A Study of the Efficiency and Unbiasedness in NCDEX: A Case Study of Guar Gum

Authors

  •   Tarun K. Soni Assistant Professor, Faculty of Management Studies, Banasthali University, Tonk - 304 022, Rajasthan
  •   Harish K. Singla Assistant Professor, School of Behavioral Science and Business Studies, Thapar University, Patiala - 147 004, Punjab

Keywords:

Cointegration

, Market Efficiency, Futures Market, Guar Gum

C14

, C32, G14

Paper Submission Date

, January 13, 2013, Paper sent back for Revision, April 29, Paper Acceptance Date, August 1, 2013.

Abstract

The paper aims to study the market efficiency and unbiasedness among guar gum futures contracts traded at the National Commodity&Derivatives Exchange Ltd. (NCDEX). The study has tested the market efficiency and unbiasedness with different maturities using cointegration analysis, and short-term market efficiency, using an error correction model and GARCH-M-ECM. The results suggest that the futures market for guar gum is inefficient in both short run and long run for all maturity periods, which may be caused by over-speculation or market manipulation. The results indicate an urgent need to provide more powers to FMC to regulate the market and penalize any insider trading, cartelization, and price manipulations.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2013-11-01

How to Cite

Soni, T. K., & Singla, H. K. (2013). A Study of the Efficiency and Unbiasedness in NCDEX: A Case Study of Guar Gum. Indian Journal of Finance, 7(11), 28–37. Retrieved from https://www.indianjournalofcapitalmarkets.com/index.php/IJF/article/view/72070

References

Ali, J., & Gupta, K. B. (2011). Efficiency in agricultural commodity futures markets in India: Evidence from cointegration and causality tests. Agricultural Finance Review, 71 (2), 162-178. DOI : 10.1108/00021461111152555

Beck, S.E. (1994). Cointegration and market efficiency in commodities futures markets. Applied Economics, 26 (3), 249-257. DOI:10.1080/00036849400000006

Bose, S. (2007). Commodity futures market in India: A study of trends in the notional multi-commodity indices. Money & Finance, 3 (3), 125-158.

Chowdhury, A. R. (1991). Futures market efficiency: Evidence from cointegration tests. Journal of Futures Markets, 11 (5), 577-589. DOI: 10.1002/fut.3990110506

Iyer, V., & Pillai, A. (2010). Price discovery and convergence in the Indian commodities market. Indian Growth and Development Review, 3 (1), 53-61. DOI:10.1108/17538251011035873

Jha, D.K.(2012, October 18).Assocham opposes re-listing of guar futures till FCRA Bill approval. Business Standard. Retrieved from http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/assocham-opposes-re-listingguar-futures-till-fcra-bill-approval/191855/

Johansen, S., & Juselius, K. (1990). Maximum likelihood estimation and inference on cointegration - with applications to the demand for money. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 52 (2), 169-210.

Kaur, G., & Rao, D. (2010). Efficiency of Indian commodities market: A study of agricultural commodity derivatives traded on NCDEX. SSRN, 1-21. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1600687

Kawamoto, K., & Hamori, S. (2011). Market efficiency among futures with different maturities: Evidence from the crude oil futures market. Journal of Futures Markets, 31 (5), 487-501. DOI: 10.1002/fut.20479

Kellard, N., Newbold, P., Rayner, T., & Ennew, C. (1999). The relative efficiency of commodity futures markets. Journal of Futures Markets, 19 (4), 413-432. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9934(199906)19:4<413::AID-FUT2>3.0.CO;2-F

Kumar, B., Singh, P., & Pandey, A. (2008). Hedging effectiveness of constant and time varying hedge ratio in Indian stock and commodity futures markets. SSRN. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1206555

Lai, K. S.,& Lai, M. (1991). A cointegration test for market efficiency. The Journal of Futures Markets, 11 (5), 567-575.

Lokare, S. (2007). Commodity derivatives and price risk management: An empirical anecdote from India. Reserve Bank of India Occasional Papers, 28 (2), 27-76.

MacKinnon, J. G. (1996). Numerical distribution functions for unit root and cointegration tests. Journal of Applied Econometrics 11 (6), 601-618.

McKenzie, A. M.,& Holt, M. T. (2002). Market efficiency in agricultural futures markets. Applied Economics, 34 (12), 1519-1532. DOI:10.1080/00036840110102761

NCDEX (n.d.). Market Data - Futures Prices. Retrieved from http://www.ncdex.com/MarketData/FuturePrices.aspx

NCDEX (n.d.). Market Data - Volume Details. Retrieved from http://www.ncdex.com/MarketData/VolumeDetails.aspx

Osterwald-Lenum, M. (1992). A note with quantiles of the asymptotic distribution of the maximum likelihood cointegration rank test statistics. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 54(3), 461-472. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0084.1992.tb00013.x

Sahadevan, K. (2002). Price discovery, return and market conditions: Evidence from commodity futures markets. The ICFAI Journal of Applied Finance, 8 (5), 25-39.

Sahi, G. S.,& Raizada, G. (2006). Commodity futures market efficiency in India and effect on inflation. SSRN. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.949161

Sahoo, P., & Kumar, R. (2009). Efficiency and futures trading-price nexus in Indian commodity futures markets. Global Business Review, 10 (2), 187-201. DOI: 10.1177/097215090901000204

Sehgal, S., Rajput, N., & Dua, R. (2012). Price discovery in Indian agricultural commodity markets. International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting, 2 (2), 34-54. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5296/ijafr.v2i2.2224

Stock, J. H., & Watson, M. W. (1993). A simple estimator of cointegrating vectors in higher order integrated systems. Econometrica, 61 (4), 783-820.

Talukdar, T.(2012, May 7). Ruchi Soya, Betul Oils under lens over guar price fixing. The Economic Times. Retrieved from http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-05-07/news/31610670_1_guar-gum-forward-markets-commission-futures-trading

Wang, H.,H.& Ke, B. (2005). Efficiency tests of agricultural commodity futures markets in China. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 49 (2), 125-141.