Barclays Commodities Research

Commodities Research
8 November 2013
Commodities Weekly
Position limits are back – but are they
needed? Editorial 2
Energy
Market Outlook: Oil: Brent in a transient
contango; Gas: Upside capped by raging
production 8
Natural Gas: Nuclear comeback 12
Metals
Market Outlook: New LME warehouse policy
could lead to front end time spread volatility 14
Base Metals: Zinc price upside: a slow burner 20
Commodity Price Forecasts 22
• New CFTC proposals on position limits announced this week aim to curb Commodity Price Comparisons 23
excessive speculation in commodities futures markets. But are they justified?
Even the CFTC’s own data show that, far from distorting commodity markets, Trade Recommendations 24
speculative activity has tended to act as a stabilising influence on prices in recent
Key Data Releases 26
years, with benefits for both producers and consumers.
• Front month Brent time spreads have extended deeper into contango, something FX Forecasts 27
we expect to be transient; as in the coming months we expect to see

backwardation in Brent, albeit with a flatter slope. In US natural gas, we expect
growing production to keep a lid on prices despite rising heating demand.
• In base metals, the LME’s decision to proceed with a new warehouse policy in
April 2014 could introduce more volatility in front end time spreads—particularly
for aluminium—as well as more metal being held off-warrant, lower physical
premiums (after an initial rise) and thus further production cuts and a tightening
in the ex-China aluminium market. In precious metals, the risks for gold remain
skewed to the downside for the rest of the year assuming no bounce-back in
physical demand and no big return of investors to the forefront, in our view.
Energy
Natural Gas: Nuclear comeback 12
Nuclear generation this fall is running far ahead of last year’s levels. Announced spring
maintenance outages suggest that nuclear output is likely to remain strong in H1 14.
Metals
Base Metals: Zinc price upside – a slow burner 20
The slowdown in zinc mine production has begun. We think there is reason to be
bullish on a 12-month view, but we don’t expect a sustained move higher in prices
Editor:
until mid-2014.
Sudakshina Unnikrishnan
[email protected]
www.barclays.com
PLEASE SEE ANALYST CERTIFICATIONS AND IMPORTANT DISCLOSURES STARTING AFTER PAGE 28
Barclays | Commodities Weekly
EDITORIAL
Position limits: Tilting at windmills?

Kevin Norrish New CFTC proposals on position limits announced this week aim to curb excessive
+44 (0)20 7773 0369 speculation in commodities futures markets. But are they justified? Even the CFTC’s own
[email protected] data show that, far from distorting commodity markets, speculative activity has tended
to act as a stabilising influence on prices in recent years, with benefits for both
producers and consumers.
Legislation still lacks supporting evidence

Position limits are back… Position limits are in the news again – this time over the CFTC’s new proposals on trading limits,
one of the most hotly contested parts of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act. The CFTC’s original plan to introduce position limits, which affect a wide range of
the most commonly traded commodity futures markets, was halted in September 2012, when
the District Court of Columbia ruled that the CFTC had failed to demonstrate whether position
limits were either appropriate or necessary to deter excessive speculation in commodities
markets. The Court referred the proposed legislation back to the CFTC to “fill in the gaps”.
… but still lack plausible This week the CFTC returned with an updated position limits document
justification (http://www.cftc.gov/ucm/groups/public/@newsroom/documents/file/federalregister110
513.pdf). Although the new rules ease some of the aggregation hurdles contained in the
initial proposals and close an exemption for derivative contracts entered into by traders to
cover rent they pay on empty storage, in our view, there seems little in the document to
suggest position limits are actually necessary.
As Congress mandated the CFTC to impose position limits, the regulator feels it does not
have to justify the need for them to the markets. Instead of attempting to show why
position limits are necessary, dissenting commissioner Scott D. O’Malia has suggested that
the commission has adopted a new legal strategy emphasising its “expertise and
experience” to justify them.
So do we really need them?
Erring on the side of caution… The CFTC says it has received 130 studies examining the link between speculation and
commodities prices. It reports that “about a third of them say excessive speculation has an
impact, about a third say it doesn’t and about a third say they can’t tell”. Position limits are
justified, according to the commission, on the basis of “dire consequences if the third of the
studies that say there is an effect are right”. But in exemplifying “dire consequences” the CFTC
points to just two occasions in the last 35 years when position limits of the type it is proposing
might have prevented market disruption. The first is the Bunker-Hunt silver market squeeze in
the late 1970s. The second is the failed trade in US natural gas made by Amaranth trader Brian
Hunter in 2006.
CFTC’s own data suggest speculation has a positive impact

What does the CFTC’s own To help cast light on the impact of speculation on commodities markets, the CFTC has
data show? its own dataset, which covers index traders, the “massive passives”, that commission
members have often referred to as one of the biggest speculative threats to the efficient
functioning of commodity markets (see ‘CFTC: Regulators aim to curb the “massive
passives”’ Financial Times 24 November 2009). It comprises a detailed breakdown of
positioning across 21 US commodity futures markets, which has been collected
regularly from all major swap market participants since 2007 and updated every month.
8 November 2013 2
Our analysis of the data suggests that in key markets like oil, passive investors tend to act
against the prevailing price trend and if anything they have most likely had a cushioning
impact on commodity prices. By selling when prices are rising and buying when they fall,
they actually help reduce potential price volatility.
The oil price spike of 2008 is a case in point. According to the CFTC’s data, as the oil price
started accelerating sharply higher from March onwards, eventually reaching a peak of
$147 in July, index holders were selling oil, resulting in a cut to their net long positions in
WTI crude oil futures, from 405k lots to a low of just 350k lots by September (Figure 1).
That adds up to a reduction in their long positions of approximately 550m barrels of crude
oil, a total equivalent to almost a week’s worth of global supply at the then prevailing
demand levels. Without this weight of selling, how much higher might the price of oil (and
consequently the price to consumers of gasoline, heating oil, jet fuel, etc) have ultimately
peaked at?
Index investors did not start buying crude oil again until early 2009 when prices had fallen
below $50/barrel, but even then prices had further to fall, eventually bottoming out in the
low $30s. While it is impossible to prove a counterfactual, it is reasonable to assume that
without that index buying, the decline in oil prices may have been even worse and lasted for
longer with the potential to slow much needed investment on the supply side.
Index investors must buy low, The mechanism that underpins this phenomenon is an easy one to understand: to maintain
sell high… a consistent set of value-based portfolio weights of different commodities, as index
investors must do to match their benchmarks over time, they need to buy more of
commodities whose prices fall and sell more of those whose prices rise. The end result of
this process over time is the mildly negative relationship between commodity index activity
and prices traced out in Figure 3.
FIGURE 1 FIGURE 2
CFTC data show that Index investors have tended to be Wheat prices down 20% since 2011, despite 70% rise in
sellers on oil price spikes index longs
500 60 1250
Crude oil prices and net index positioning KBOT wheat prices and
480 140 55 net index positioning
Index longs ('000 lots, 1150
460 50
LHS)
120
440 45 Wheat price 1050
420 40 (c/bushel, RHS)
100
400 35 950
380 30
80
850
360 25
340 60 20
Index longs ('000 lots, LHS) 750
320 15
WTI oil price ($/b, RHS)
300 40 10 650
Dec-07 Dec-08 Dec-09 Dec-10 Dec-11 Dec-12 Mar-11 Jan-12 Nov-12 Sep-13
Source: CFTC, Barclays Source: CFTC, Barclays
8 November 2013 3
FIGURE 3
CFTC data on commodity investment buying show mild negative relationship with prices
Commodity price change vs. change in lots bought by index investors (2007 to present)
200% Change in
lots held
Copper
Nat. gas by indexers
150%
KBOT RBOB
100% Line of best fit
wheat
Cocoa Silver
50%
Soyoil Gold
Corn Soybeans Sugar
Coffee Cotton L. hogs
0%
WTI HO
CBOT wheat L. Cattle F. Cattle
-50%
-60% -20% 20% 60%
Price change
Source: CFTC, Barclays
… helping to lower volatility Thus, the CFTC’s own data tend to suggest that in its determination to impose position
limits in commodity markets it may be putting at risk what appears to be a highly beneficial
by-product of commodity investment activity; the buying and selling by index investors may
be working effectively to reduce the potential for volatility in commodity prices.
There are many other good examples of how commodity indexers tend to lean against the
direction of price movements in commodity markets with beneficial effects for both
producers and consumers. US natural gas is a good example. It stands out above other
commodities as experiencing one of the biggest increases in index positions of any
commodity since 2007 (181%), but also the largest price fall of any commodity market
(-52%). Without that index buying to offset the selling by other market participants, how
much further would natural gas prices fallen?
Similar trends are evident in food markets. The price of wheat traded on the KBOT exchange
is 20% lower than it was in 2007, while index holdings of KBOT wheat futures have more
than doubled. Wheat farmers are probably planting more wheat than they otherwise would
have, had the buying by indexers not cushioned the price fall. At the other extreme is the
market for feeder cattle. Here futures prices are up 25% since mid-2011. It could be argued
that US beef prices might be much higher than they are now if index holders had not cut
their net long positions by 40% over the same period.
Throwing the baby out with the bath water?

The risk of unintended Position limits could have other unintended consequences. The CFTC’s desire to use them
consequences is high to affect a lowering in the level of industry concentration in the provision of services to index
investors risks a reduction in the level of liquidity that existing market participants are able
to provide. The likelihood of large numbers of new service providers entering this sector
looks very unlikely at a time when many financial institutions are exiting the commodities
business in any case.
The danger is that not enough work is being done to assess or understand how speculation
works in commodities markets, why it might be needed and what the risks to market
efficiency might be if position limits are imposed in their current form. The proposals will
now be published for public comment – we suspect that there is still much more work to be
done on the issue.
8 November 2013 4
WEEK IN REVIEW
Commodities publications released this week:
Cross Commodities
The Commodity Investor: Momentum swings again
Following an all-too brief improvement in Q3, the environment for commodities has
deteriorated once again. Supply problems have lessened, Chinese economic data have
softened, backwardations in key markets such as oil have eased, and prices for many
commodities are falling once more. Absent a positive growth surprise, we expect the
subdued tone in commodity markets to persist to year-end. What that means for investors
is that the recent resurgence in passive long-only benchmark returns is over for now, and
alpha strategies are likely to do much better again over the rest of Q4. Backwardation and
curve alpha strategies have started the quarter strongly, and we expect that to continue.
China key commodities trade: Holiday pullback

China’s October data saw a seasonal pullback in most commodity imports, as industrial
activity took a breather during the Golden Week holiday. Imports will likely normalise into
year-end as industrial activity expands moderately.
Energy
Gas and Power Kaleidoscope: Double trouble
Drilling activity in Canada has rebounded recently, helping aggregate Canadian declines to
moderate significantly and putting them on track to reverse. Meanwhile, growing US
production is increasingly displacing Canadian gas in the US supply mix. This spells double
trouble for AECO basis differentials. While toll fee changes should allow AECO basis to
tighten from this year’s levels in 2014 (to -$0.55/MMBtu), we foresee a further
deterioration in 2015 to -$0.70.
Metals
Gold Delta: Fragile price floor
Gold surrendered its gains and tested levels towards $1300/oz at the end of last week.
Relatively large ETP inflows proved to be short-lived, and outflows in October have
exceeded the net redemptions over the past two months combined. The dollar’s strength
against the euro, an uptick in 10y US Treasuries and firmer equity markets worked to set a
difficult environment for gold, despite delayed expectations for Fed tapering. Weaker-than-
usual seasonal demand from India continues to set a fragile floor for gold.
8 November 2013 5
This page is intentionally left blank
8 November 2013 6
Energy
8 November 2013 7
ENERGY MARKET OUTLOOK
Oil: Brent in a transient contango; Gas: Upside

capped by raging production
• A lacklustre outlook for European refinery runs, at a time of stable North Sea supplies,
does not imply an extended period of contango for Brent, in our view; it does,
however, suggest a backwardation with a flatter slope for Brent in the coming months.
• A partial recovery in Libyan volumes and marginal new output from Iraq, if they
materialize, have the potential to put further pressure on these spreads, in our view,
provided, there is little reciprocal adjustment from holders of spare capacity, which
could help balance the market and make the impact negligible. We however expect
reciprocal adjustments in supply from holders of spare capacity.
• The weather forecast has rescued gas prices once again, as the 10-15 day forecasts
turned incrementally colder. Against the backdrop of rising heating demand, natural
gas production continued to hit fresh highs. Growing production should continue to
keep a lid on prices.
Oil: Brent in contango… despite Libya

Miswin Mahesh Brent crude prices continue to drift lower, in line with our expectations, please see Oil: Easing bias
+44 (0)20 7773 4291 in Q4, with swing factors on the radar. The trend took a more wholesome shape this week, with
[email protected] Brent front month time spreads extending into a deeper contango (Figure 1), after having tip-
toed the parity line over the past week. WTI’s contango remains in place as a result of increasing
US crude production, changing transport dynamics and refinery appetite to handle the input; the
move to contango for Brent, however, is reflective of the following:
1. Relatively tepid fundamentals globally at present, with refineries in Asia slowly throttling
up their utilisation rates, but remaining in a relaxed state with regards to their purchasing
decisions at the prompt, opting for bargain-priced non-traditional sources to meet their
requirements. Oil suppliers have been adjusting their differentials to maintain market
share, while VLCC tanker owners have been a beneficiary of this recent extension of length
away from seasoned trade routes, to new geographies, with charter rates picking up.
FIGURE 1 FIGURE 2
Brent front month spreads move to contango; a contrast to North Sea crude oil loadings (Brent, Forties, Oseberg,
the backwardation seen during similar periods in the past Ekofisk) have improved from September of this year
0.5
$/bbl 1.3 mb/d 2013
0.0 2012
1.2
Four year average
-0.5
1.1
-1.0
1.0
-1.5
0.9
-2.0
0.8
-2.5 2013
2012 0.7
-3.0
2011
-3.5 0.6
Jan Mar May Jul Sep Nov
Jul-13 Aug-13 Oct-13 Nov-13
Source: Bloomberg, Barclays Research Source: Bloomberg, Barclays Research
8 November 2013 8
2. On a micro level however, for Brent, the expected state of supply-demand balances
in the North Sea crude market is more in focus. Crude oil loading programmes
released this week for the Brent, Forties, Oseberg, and Ekofisk quartet in December
shows output receding slightly m/m from November’s levels (which was inflated by
deferred cargoes from October). However, it remains relatively stable and higher
y/y (Figure 2). North Sea fields restoring production after maintenance in October
and November, along with output from the Buzzard field being a lot more stable
than 2012 has helped overall North Sea output to firm ground. Statoil has started
production at its new Visund North oil and gas field in the North Sea, which extends
output by 10 thousand b/d at the Visund fields (Visund and Visund South), that
currently produce 20 – 25 thousand b/d.
The relatively healthy state of North Sea supplies is met with continued lacklustre appetite
for crude among European refineries. In the coming weeks, the level of contango for Brent
at the front of the curve will be tested by:
1. The economics of bringing more of Europe’s refining capacity back online, in the face of
continuing weak margins, and increasing competitive product imports into Europe
(especially from the US, where refineries have access to cheaper crude). Added to this,
initial indications for demand in Europe continue to look lacklustre, especially in light of
recent data showing net stock-building of heating oil by final consumers in France, at a
time when temperatures have been above normal for this time of the year. A lacklustre
outlook for European refinery runs, at a time of stable North Sea supplies, does not
imply an extended period of contango for Brent, in our view; it does, however,
suggest a backwardation with a flatter slope for Brent in the coming months. This is
because outside Europe, refineries are still expected to ramp up runs (although keeping
a watch on margins), including new capacity being brought online. A weak Brent at the
prompt, with a narrow differential to grades such as Dubai, would likely prompt
arbitrage flows.
2. Whether differentials for North Sea crudes will adjust to make arbitrage flows out of
the region possible. So far two cargoes in October and three cargoes in November
have been shipped out of the region. Overall, the Mediterranean light sweet crude
market remains one of the few regions with a constructive crude oil demand-supply
balance at present, with offers for Azeri Light crude topping $3/bbl over dated Brent
this week, as the void left from fragmented Libyan oil supplies leave an impression.
Forward curves for Dubai and Tapis are still in backwardation – although only with a
mild degree of slope – while West African grades that price off forward Dated Brent
are mirroring the contango in Brent CFDs. A partial recovery in Libyan volumes, (at
least up to the 600 thousand b/d level), along with marginal new output from Iraq,
if materialized, has the potential to put further pressure on these spreads, provided
there is little reciprocal adjustment from holders of spare capacity, which could
help balance the market and make the impact negligible. We however expect
reciprocal adjustments in supply from holders of spare capacity. In this context, it is
worth highlighting the impact of the start-up of the Jubail refinery on crude available
for exports from Saudi Arabia.
8 November 2013 9
US natural gas: Raging production, but weather uplifts

Shiyang Wang Natural gas prices edged slightly higher at the front of the curve with the prompt contract
+1 212 526 7464 gaining one cent to $3.60/MMBtu on the week. The weather forecast has rescued gas
[email protected] prices once again, as the 10-15 day forecasts turned incrementally colder. Against the
backdrop of rising heating demand, natural gas production continued to hit fresh highs.
Growing production should continue to keep a lid on prices.
Notably, a visible upward step change could be observed in pipeline flow data when four
pipeline expansion projects came online in the Marcellus on November 1. Indeed, as much
as 1.9 Bcf/d of pipeline expansions entered into service on November 1 in the northeastern
region of the Marcellus. By the end of the week, northeast pipeline flow increased by more
than 1 Bcf/d compared to the end of October. These projects such as TETCO’s NJ-NY
expansion unleashed the pent up supply in the Marcellus and brought incremental
production to areas with traditionally high gas demand. We believe northeast (Marcellus
and Utica) production will likely grow further in 2014, with the size of the production
growth paced by infrastructure additions in the area. Overall, northeast production growth
should support overall production growth in the lower-48 next year.
On a different note, a market-neutral weekly injection finished the traditional injection

season this year with 3,814 Bcf gas left in the ground. The EIA reported that working gas in
storage increased by 35 Bcf for the week ending October 25. This is roughly in line with
market expectations. With a 3.8 finish to the injection season, the market should be well
cushioned with enough gas in the ground heading into the withdrawal season. Given our
expectations for supply and demand balances and assuming normal weather patterns this
winter, we forecast a 1.9 Tcf finish for inventories in March. Prices, in our view, should trade
around the high end of the $3-4 range and breach the $4 level in Q1 during this coming
winter season.
8 November 2013 10
Key price charts

