-5 years +). But, if you want to potentially save yourself some money in the near term, watch the $120 level as the technicals have really dictated this volatile and whacky market as of late. As long as you've got a stop just below $120, call it good. Or, you can take the Buffett-buy-and-hold approach with this name, as they stand to benefit over the long haul.

Source: StreetInsider

Boone Pickens Hedge Fund (BP Capital) Has Rough July

From Reuters:

"The commodity half of oil tycoon T. Boone Pickens's BP Capital hedge fund lost 35 percent of its value in July, the New York Post said, citing sources."

Ouch. Sounds as if old T. Boone needs to spend a little bit less time campaigning for his PickensPlan, and a little more time running his hedge fund. (Okay, maybe that's a little harsh considering he is poised to make big $$$ should his 'Plan' materialize in any way shape or form). Nevertheless, it will be interesting to see what his 13F looks like when he files that here in the next few days. It sounds as if he was pretty stubborn with some natural gas and oil plays though, that's for sure. Considering that commodities took it on the chin in July, and given the fact that his fund is energy-centric, the losses make sense. But, you'd think that someone with as much experience in the energy markets as Boone would be a bit quicker to react/adapt to what was happening.

World GDP Vs. Oil Production

This chart is about as simplistic as it gets. Hat tip to Barry Ritholtz over at The Big Picture for posting up what he aptly calls "A Chart of the Decade." Many of the energy themes I've discussed here before stem from one very basic chart.

(click to enlarge)

Source: ITF Interim Report on Crude Oil

John McCain's Energy Plan

TheOilDrum has a post about John McCain's energy plan found here. Reason I point this out is because its a smart move to position your investments accordingly come the election in November. Both candidates have various implications for numerous sectors based on their proposed policies. And, I'd recommend figuring out how you want to position yourself should McCain be elected versus positioning yourself should Obama be elected, as both have different outcomes in a few sectors (namely energy and healthcare).

"Arithmetic, Population, and Energy"

Couresy of vruz, I have stumbled upon a very thought provoking series of videos. These videos chronicle a presentation by Prof. Emeritus Dr. Albert A. Bartlett on “Arithmetic, Population, and Energy." The series is 8 segments long and they are all very insightful. I have to mention that the series starts off slow in the first segment as it is laid out like a class lecture. But, it picks up a lot in the second segment. If you sit down and take an active interest in the videos and follow his presentation, you will find the series fascinating. I realize many people these days are so busy they don't have the time to sit down and watch an 8 part video, so I'll embed arguably the most important segment (the 4th one) and then link the rest of the segments below for those who are interested.

Segment 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY
Segment 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pb3JI8F9LQQ
Segment 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFyOw9IgtjY

Segment 4:


Segment 5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHuwgxrTKPo
Segment 6: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3y7UlHdhAU
Segment 7: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyseLQVpJEI
Segment 8: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoiiVnQadwE