Comment on Can Exchange Rates Forecast Commodity Prices by Yu by richman10

VIEWS: 29 PAGES: 16

									Comment on “Can Exchange Rates Forecast Commodity Prices?” by Yu-chin Chen, Ken Rogoff and Barbara Rossi
Jeffrey Frankel Harvard and NBER IFM Program Meeting, March 21, 2008

Commodities are back !
10 years ago, agricultural & mineral commodities were not of great interest. Huge swings in commodity prices – mostly upward – have put them back in the limelight.
Commodity Price Index
20 0

Monthly data from Jan 2000 to Feb 2008

A c m o it pic in e inU $ ll o mdy r e d x S

5 0

10 0

10 5

2000m1
Source: IMF

2002m1

2004m1 Time

2006m1

2008m1

The Chen-Rogoff-Rossi research strategy is excellent:
Using world commodity prices as an exogenous variable (from the viewpoint of a small country) with which to cut through macroeconomics that is normally fraught with simultaneity/endogeneity. I’ve been trying something similar
(with much less apparent success).

Commodity Currencies
Such as Canadian $, Australian $ & NZ $ They are indeed commodity-driven currencies. Others: South African rand & Chilean peso Idle thought: Are we sure these countries are small enough in their export markets to take commodity prices as given?

The Rand, 1984-2006
Fundamentals (real commodity prices, real interest differential, country risk premium, & l.e.v.) can explain the real appreciation of 2003-06 – Frankel (2007).
200.000 180.000

160.000

140.000

120.000

100.000

80.000

60.000

40.000

Actual

vs

Fitted

vs.

FundamentalsProjected Values

20.000

0.000

Q 2

Q 1

19 84 19 85 Q 4 19 85 Q 3 19 86 Q 2 19 87 Q 1 19 88 Q 4 19 88 Q 3 19 89 Q 2 19 90 Q 1 19 91 Q 4 19 91 Q 3 19 92 Q 2 19 93 Q 1 19 94 Q 4 19 94 Q 3 19 95 Q 2 19 96 Q 1 19 97 Q 4 19 97 Q 3 19 98 Q 2 19 99 Q 1 20 00 Q 4 20 00 Q 3 20 01 Q 2 20 02 Q 1 20 03 Q 4 20 03 Q 3 20 04 Q 2 20 05 Q 1 20 06
RERICPIactual
RERICPIFitted
RERICPIProjected

The claim:
Foreign exchange values of “commodity currencies” can help predict the prices of the commodities they export.

The question at hand:
present value formulation of exchange rates
I must (reluctantly) confess to long-held misgivings about the practical importance of present-value formulations. The theory is impeccable. Two special cases that are sometimes useful:

More generally, I’m just not sure that investors have enough information to formulate elaborate expected future paths of fundamentals.

a long-run trend, which is incorporated into expectations, and perceptions that a currency (or commodity) is currently priced above or below its long-run trend.

Example:
Forecasting oil prices can be slippery
The Economist magazine in a 1999 cover story
forecast that oil might be headed for a price of $5 a barrel.

Even when oil prices rose sharply, forecasters initially judged the rise temporary, measured by the futures market. In what sense has the market had much useful ability to look ahead on oil prices?

Advanced econometric technology
Beyond addressing the endogeneity problem, the authors also emphasize their use of timevarying parameters. Great, but I’m not sure I see the connection: “Standard exchange rate fundamentals…are often jointly determined with exchange rates … For these reasons, reduced form estimations of single-equation exchange rate models are prone to omitted variable problems and are likely to have time-varying parameters.”

Granger causality tests
Always have the problem that they can’t address the possibility of simultaneous causality. Here the logic is that the currency investors are acting on the basis of future commodity prices. E t ∆f t+1 = β0 + β1 ∆s t

Fundamentals observed ex post are generally an extremely noisy measure of what had been expected ex ante.
“…we should reject the null hypothesis that β0 = β1 = 0 in the regression.” – p.8
Only if there is enough power.
There won’t be, if ex post fundamentals are a noisy measure of ex ante expectations.

But “the proof is in the pudding”
To my surprise, the authors do get impressively strong results

My initial suspicion:
It’s a numeraire problem. When the values of the commodity currency and the commodity are both measured in terms of US $, you can get a positive correlation just because of fluctuations in the value of the $. (1/2, in the case where values are symmetrically variable). It would be the same if the £ or ¥ were the numeraire. But I take it that in the robustness check (Sect. 4.1), when £ or ¥ are used as numeraires for currency values, the $ remains numeraire for commodity prices?
In that case, my concern is largely addressed.

One question
Have the authors tried matching this predictive ability against:
Predictive ability of futures rates?
“…many commodities lack deep and liquid forward markets” (p. 4). Which ones?

Predictive ability of survey data.

Admittedly these predictive abilities are small.

One remaining suspicion
Big swings in commodity prices – up in 1970s, down in 1980s, up in this decade – might be explained by big movements in US & global monetary conditions (real interest rates down in 70s, up in 80s, down recently). The same is true of big swings in the popularity of emerging-market currencies. = The “carry trade.” Could world interest rates be driving both commodity currencies and commodities?


								
To top