FIGURE 3 FIGURE 4
Oil: Front-month WTI and Brent ($/bbl) Oil: Brent forward curve ($/bbl)
130 120
WTI Brent
Range in 2012
119
110 Two months ago
One month ago
04-Nov-13
108
100
97
90
86
Years to expiry
75 80
Oct-12 Dec-12 Feb-13 Apr-13 Jun-13 Aug-13 Oct-13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Source: Bloomberg, Barclays Research Source: Barclays Research
FIGURE 5 FIGURE 6
Oil: Front-month Brent (€/bbl) and ICE Gasoil (€/ton) Oil: Front-month ICE Gasoil crack ($/bbl)
97 800 24
94 22
91 760
20
88
720 18
85
82 16
680
79
14
76 640
73 12
Brent (LHS) Gasoil (RHS)
70 600 10
Oct-12 Dec-12 Feb-13 Apr-13 Jun-13 Aug-13 Oct-13 Oct-12 Dec-12 Feb-13 Apr-13 Jun-13 Aug-13 Oct-13
Source: Bloomberg, Barclays Research Source: Bloomberg, Barclays Research
FIGURE 7 FIGURE 8
US natural gas: Henry hub ($/MMbtu) US natural gas: Forward curve ($/MMbtu)
4.50 4.40
$/MMBtu
4.30
4.20
4.10
4.00
3.90
3.70 3.80
3.50
3.60
3.30
3.40 11/7/2013 10/31/2013
3.10
Prompt Cash
2.90 3.20
Mar-13Apr-13May-13Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13Sep-13Oct-13Nov-13 Dec-13 Apr-14 Aug-14 Dec-14 Apr-15 Aug-15 Dec-15 Apr-16
Source: Reuters, Barclays Research Source: Reuters, Barclays Research
8 November 2013 11
FOCUS: NATURAL GAS
Nuclear comeback
Shiyang Wang Nuclear generation this fall is running far ahead of last year’s levels. Announced spring
+1 212 526 7464 maintenance outages suggest that nuclear output is likely to remain strong in H1 14.
[email protected]
Against the backdrop of a heavy maintenance season and large unplanned outages caused
by hurricane Sandy last fall, nuclear generation has been running almost 12 GW above last
year’s level in November so far (Figure 1). Announced outages for the rest of the year
suggest that the surplus should persist, with November and December on track to see,
respectively, 14 GW and 7 GW higher nuclear output versus last year. If natural gas were the
only fuel displaced, gas demand would lose on average 2.5 Bcf/d this month and 1.25 Bcf/d
next month compared with last year. In reality, however, both gas-fired and coal-fired
generation would likely be curtailed as a result of higher nuclear output. Planned outages
are much smaller than last year, as many nuclear plants are on 18-month or two-year
maintenance cycles.
For next year, H1 14 announced maintenance schedules indicate that nuclear generation
will be running ahead of 2013 levels in Q1 and Q2 14, by 2.8 GW and 4.9 GW y/y
respectively (Figure 2). This analysis conservatively assumes that Fort Calhoun in Nebraska
(479 MW), which has been down since April 2011 due to restart complications, will not
come back this year or during H1 14. Fort Calhoun was heating up the reactor to run some
tests in late October, making some progress towards a restart. However, announced nuclear
maintenance schedules routinely fall short of actual outages as a result of unplanned
downtime and longer-than-expected maintenance works. This means that while nuclear
generation is likely to run ahead of this year’s levels during the first half of 2014, the
rebound may not be as strong as announced outages alone would indicate.
FIGURE 1 FIGURE 2
US daily nuclear generation rate Monthly average US nuclear generation
MW 2011 2012 2013 MW

100,000 100,000
95,000 90,000
90,000 80,000
85,000 70,000
80,000 60,000
75,000
50,000
70,000
40,000
65,000 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2012 2013 2013 forecast 2014 forecast
Source: Bloomberg, NRC, Barclays Research Source: Bloomberg, Reuters, NRC, Barclays Research
8 November 2013 12
Metals
8 November 2013 13
METALS MARKET OUTLOOK
New LME warehouse policy could lead to front

end time spread volatility
• The LME’s decision to go ahead with a new warehouse policy as of 1 April 2014
means there could be more volatility in front-end time spreads, more metal held off-
warrant and lower physical premiums (after possibly rising initially), resulting in
further production cuts and ultimately a tightening in the ex-China aluminium
market that we already forecast to swing into deficit in 2014.
• Risks are skewed to the downside for gold over the remainder of the year unless the
physical market bounces back and investors return to the forefront. Thus, we
believe the platinum-gold spread has scope to widen further given that wage
settlements have yet to be reached in South Africa.
Base metals: Overhaul of LME warehousing system

Gayle Berry The LME’s decision to go ahead with a new warehouse policy as of 1 April 2014 means
+44 (0)20 3134 1596 there could be more volatility in front-end time spreads (aluminium in particular), more
[email protected] metal held off-warrant and lower physical premiums (after possibly rising initially),
resulting in further production cuts and ultimately a tightening in the ex-China aluminium
Nicholas Snowdon market that we already forecast to swing into deficit in 2014. For more details on the
+1 212 526 7279 implications of the warehouse policy, please see Base metals flash: Proposed LME
[email protected] warehouse policy: spreads could tighten, premiums fall, and smelters close, and for more
details on our aluminium market balance, please see Metals Magnifier: Are copper smelter
Sijin Cheng economics improving?
+65 6308 6320
The LME has cut the threshold for warehouse queues that will be subject to the new load-
[email protected]
out rules, from 100 days to 50 days. This change means that a few more warehouses will
fall under the new load-out rules than would have been the case under the first proposal
and, thus, the volume of metal leaving warehouses will be marginally quicker. The LME itself
acknowledges this is a concession to consumers with “50 days allowing the LME to better
deliver a market of last resort to physical metals users”. Based on current queue levels, there
FIGURE 1 FIGURE 2
Seven warehouse locations will be subject to the new LME Supply cuts are tightening the ex-China aluminium market
warehouse policy
800 LME warehouse locations with queues of over 50 Barclays ex-China aluminium supply-demand balance
calendar days 1,500 (Kt)
700
600 1,000
500
400 500
300
0
200
100 -500
0
-1,000
-1,500
2011 2012 2013 2014
Source: LME, Barclays Research Source: Wood Mackenzie, CRU, IAI, Barclays Research
8 November 2013 14
are seven locations that have so-called “affected warehouses”. The first additional material
that will be made available as a result of the new policy will be on 1 May 2014 through to 31
July 2014.
If industry participants react to the proposals by rushing to get metal out of LME
warehouses, there could be a sudden surge in cancelled warrants. This would reduce
tradable warrants, which could lead to bouts of front-end spread tightness – as witnessed
before, especially in the lead market. Furthermore, a symptom of the warehouse policy and
differentials between rents means more metal could be moved from on-exchange to off-
exchange; this would also reduce tradable warrants and again potentially lead to bouts of
front-end spread tightness. This is especially the case if this off-exchange material is hedged
on-exchange since, as the LME itself acknowledges, individual warehouses could refuse to
take delivery of material against a short future position if it subsequently affected its load-
out rate. Such an event could lead to exaggerated backwardations if the short futures leg of
the trade had to be rolled while material was moved to a location that would take delivery.
We also see potential for some upside risk to physical premiums in the short term if industry
participants react by rushing to get metal out of LME warehouses. A sudden surge in LME
cancelled warrants could boost queues temporarily, causing physical premiums to go
higher. However, we ultimately expect physical premiums to continue to drift lower as a
function of reduced queue lengths on the LME and reduced incentive affordability as
material is held off-warrant.
Weaker physical premiums would reduce the take-home price for producers (especially
aluminium smelters) unless it was offset by an increase in the flat price. We think premiums
are more likely to fall before prices rise, so initially there could be more supply rationing,
with high premiums having been a lifeline for higher cost aluminium producers in North
America and Europe in particular (European smelters likely to suffer most from weaker
aluminium premiums). However, further down the line, this should be price-positive,
especially since the ex-China aluminium market has swung from a 1.4Mt surplus in 2011 to
a forecast 1Mt deficit in 2014.
The LME also intends to provide new delayed data on a per-warehouse basis and will look
into publishing a “commitment of traders” report, both of which would increase
transparency of the market.
Precious metals: China’s gold demand softens from H1 13 highs

Suki Cooper Price action has been mixed across the complex: gold and silver have lost ground; palladium
+1 212 526 7896 has tested its highest levels since mid-August; and platinum has remained stable. Gold has
[email protected] dipped below $1300/oz as the dollar has strengthened against the euro towards mid-
September levels – following the surprise rate cut – equity markets retain their gains and
Christopher Louney 10y US Treasuries have risen. The external backdrop is less favourable for gold; thus,
+1 212 526 6721 investors continue to scale back exposure. Furthermore, physical demand remains softer
[email protected] than expected at this time of year.
After declining by 48.5 tonnes in October, gold ETP holdings have continued to dwindle in
early November and are down 6.36 tonnes. Net outflows have reached 754 tonnes for the
year-to-date, totalling 27% of the peak holdings set at the start of the year. The delayed
data release from the CFTC has data to 29 October now, which unsurprisingly reveals an
improvement in short-term tactical positioning as prices headed towards $1360/oz, a then-
five-week high. Net fund length rose above 100k lots for the first time since 23 April, driven
by a combination of short covering activity (reduced to levels last seen in January) and the
establishment of fresh longs (to early August levels). However, prices have eased since then,
while open interest has fallen, implying exposure has been reduced.
8 November 2013 15
The physical market is offering little to buffer the negative market sentiment with
preliminary estimates for weak demand amid festival-related buying proving to be accurate.
The Times of India cited some jewellers saying gold sales were down 40%, with customers
preferring diamond set pieces, and another saying gold sales were down 20% compared
with the same period last year as customers preferred silver. India’s finance minister
reported gold imports rose modestly to 23.5 tonnes in October, well below imports in
October last year. The Times of India also reported that the state of Gujarat imported 127kg
of gold in October, a five-year low and just 0.5% of the imports in October 2012.
Demand in China has slowed as well, with volume traded on the Shanghai Gold Exchange
softer than levels earlier in the year but still above year-ago levels. Demand tends to pick up
in the 6-8 weeks before the Chinese New Year, so it should start to firm from mid- to late
November. The China Gold Group has said it expects the country’s production to grow by
7% to a record 430 tonnes (Barclays estimate: 420 tonnes), but demand is expected to
exceed 1000 tonnes. Assuming scrap supply of just over 100 tonnes per annum, China
remains dependent upon imports to meet just consumer demand. The World Gold Council
has reported consumer demand of 570 tonnes over H1 13; the China Gold Association has
reported gold output from mined and by-product production to August reached 270
tonnes, up 6% y/y. In the absence of China’s trade statistics, the Hong Kong Statistics
suggest net imports of 508 tonnes in H1 13 and 846 tonnes over the first three quarters of
the year. Given the growth in consumer demand alone, China is set to remain a net importer
of gold, although growth rates are likely to slow, particularly given the response to the sharp
price drop in April. In turn, we maintain our estimate for China’s jewellery demand growth
at 15% y/y for the full year 2013 and for growth to slow to 5% in 2014 (H1 13 per WGC:
338 tonnes, 2012 per WGC: 515 tonnes). In our view, risks are skewed to the downside for
gold over the remainder of the year unless the physical market bounces back and investors
return to the forefront.
On the supply side, Statistics South Africa has reported a continued decline in gold output in
September, down 3% y/y and m/m, while PGM output has improved 5%, albeit from a
weak base given the strike action that plagued the industry last year. In terms of company
results, platinum production at Impala, the second-largest platinum producer, was flat q/q
at 376koz, but down 17% y/y. Similarly, palladium production fell 21% y/y to 228koz. Cash
costs, after taking into account exchange rates, were $1658/oz, $200 lower than in Q3 12.
Vale also reported Q3 13 platinum and palladium production: the latter was 6% higher q/q
FIGURE 3 FIGURE 4
Growth in China’s consumer demand outpaces mine output South African platinum output shows modest improvement
growth from a weak base
1200 China mine supply 80% South Africa mine supply (y/y change)
Tonnes
China gold consumer demand
1000 60%
40% Little
800 improvement from
20% weak base year
600
0%
400 -20%
200 -40%
-60%
0 Sep-11 Mar-12 Sep-12 Mar-13 Sep-13
2005 2007 2009 2011 2013F
Source: CRU, WGC (TR GFMS), Barclays Research Source: Statistics South Africa, Barclays Research
8 November 2013 16
and 21% higher y/y at 86koz; while the former was flat y/y but 6% higher q/q at 35koz.
The platinum-gold spread has widened to levels last seen 11 weeks ago and, given wage
settlements have yet to be reached, has scope to widen further, in our view.
The latest gold production results were largely positive, building upon previous reports that,
on average, were at least flat. AngloGold Ashanti, the third-largest gold producer, reported
Q3 13 gold production over 1Moz, up 11% q/q and 1% y/y. Average total cash costs were
better than guidance, down 1% q/q and 14% y/y to $809/oz. Likewise, all-in sustaining
costs also fell, by 11% q/q, to $1155/oz. The company maintained its guidance for 4-
4.1Moz at $815-845/oz. At IAMGOLD, the eleventh-largest producer, production also rose,
by 1% q/q and 10% y/y to 226koz. Cash costs fell q/q to $734/oz, and the company
maintained full-year production guidance at 875-950koz with cash costs of $790-840/oz.
All in, sustaining cost guidance remains $1150-1250/oz.
On the other hand, Buenaventura, the seventh-largest gold producer, reported Q3 13

production results as well. Gold production fell marginally, by 3% q/q and 1% y/y to
266koz. Average cash costs fell by 12% q/q and 10% y/y to $509/oz amid a cost savings
program. 2013 total production guidance for its largest mine, Yanacocha (of which it owns
43.65%), remains 0.9-1Moz. Silver production at Buenaventura built upon the strong
production results seen among other silver producers this year, rising 12% q/q and 5% y/y
to 4.9Moz. Silver production at GlencoreXstrata also remained strong at 2.9Moz, up 1% q/q
and 12% y/y.
8 November 2013 17
Base metals LME cash prices

FIGURE 5 FIGURE 6
Aluminium ($/t) Copper ($/t)
2,200 8,500
2,100 8,100
2,000 7,700
1,900 7,300
1,800 6,900
1,700 6,500
Nov-12 Feb-13 May-13 Aug-13 Nov-13 Nov-12 Feb-13 May-13 Aug-13 Nov-13
Source: EcoWin, Barclays Research Source: EcoWin, Barclays Research
FIGURE 7 FIGURE 8
Lead ($/t) Nickel ($/t)
2,600 21,000
2,400
18,500
2,200
16,000
2,000
13,500
1,800
1,600 11,000
FIGURE 9 FIGURE 10
Tin ($/t) Zinc ($/t)
26,000 2,300
24,000
2,150
22,000
2,000
20,000
1,850
18,000
16,000 1,700
8 November 2013 18
Precious metals prices and ETP holdings

FIGURE 11 FIGURE 12
Gold ($/oz) Silver ($/oz)
1,900 37
33
1,700
29
1,500
25
1,300
21
1,100 17
FIGURE 13 FIGURE 14
Platinum ($/oz) Palladium ($/oz)
1,800 800
1,650 725
1,500 650
1,350 575
1,200 500
FIGURE 15
ETP holdings (as of 6 November 2013)
Physical ETPs Weekly change Month-to-date change Year-to-date change Total holdings
Gold (tonnes) -7.2 -6.4 -754.4 2,009

Open-end funds -6.6 -5.8 -772.2 1,832
SPDR (GLD) -3.6 -3.6 -482.4 868
Silver (tonnes) -4.6 -9.5 763.7 20,371
Open-end funds -4.6 -9.5 763.7 16,347
iShares US -4.5 -4.5 412.8 10,498
Platinum (ounces) -3,641 -1,758 808,720 2,605,015
Open-end funds -3,361 -1,478 794,315 2,523,110
ABSA NewPlat -59 -59 770,349 770,349
Palladium (ounces) -16,061 -5,667 13,654 2,198,185
Open-end funds -15,401 -5,007 -25,900 2,011,131
US ETF Securities -15,061 -392 -18,550 693,814
Source: Various issuer websites, Bloomberg, Barclays Research
8 November 2013 19
FOCUS: BASE METALS
Zinc price upside: a slow burner

Gayle Berry The slowdown in zinc mine production has begun. We think there is reason to be bullish
+44 (0)20 3134 1596 on a 12-month view, but don’t expect a sustained move higher in prices until mid-2014.
[email protected]
For some time now there has been a much talked about and widely anticipated tightening in
zinc mine production that so far has failed to transpire. But with global zinc mine production
growth trending lower and Glencore’s production results showing a 12% y/y decline in zinc
production, is this story finally beginning to take shape?
Data from the International Lead and Zinc Study Group (ILZG) show that global zinc mine
production growth is trending lower and is flat y/y in the year to August. Mine production
ex-China is down 2% y/y in the same period though it did recover to grow 4% y/y in
August. Glencore’s Q3 13 results showed that its zinc mine production dropped 12% y/y (in
line with expectations) due to the shuttering of two big mines – Perseverance and
Brunswick. These mines will remove a total of 300Ktpy from global supply and mark the
beginning of what needs to happen for a bullish zinc story to take shape, in our view.
Supply growth from mines like Bracemac McLeod, Peroka and Velardena (total 295Ktpy)
will, in the short term, offset losses from attrition. But there is now little slack should these
mines not perform. The other big swing factor is Chinese mine production. To get bullish, it
needs to weaken considerably. Unfortunately, the sector is opaque and for the past few
years it has consistently surprised to the upside. Growth has slowed from 25% in 2012, but
at 11% y/y YTD it is still strong. There is also an ample global concentrate surplus which
would provide some buffer, albeit only short term.
We think there are reasons to be bullish on zinc prices on a 12-month view, but we don’t
expect a sustained move higher to develop until mid-2014. We see more than 15% upside
for zinc prices between now and the end of 2014, albeit with most of that happening in H2
14 with Q4 14 prices forecast to average $2,200/t. We also think the downside for prices is
limited with cost-support demonstrated around $1,700/t. So the question of whether to go
long zinc is a question of timing.
FIGURE 1 FIGURE 2
Growth in global zinc mine production trending lower Some big closures offset, for now, by a collection of smaller
additions
200 Change in global zinc mine production (Kt, y/y) Top 5 zinc mine new projects, expansions and
150 closures 2013-2014 (Kt increase in production)
160
100
New production 534Kt
120 50
0
80
-50
40 -100
0 -150
Production closed 536Kt
-200
-40
-80 12-month moving

average
-120
Aug-08 Aug-09 Aug-10 Aug-11 Aug-12 Aug-13
Source: ILZG, Barclays Research Source: Wood Mackenzie, Barclays Research
8 November 2013 20
Forecasts and Data
8 November 2013 21
COMMODITY PRICE FORECASTS

Barclays Research quarterly average commodity price forecasts
Q1 12 Q2 12 Q3 12 Q4 12 Q1 13 Q2 13 Q3 13 Q4 13F
Base Metals (LME cash)
Aluminium US$/t 2,176 1,975 1,921 1,996 2,003 1,835 1,781 1,900
Copper US$/t 8,310 7,869 7,706 7,909 7,931 7,148 7,073 7,150
Lead US$/t 2,093 1,974 1,975 2,199 2,301 2,053 2,102 2,200
Nickel US$/t 19,651 17,146 16,317 16,967 17,314 14,963 13,916 14,500
Tin US$/t 22,941 20,565 19,275 21,560 24,125 20,905 21,268 24,000
Zinc US$/t 2,025 1,928 1,885 1,947 2,033 1,840 1,859 1,980
Base Metal Index^ 218 201 195 203 209 186 183 192
Precious metals
Gold US$/oz 1690 1611 1653 1717 1631 1416 1329 1325
Silver US$/oz 32.6 29.4 29.9 32.5 30.1 23.2 21.4 20.0
Platinum US$/oz 1604 1495 1493 1593 1628 1464 1449 1550
Palladium US$/oz 680 625 609 650 738 712 721 780
Energy
WTI US$/bbl 103 94 92 88 94 94 106 101
Brent US$/bbl 118 109 109 110 113 103 110 105
US Natural Gas US$/mmbtu 2.5 2.4 2.9 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.6 3.9
Note: Economist Intelligence Unit weight. Base metals prices are LME cash. Precious metals spot prices. WTI: front month NYMEX close. Brent: front month IPE close.
US natural gas: NYMEX front month close. Source: Barclays Research
Barclays Research annual average commodity price forecasts

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013F 2014F 2015F
Base Metals
Aluminium US$/t 2,573 1,664 2,172 2,398 2,017 1,879 1,838 2,250
Copper US$/t 6,961 5,148 7,533 8,813 7,948 7,326 6,750 9,500
Lead US$/t 2,093 1,721 2,146 2,399 2,060 2,164 2,263 2,600
Nickel US$/t 21,115 14,604 21,809 22,853 17,520 15,173 15,000 20,000
Tin US$/t 18,500 13,579 20,407 26,063 21,085 22,575 26,000 26,000
Zinc US$/t 1,876 1,654 2,158 2,191 1,946 1,928 2,025 2,800
Base Metal Index^ 204.3 146.2 210 240 204 192 190 243
Precious Metals
Gold US$/oz 872 972 1,226 1,571 1,668 1,425 1,310 1,190
Silver US$/oz 15.0 14.6 20.2 35.2 31.1 23.7 19.5 17.0
Platinum US$/oz 1,569 1,205 1,610 1,716 1,547 1,523 1,600 1,700
Palladium US$/oz 348 262 526 729 641 738 795 900
Energy
WTI US$/bbl 99.7 62 80 95 94 99 104 104
Brent US$/bbl 98.4 63 80 111 112 108 110 115
US Natural Gas US$/mmbtu 8.90 4.16 4.39 4.03 2.82 3.74 3.88 4.15
Note: Economist Intelligence Unit weight. Base metals prices are LME cash. Precious metals spot prices. WTI: front month NYMEX close. Brent: front month IPE close.
US natural gas: NYMEX front month close. Source: Barclays Research
8 November 2013 22
Price forecast comparisons

Price Change Week Ago Price Change Month Ago Price Change Year Ago
7-Nov-13
(%, w/w) Price (%, m/m) Price (%, y/y) Price
Rough Rice CBOT $/bushel 4.4% 15.7 15.0 6.3% 14.8 5.0% 14.9
Palladium NYMEX $/oz 3.0% 759 736 6.3% 714 24.5% 610
Oats CBOT $/bushel 2.6% 339 330 7.0% 317 -7.2% 365
UK Natural Gas ICE £/therm 2.3% 64 63 -1.9% 66 -0.4% 65
Lumber CME $/1000ft 1.4% 367 362 9.6% 335 14.5% 320
German Power EEX €/MWh 0.8% 41 41 -1.5% 42 -14.8% 49
Platinum NYMEX $/oz 0.6% 1,455 1,446 3.9% 1,400 -5.2% 1,536
Azuki beans TGE JPY/30kg 0.1% 10,600 10,590 3.8% 10,210 -14.5% 12,400
Cocoa ICE $/tonne 0.0% 2,676 2,677 -1.5% 2,718 11.5% 2,399
Soybeans CBOT $/bushel -0.1% 1,279 1,280 -0.8% 1,289 -15.2% 1,509
Carbon EUA ECX €/tonne -0.2% 4.8 4.8 -1.2% 4.9 -41.7% 8.2
UK Power ICE £/MWh -0.4% 70 70 0.6% 69 6.7% 65
Feeder Cattle CME $/lb -0.4% 165 165 -0.1% 165 14.2% 144
Rubber TOCOM ¥/kg -0.4% 247 248 -1.0% 250 3.2% 239
Cotton ICE $/lb -0.5% 77 77 -6.6% 82 9.9% 70
Tin LME $/tonne -0.7% 22,693 22,860 -3.7% 23,566 11.5% 20,348
Coal API2 ICE $/tonne -0.8% 82 82 2.8% 80 -10.7% 92
Silver OTC $/oz -1.0% 21.6 21.9 -2.8% 22.3 -31.9% 31.8
Gold OTC $/oz -1.2% 1,308 1,323 -0.8% 1,318 -23.8% 1,716
Coffee ICE $/tonne -1.4% 104 105 -9.6% 115 -31.3% 151
Copper LME $/tonne -1.4% 7,140 7,244 -1.0% 7,214 -6.1% 7,600
Coal API4 ICE $/tonne -1.5% 84 86 3.1% 82 -3.9% 88
Sugar ICE $/lb -1.5% 18.0 18.3 -3.1% 18.6 -4.8% 19.0
US Natural Gas NYMEX $/mmbtu -1.7% 3.5 3.6 -5.3% 3.7 -1.6% 3.6
Corn CBOT $/bushel -1.8% 421 428 -4.8% 442 -43.5% 744
Lead LME $/tonne -1.9% 2,127 2,168 2.9% 2,068 -3.0% 2,193
Aluminium alloy LME $/tonne -1.9% 1,805 1,840 -1.1% 1,825 -0.9% 1,821
Live Cattle CME $/lb -2.1% 132 135 2.7% 128 5.4% 125
Wheat CBOT $/bushel -2.2% 653 668 -5.8% 694 -27.0% 894
Crude Oil NYMEX $/barrel -2.3% 94 96 -9.0% 103 11.6% 84
Aluminium LME $/tonne -2.3% 1,781 1,823 -2.2% 1,822 -6.4% 1,903
Wheat KBT $/bushel -3.8% 713 741 -6.3% 761 -23.5% 932
Nickel LME $/tonne -4.3% 13,943 14,565 0.8% 13,831 -12.6% 15,955
Heating Oil NYMEX $/gallon -4.3% 2.8 3.0 -6.4% 3.0 -4.1% 3.0
Gas Oil ICE $/tonne -4.7% 889 932.5 -5.0% 936 -4.6% 931
Crude Oil ICE $/barrel -4.9% 103 109 -6.1% 110 -3.1% 107
Gasoline NYMEX $/gallon -5.0% 2.5 2.6 -4.8% 2.6 -3.3% 2.6
Source: EcoWin, Barclays Research
8 November 2013 23
TRADE RECOMMENDATIONS
FIGURE 1
Key recommendations
Current Price Gain/Loss
Contract Entry Date Entry price Unit
06-Nov-13 $ %
Open trades
Long LME tin Mar-14 10/1/2013 23067.00 22826.00 $/t -241.00 -1.0%
Rationale: Although we believe tin has the weakest demand outlook among all base metals, its constrained supply outlook means that the
market is still facing a deficit, and we forecast further price upside in 2014 to $26,000/t.
Long NYMEX platinum Jan-14 4/30/2013 1511.40 1467.40 $/oz -44.00 -2.9%
Rationale: We continue to forecast the platinum market to remain in deficit this year, and the rising workforce representation of AMCU is likely to
lead to greater scope for industrial unrest during the biennial wage negotiations.
Long Brent crude oil Dec-15 1/27/2011 98.15 96.86 $/bbl -1.29 -1.3%
Rationale: We see the medium-term crude oil price risks as being to the upside, due mainly to strong EM demand growth, lack of spare capacity
and constraints on non-OPEC supply. We expect far-forward prices to benefit, with our 2015 price forecast for Brent pegged at $115/bbl.
Note: From January 2013, a stop loss of -7.5% and a profit target of 15% will be applied to all trades. Trades will automatically be shut if either of these thresholds is
breached, unless there are exceptional circumstances that suggest the trade should be kept open. Source: Bloomberg, Reuters, Barclays Research
8 November 2013 24
FIGURE 2
Closed trades
Gain/Loss
Closed Trades Contract Entry Date Exit Date Entry price Exit price Unit
$ %
Directional trades
Short LME copper Dec-13 8/27/2013 06/11/2013 7321 7113 $/t 208.0 2.8%
Short LME aluminium Dec-13 6/7/2013 01/10/2013 1976 1820 $/t 156.3 7.9%
Long NYMEX palladium Dec-13 1/18/2013 8/27/2013 724.8 751.3 $/oz 26.45 3.6%
Short LME nickel May-13 2/15/2013 3/21/2013 18380 16872 $/t 1508 8.2%
Short LME aluminium Mar-13 10/1/2012 3/18/2013 2144 1894 $/oz 251 11.7%
Long COMEX gold Feb-13 10/1/2012 1/22/2013 1786 1693 $/oz -92.3 -5.2%
Long NYMEX palladium Dec-12 2/29/2012 12/31/2012 710 703 $/oz -7 -0.9%
Long LME copper Dec-12 5/17/2012 8/24/2012 7639 7642 $/t -1373 -14.3%
Long LME aluminium Dec-15 3/29/2011 7/20/2012 2884 2193 $/t -691 -24.0%
Short US nat gas Henry Hub Oct-13 11/21/2011 12/20/2011 4.4 4.1 $/mmbtu 0.3 6.6%
Long COMEX gold** Dec-12 11/21/2011 12/20/2011 1694 1628 $/oz -66 29.3%
Long Carbon EUA Dec-11 2/24/2011 6/30/2011 15.4 13.5 €/t -1.9 -12.1%
Long UK natural gas Q3-11 3/29/2011 5/26/2011 63.9 58.5 p/therm -5.4 -8.5%
Long LME nickel Jun-11 2/24/2011 5/26/2011 27501 22821 $/t -4680 -17.0%
Long European delivered coal (API2)** Apr-11 1/27/2011 3/29/2011 114.5 125.7 $/t 16 14.4%
Short Comex silver Dec-11 1/27/2011 2/24/2011 27.1 33.1 $/oz -6 -22.4%
Spread trades
Short 3.5% fuel oil Rotterdam-Brent crack spread 4/30/2013 5/31/2013 -10.79 -11.74 $/bbl 0.95 -
US natural gas spread widening 3/21/2013 3/26/2013 0.095 0.086 $/mmbtu -0.01 -
Short front month Brent time spread 2/15/2013 3/8/2013 90.0 76.0 c/b 14.0 -
Short US gasoline crack spread 1/18/2013 1/24/2013 27.8 30.0 $/b -2.2 -
UK nat gas spread widening 8/24/2012 11/29/2012 0.01 0.58 p/therm 0.57 -
Fuel oil versus gasoil differentials 2/29/2012 10/1/2012 -30.54 -30.01 $/b 0.54 -
Short European gasoil crack spreads 6/25/2012 7/20/2012 0.50 -0.41 $/b 0.91 -
US gasoline (RBOB) spread tightening 12/20/2011 5/17/2012 3.0 3.8 $/b 0.9 -
Copper spreads tightening 11/21/2011 3/21/2012 -17.3 14.5 $/t 14.0 -
WTI contango widening 7/19/2011 2/29/2012 0.38 0.41 $/b 0.03 -
Crude oil spread tightening** 4/20/2011 5/26/2011 -0.36 -0.37 $/b 0.34 -
Note: Entry and exit prices reference closing prices on the day of publication. **These trades include gains/losses from previous trades.
Source: Reuters, Barclays Research
8 November 2013 25
KEY DATA RELEASES

• The latest US nonmanufacturing ISM suggested a solid start for the service sector in Q4. After a reading of 54.4 in September,
it rose to 55.4 in October, which was above both our economists’ and consensus forecasts of 55.0 and 54.0, respectively. The
pick-up was driven mostly by activity and employment, which offset an export demand-driven fall in new orders. The index
stands just above its sixth-month average of 55.2, and given last week’s above-consensus manufacturing ISM, our
economists believe the US economy held up relatively well through October during the government shutdown.
• US factory orders rose in September, up 1.7% m/m, in line with our and consensus forecasts of 1.8%. Delayed due to the
government shutdown, it also showed a 0.1% decline in August. The details were modestly positive, and September’s reading
boosted our economists’ Q3 GDP tracking index by 0.1pp.
• The first Q3 GDP estimate was above our and the consensus forecast of 2.0%, with real GDP rising 2.8% (saar) in Q3. That
said, most of the upside surprise reflected inventory accumulation (contributing 0.8pp), and our economists believe that this
suggests taking the apparent acceleration in growth with some caution. The report as a whole did not change our
economists’ outlook because, while the strength in structures and residential investment is encouraging, inventory
accumulation is unlikely to sustainably boost GDP, at least not to the same extent. Additionally, final household and business
demand remains soft. Our economists believe that policy makers will want to see a more decisive pick-up before concluding
that overall growth is on a sustainably strong path.
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday

04 Nov 05 Nov 06 Nov 07 Nov 08 Nov
Preliminary (October) US ISM Non-Mfg Index Dept of Energy Weekly Oil EIA Weekly Natural Gas CFTC Data
China Commodity Data Data Storage SHFE Aluminium, Copper
(National Bureau of and Zinc Inventory Data
Statistics) USDA WASDE Report
US Factory Orders US Consumer Sentiment

US Public Holiday OPEC Monthly Oil Market Dept of Energy Weekly Oil EIA Weekly Natural Gas CFTC Data
Report Data Storage SHFE Aluminium, Copper
OECD Main Economic US PPI and Zinc Inventory Data
Indicators US CPI
Johnson Matthey Platinum US Empire State Mfg Index
Interim Report US IP

Detailed (October) China Dept of Energy Weekly Oil EIA Weekly Natural Gas CFTC Data
Commodity Data out this Data Storage SHFE Aluminium, Copper
week (National Bureau of US Existing Home Sales US Philly Fed Mfg Index and Zinc Inventory Data
Statistics) FOMC Minutes US Leading Indicators

US GDP Dept of Energy Weekly Oil US Public Holiday CFTC Data
Data EIA Weekly Natural Gas SHFE Aluminium, Copper
US Durable Goods Orders Storage and Zinc Inventory Data
US Chicago PMI
US Consumer Sentiment
US New Home Sales
8 November 2013 26
FX FORECASTS
FX forecasts Forecast vs outright forward
Spot 1m 3m 6m 1y 1m 3m 6m 1y
G7 countries
EUR/USD 1.36 1.32 1.30 1.28 1.25 -1.5% -3.0% -4.6% -6.9%
USD/JPY 98.4 98.0 100.0 102.0 105.0 -0.5% 1.5% 3.6% 6.9%
GBP/USD 1.60 1.57 1.57 1.54 1.52 -2.4% -2.3% -4.1% -5.2%
USD/CHF 0.91 0.94 0.97 1.02 1.08 2.5% 5.8% 11.4% 18.2%
USD/CAD 1.04 1.04 1.05 1.07 1.07 -0.5% 0.3% 2.0% 1.5%
AUD/USD 0.95 0.94 0.91 0.86 0.82 -0.5% -3.3% -8.1% -11.2%
NZD/USD 0.83 0.82 0.82 0.77 0.75 -1.5% -1.1% -6.5% -7.5%
Emerging Asia
USD/CNY 6.09 6.08 6.06 6.04 6.00 -1.0% -1.4% -1.8% -2.6%
USD/HKD 7.75 7.76 7.76 7.76 7.76 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2%
USD/INR 61.50 62.00 61.00 61.00 61.00 -1.8% -4.9% -7.1% -10.1%
USD/IDR 11,274 11,500 12,000 12,250 11,750 -0.2% 2.4% 2.4% -5.4%
USD/KRW 1,061 1,050 1,050 1,060 1,070 -1.5% -1.9% -1.4% -1.1%
USD/LKR 130.90 132.50 133.00 133.50 134.00 0.4% -0.6% -1.9% -4.6%
USD/MYR 3.16 3.10 3.10 3.15 3.18 -2.8% -3.1% -2.0% -2.0%
USD/PHP 43.21 42.50 42.50 43.00 43.00 -1.6% -1.3% -0.1% 0.1%
USD/SGD 1.241 1.250 1.250 1.260 1.260 0.4% 0.5% 1.3% 1.3%
USD/THB 31.18 31.25 31.25 31.50 32.00 -0.6% -0.9% -0.8% -0.2%
USD/TWD 29.42 29.50 29.50 29.75 29.75 0.2% 0.5% 1.7% 2.3%
USD/VND 21,100 21,200 21,250 21,300 21,500 -0.5% -1.4% -3.2% -7.2%
Latin America
USD/ARS 5.91 5.96 6.20 6.64 7.56 -4.7% -9.2% -12.3% -16.5%
USD/BRL 2.23 2.30 2.35 2.40 2.45 -0.8% -0.1% 0.0% -2.5%
USD/CLP 514 515.0 518.0 522.0 527.0 -0.9% -1.1% -1.3% -2.2%
USD/MXN 13.03 13.00 12.85 12.75 12.70 -1.7% -3.3% -4.8% -6.5%
USD/COP 1,892 1,915 1,918 1,920 1,940 -1.0% -1.4% -2.0% -2.5%
USD/PEN 2.78 2.79 2.80 2.83 2.86 -0.6% -0.9% -0.7% -1.2%
EEMENA
EUR/CZK 26.97 27.00 27.00 27.00 27.00 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% 0.5%
EUR/HUF 297 295 295 295 310 -0.8% -1.2% -1.8% 2.0%
EUR/PLN 4.19 4.16 4.16 4.12 4.05 -0.9% -1.3% -2.8% -5.5%
EUR/RON 4.44 4.42 4.38 4.34 4.30 -0.6% -2.3% -3.3% -5.3%
RUB 32.39 32.00 32.00 32.00 33.00 -1.6% -2.8% -4.0% -3.8%
BSK/RUB 37.33 37.04 36.61 36.32 37.01 -2.0% -4.2% -6.1% -7.2%
TRY 2.03 1.95 2.00 2.10 2.10 -4.5% -3.1% 0.1% -3.5%
ILS 3.54 3.50 3.50 3.47 3.40 -1.1% -1.2% -2.1% -4.3%
EGP 6.89 6.85 6.78 6.67 6.52 -1.3% -4.8% -10.0% -18.6%
UAH 8.19 8.25 8.32 8.50 8.70 -0.7% -2.9% -4.6% -9.5%
Sub-Saharan Africa
GHS 2.24 2.20 2.30 2.35 2.50 -1.6% 2.9% -3.8% 11.8%
KES 85.55 88.00 90.00 92.00 95.00 2.2% 2.9% 4.2% 2.5%
NGN 158.65 162.00 163.00 164.00 165.00 1.2% -0.3% -2.4% -7.1%
UGX 2520 2580 2600 2630 2700 1.5% 0.7% -0.8% -2.9%
ZAR 10.30 10.10 10.20 10.50 10.50 -2.3% -2.3% -0.7% -3.5%
ZMW 5.54 5.40 5.60 5.75 5.90 -3.1% -1.2% -0.8% -3.0%
Source: Barclays Research
8 November 2013 27
COMMODITIES RESEARCH ANALYSTS

Barclays
5 The North Colonnade
London E14 4BB
Gayle Berry Sijin Cheng Suki Cooper Helima Croft
Commodities Research Commodities Research Commodities Research Commodities Research
+44 (0)20 3134 1596 +65 6308 6320 +1 212 526 7896 +1 212 526 0764
[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
Christopher Louney Sha Luo Miswin Mahesh Kevin Norrish
+1 212 526 6721 +44 (0)20 7773 3994 +44 (0)20 7773 4291 +44 (0)20 7773 0369
Biliana Pehlivanova Nicholas Snowdon Sudakshina Unnikrishnan Shiyang Wang
+1 212 526 2492 +1 212 526 7279 +44 (0)20 7773 3797 +1 212 526 7464
8 November 2013 28
Analyst Certification
We, Christopher Louney, Sudakshina Unnikrishnan, Kevin Norrish, Miswin Mahesh, Shiyang Wang, Gayle Berry, Sijin Cheng, Suki Cooper and Nicholas
Snowdon, hereby certify (1) that the views expressed in this research report accurately reflect our personal views about any or all of the subject securities
or issuers referred to in this research report and (2) no part of our compensation was, is or will be directly or indirectly related to the specific
recommendations or views expressed in this research report.
Each research report excerpted herein was certified under Reg AC by the analyst primarily responsible for such report as follows: I hereby certify that: 1)
the views expressed in this research report accurately reflect my personal views about any or all of the subject securities referred to in this report and; 2)
no part of my compensation was, is or will be directly or indirectly related to the specific recommendations or views expressed in this report.
Important Disclosures:
Barclays Research is a part of the Corporate and Investment Banking division of Barclays Bank PLC and its affiliates (collectively and each individually,
"Barclays"). For current important disclosures regarding companies that are the subject of this research report, please send a written request to: Barclays
Research Compliance, 745 Seventh Avenue, 14th Floor, New York, NY 10019 or refer to http://publicresearch.barclays.com or call 212-526-1072.
Barclays Capital Inc. and/or one of its affiliates does and seeks to do business with companies covered in its research reports. As a result, investors should
be aware that Barclays may have a conflict of interest that could affect the objectivity of this report. Barclays Capital Inc. and/or one of its affiliates
regularly trades, generally deals as principal and generally provides liquidity (as market maker or otherwise) in the debt securities that are the subject of
this research report (and related derivatives thereof). Barclays trading desks may have either a long and / or short position in such securities, other
financial instruments and / or derivatives, which may pose a conflict with the interests of investing customers. Where permitted and subject to
appropriate information barrier restrictions, Barclays fixed income research analysts regularly interact with its trading desk personnel regarding current
market conditions and prices. Barclays fixed income research analysts receive compensation based on various factors including, but not limited to, the
quality of their work, the overall performance of the firm (including the profitability of the investment banking department), the profitability and revenues
of the Fixed Income, Currencies and Commodities Division and the potential interest of the firm’s investing clients in research with respect to the asset
class covered by the analyst. To the extent that any historical pricing information was obtained from Barclays trading desks, the firm makes no
representation that it is accurate or complete. All levels, prices and spreads are historical and do not represent current market levels, prices or spreads,
some or all of which may have changed since the publication of this document. Barclays produces various types of research including, but not limited to,
fundamental analysis, equity-linked analysis, quantitative analysis, and trade ideas. Recommendations contained in one type of research may differ from
recommendations contained in other types of research, whether as a result of differing time horizons, methodologies, or otherwise. Unless otherwise
indicated, Barclays trade ideas are provided as of the date of this report and are subject to change without notice due to changes in prices. In order to
access Barclays Statement regarding Research Dissemination Policies and Procedures, please refer to
https://live.barcap.com/publiccp/RSR/nyfipubs/disclaimer/disclaimer-research-dissemination.html. In order to access Barclays Research Conflict
Management Policy Statement, please refer to: http://group.barclays.com/corporates-and-institutions/research/research-policy.
Disclaimer:
This publication has been prepared by the Corporate and Investment Banking division of Barclays Bank PLC and/or one or more of its affiliates
(collectively and each individually, "Barclays"). It has been issued by one or more Barclays legal entities within its Corporate and Investment Banking
division as provided below. It is provided to our clients for information purposes only, and Barclays makes no express or implied warranties, and expressly
disclaims all warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose or use with respect to any data included in this publication. Barclays will not
treat unauthorized recipients of this report as its clients. Prices shown are indicative and Barclays is not offering to buy or sell or soliciting offers to buy or
sell any financial instrument.
Without limiting any of the foregoing and to the extent permitted by law, in no event shall Barclays, nor any affiliate, nor any of their respective officers,
directors, partners, or employees have any liability for (a) any special, punitive, indirect, or consequential damages; or (b) any lost profits, lost revenue, loss
of anticipated savings or loss of opportunity or other financial loss, even if notified of the possibility of such damages, arising from any use of this
publication or its contents.
Other than disclosures relating to Barclays, the information contained in this publication has been obtained from sources that Barclays Research believes
to be reliable, but Barclays does not represent or warrant that it is accurate or complete. Barclays is not responsible for, and makes no warranties
whatsoever as to, the content of any third-party web site accessed via a hyperlink in this publication and such information is not incorporated by
reference.
The views in this publication are those of the author(s) and are subject to change, and Barclays has no obligation to update its opinions or the information
in this publication. The analyst recommendations in this publication reflect solely and exclusively those of the author(s), and such opinions were prepared
independently of any other interests, including those of Barclays and/or its affiliates. This publication does not constitute personal investment advice or
take into account the individual financial circumstances or objectives of the clients who receive it. The securities discussed herein may not be suitable for
all investors. Barclays recommends that investors independently evaluate each issuer, security or instrument discussed herein and consult any
independent advisors they believe necessary. The value of and income from any investment may fluctuate from day to day as a result of changes in
relevant economic markets (including changes in market liquidity). The information herein is not intended to predict actual results, which may differ
substantially from those reflected. Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.
This communication is being made available in the UK and Europe primarily to persons who are investment professionals as that term is defined in Article
19 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Financial Promotion) Order 2005. It is directed at, and therefore should only be relied upon by, persons
who have professional experience in matters relating to investments. The investments to which it relates are available only to such persons and will be
entered into only with such persons. Barclays Bank PLC is authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct
Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority and is a member of the London Stock Exchange.
The Corporate and Investment Banking division of Barclays undertakes U.S. securities business in the name of its wholly owned subsidiary Barclays Capital
Inc., a FINRA and SIPC member. Barclays Capital Inc., a U.S. registered broker/dealer, is distributing this material in the United States and, in connection
therewith accepts responsibility for its contents. Any U.S. person wishing to effect a transaction in any security discussed herein should do so only by
contacting a representative of Barclays Capital Inc. in the U.S. at 745 Seventh Avenue, New York, New York 10019.
Non-U.S. persons should contact and execute transactions through a Barclays Bank PLC branch or affiliate in their home jurisdiction unless local
regulations permit otherwise.
Barclays Bank PLC, Paris Branch (registered in France under Paris RCS number 381 066 281) is regulated by the Autorité des marchés financiers and the
Autorité de contrôle prudentiel. Registered office 34/36 Avenue de Friedland 75008 Paris.
This material is distributed in Canada by Barclays Capital Canada Inc., a registered investment dealer and member of IIROC (www.iiroc.ca).
Subject to the conditions of this publication as set out above, Absa Capital, the Investment Banking Division of Absa Bank Limited, an authorised financial
services provider (Registration No.: 1986/004794/06. Registered Credit Provider Reg No NCRCP7), is distributing this material in South Africa. Absa Bank
Limited is regulated by the South African Reserve Bank. This publication is not, nor is it intended to be, advice as defined and/or contemplated in the
(South African) Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, 37 of 2002, or any other financial, investment, trading, tax, legal, accounting, retirement,
actuarial or other professional advice or service whatsoever. Any South African person or entity wishing to effect a transaction in any security discussed
herein should do so only by contacting a representative of Absa Capital in South Africa, 15 Alice Lane, Sandton, Johannesburg, Gauteng 2196. Absa
Capital is an affiliate of Barclays.
In Japan, foreign exchange research reports are prepared and distributed by Barclays Bank PLC Tokyo Branch. Other research reports are distributed to
institutional investors in Japan by Barclays Securities Japan Limited. Barclays Securities Japan Limited is a joint-stock company incorporated in Japan with
registered office of 6-10-1 Roppongi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 106-6131, Japan. It is a subsidiary of Barclays Bank PLC and a registered financial instruments firm
regulated by the Financial Services Agency of Japan. Registered Number: Kanto Zaimukyokucho (kinsho) No. 143.
Barclays Bank PLC, Hong Kong Branch is distributing this material in Hong Kong as an authorised institution regulated by the Hong Kong Monetary
Authority. Registered Office: 41/F, Cheung Kong Center, 2 Queen's Road Central, Hong Kong.
Information on securities/instruments that trade in Taiwan or written by a Taiwan-based research analyst is distributed by Barclays Capital Securities
Taiwan Limited to its clients. The material on securities/instruments not traded in Taiwan is not to be construed as 'recommendation' in Taiwan. Barclays
Capital Securities Taiwan Limited does not accept orders from clients to trade in such securities. This material may not be distributed to the public media
or used by the public media without prior written consent of Barclays.
This material is distributed in South Korea by Barclays Capital Securities Limited, Seoul Branch.
All equity research material is distributed in India by Barclays Securities (India) Private Limited (SEBI Registration No: INB/INF 231292732 (NSE), INB/INF
011292738 (BSE), Registered Office: 208 | Ceejay House | Dr. Annie Besant Road | Shivsagar Estate | Worli | Mumbai - 400 018 | India, Phone: + 91 22
67196363). Other research reports are distributed in India by Barclays Bank PLC, India Branch.
Barclays Bank PLC Frankfurt Branch distributes this material in Germany under the supervision of Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin).
This material is distributed in Malaysia by Barclays Capital Markets Malaysia Sdn Bhd.
This material is distributed in Brazil by Banco Barclays S.A.
This material is distributed in Mexico by Barclays Bank Mexico, S.A.
Barclays Bank PLC in the Dubai International Financial Centre (Registered No. 0060) is regulated by the Dubai Financial Services Authority (DFSA).
Principal place of business in the Dubai International Financial Centre: The Gate Village, Building 4, Level 4, PO Box 506504, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
Barclays Bank PLC-DIFC Branch, may only undertake the financial services activities that fall within the scope of its existing DFSA licence. Related financial
products or services are only available to Professional Clients, as defined by the Dubai Financial Services Authority.
Barclays Bank PLC in the UAE is regulated by the Central Bank of the UAE and is licensed to conduct business activities as a branch of a commercial bank
incorporated outside the UAE in Dubai (Licence No.: 13/1844/2008, Registered Office: Building No. 6, Burj Dubai Business Hub, Sheikh Zayed Road, Dubai
City) and Abu Dhabi (Licence No.: 13/952/2008, Registered Office: Al Jazira Towers, Hamdan Street, PO Box 2734, Abu Dhabi).
Barclays Bank PLC in the Qatar Financial Centre (Registered No. 00018) is authorised by the Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory Authority (QFCRA).
Barclays Bank PLC-QFC Branch may only undertake the regulated activities that fall within the scope of its existing QFCRA licence. Principal place of
business in Qatar: Qatar Financial Centre, Office 1002, 10th Floor, QFC Tower, Diplomatic Area, West Bay, PO Box 15891, Doha, Qatar. Related financial
products or services are only available to Business Customers as defined by the Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory Authority.
This material is distributed in the UAE (including the Dubai International Financial Centre) and Qatar by Barclays Bank PLC.
This material is distributed in Saudi Arabia by Barclays Saudi Arabia ('BSA'). It is not the intention of the publication to be used or deemed as
recommendation, option or advice for any action (s) that may take place in future. Barclays Saudi Arabia is a Closed Joint Stock Company, (CMA License
No. 09141-37). Registered office Al Faisaliah Tower, Level 18, Riyadh 11311, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Authorised and regulated by the Capital Market
Authority, Commercial Registration Number: 1010283024.
This material is distributed in Russia by OOO Barclays Capital, affiliated company of Barclays Bank PLC, registered and regulated in Russia by the FSFM.
Broker License #177-11850-100000; Dealer License #177-11855-010000. Registered address in Russia: 125047 Moscow, 1st Tverskaya-Yamskaya str.
21.
This material is distributed in Singapore by the Singapore branch of Barclays Bank PLC, a bank licensed in Singapore by the Monetary Authority of
Singapore. For matters in connection with this report, recipients in Singapore may contact the Singapore branch of Barclays Bank PLC, whose registered
address is One Raffles Quay Level 28, South Tower, Singapore 048583.
Barclays Bank PLC, Australia Branch (ARBN 062 449 585, AFSL 246617) is distributing this material in Australia. It is directed at 'wholesale clients' as
defined by Australian Corporations Act 2001.
IRS Circular 230 Prepared Materials Disclaimer: Barclays does not provide tax advice and nothing contained herein should be construed to be tax advice.
Please be advised that any discussion of U.S. tax matters contained herein (including any attachments) (i) is not intended or written to be used, and
cannot be used, by you for the purpose of avoiding U.S. tax-related penalties; and (ii) was written to support the promotion or marketing of the
transactions or other matters addressed herein. Accordingly, you should seek advice based on your particular circumstances from an independent tax
advisor.
© Copyright Barclays Bank PLC (2013). All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any manner without the prior written
permission of Barclays. Barclays Bank PLC is registered in England No. 1026167. Registered office 1 Churchill Place, London, E14 5HP. Additional
information regarding this publication will be furnished upon request.
EU22061

Barclays Commodities Research

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Barclays Commodities Research

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Barclays Commodities Research

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Commodities Research

Commodity Price Forecasts 22

we expect to be transient; as in the coming months we expect to see

Position limits: Tilting at windmills?

Legislation still lacks supporting evidence

So do we really need them?

CFTC’s own data suggest speculation has a positive impact

Throwing the baby out with the bath water?

China key commodities trade: Holiday pullback

This page is intentionally left blank

ENERGY MARKET OUTLOOK

Oil: Brent in a transient contango; Gas: Upside

Oil: Brent in contango… despite Libya

US natural gas: Raging production, but weather uplifts

On a different note, a market-neutral weekly injection finished the traditional injection

Key price charts

FOCUS: NATURAL GAS

MW 2011 2012 2013 MW

METALS MARKET OUTLOOK

New LME warehouse policy could lead to front

Base metals: Overhaul of LME warehousing system

Precious metals: China’s gold demand softens from H1 13 highs

On the other hand, Buenaventura, the seventh-largest gold producer, reported Q3 13

Base metals LME cash prices

Source: EcoWin, Barclays Research Source: EcoWin, Barclays Research

Source: EcoWin, Barclays Research Source: EcoWin, Barclays Research

Source: EcoWin, Barclays Research Source: EcoWin, Barclays Research

Precious metals prices and ETP holdings

Source: EcoWin, Barclays Research Source: EcoWin, Barclays Research

Source: EcoWin, Barclays Research Source: EcoWin, Barclays Research

Gold (tonnes) -7.2 -6.4 -754.4 2,009

FOCUS: BASE METALS

Zinc price upside: a slow burner

-80 12-month moving

Source: ILZG, Barclays Research Source: Wood Mackenzie, Barclays Research

Forecasts and Data

COMMODITY PRICE FORECASTS

Barclays Research annual average commodity price forecasts

Price forecast comparisons

KEY DATA RELEASES

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday

11 Nov 12 Nov 13 Nov 14 Nov 15 Nov

18 Nov 19 Nov 20 Nov 21 Nov 22 Nov

25 Nov 26 Nov 27 Nov 28 Nov 29 Nov

COMMODITIES RESEARCH ANALYSTS

You might also like