Följ oss

Analys

Risk for OPEC dissapointment and a short term sell-off as all bets are on the long side

Publicerat

den

SEB - analysbrev på råvaror

SEB - Prognoser på råvaror - CommodityMarked has placed all chips on the long side betting on an extension of OPEC/non-OPEC production cuts which officially ends in Q1-18. In general we do think that OPEC/non-OPEC will manage the market and hold back production if needed through 2018 in order to secure further gradual draw down of OECD inventories. However we also think that it would be better for OPEC/non-OPEC to make hard decissions on this in Feb/Mar getting as much data as possible before making that decission. That is also what the group has mostly consistengly communicated through the autumn. The market seems to expect and demand a firm decission right now this week. As such the market is rigged for dissapointment with a possible short term sell-off as all chips are on the long side.

On Thursday 30th OPEC and some non-OPEC producers will meet in Vienna to discuss whether to extend current production cuts or not.

The communication all through the autumn has been that they want to make this decission in February/March 2018 in order to have as much data on the table as possible before making the decission.

That makes a lot of sense since there is substantial dissagreement with respect to how much oil is needed from OPEC in 2018.

Somehow the market has geared it self up to an expectation that OPEC/non-OPEC needs to make a firm decission on this right now on Thursday. And further that the decission will be an extension of current cuts maintained all to the end of 2018.

As such it seems to us that there is a substantial risk that the market is setting it self up for a dissapointment this week. For us it makes much more sense for the group to make this call in Feb/Mar which is also what they mostly have been communicating all through the autumn.

The challenge for the group this is week may thus be all about managing the market’s expectations. How not to let the market down when it communicates that the decission will be taken in Feb/March.

And if there is a decission this week it is likely going to be a sign of intention: “If needed we’ll maintain cuts to the end of 2018”, or “We’ll maintain cuts to June 2018 and then make a new assessment”, or “We are all in agreement that we’ll extend cuts as long as needed in order to drive OECD inventories down to the 5 year average”.

That is indeed a trickey reference. This is because for every month we move forward the 5 year average reference is rising. Since March 2017 the OECD inventories have declined some 0.7 mb/d when adjusting for seasonal trends (given by the 2010-2014 seasonal average profile). If we extend this decline rate on top of the seasonal trend (2010-2014) we actually almost get all the way down the 2013-2017 average profile.

As such one can say that in February when we get the OECD inventory data for December 2017 the goal of getting inventories down to the 5 year average (2013-2017) will have been achieved. The goal of getting OECD inventories down to the 5 year average is thus a trickey goal and a moving target.

The big question though is what is really needed in order to secure a balanced oil market in 2018? There is a significant dissagreement on this. The IEA says that call-on-OPEC will be 32.4 mb/d in 2018. SEB’s estimate is 32.7 mb/d, the US EIA’s is 32.7 mb/d while OPEC’s own estimate is 33.4 mb/d. Variations on this comes down to projections for demand, US shale oil production and the level of OPEC’s NGL production in 2018.

The OECD draw down since March this year of 0.7 mb/d (adjusted for seasonallity) indicates an implied oil market deficit of 0.7 mb/d thrugh Q2 and Q3 this year during which OPEC produced 32.55 mb/d. However, if we assume that the OECD inventories only cover half or a third of global inventories then what we see of deficit implied by the draw down in the OECD inventories could actually be two or three times as much if there have been comparable draw downs in non-OECD inventories.

Thus beeing carefule about committing to further cuts now on Thursday seems kind of sensible with the aim of instead making that decission in Feb/Mar.

Market participants are seemingly all expecting OPEC/non-OPEC to make a firm and clear decission this Thursday for extending current cuts to Dec-2018. Net long speculative positions for Brent and WTI together are now very close to all time high. US oil rig count has started to rise again (+9 rigs last week). The decission to add these 9 rigs was probably taken some 6-8 weeks ago when the WTI forward price only stood at $51-52/b. Now that reference WTI price stands at $55/bl with a clear risk for a rise in rig count in the weeks to come. The outage of the 590 kbl/d Keystone pipeline due to an oil spill has reduced supply into Cushing Oklahoma by some 4 mbl/week. It has helped to reduce Chushing inventories and to drive also the WTI crude curve into backwardation. However, the Keystone pipline is likely to back in operation within a week or so.

Thus overall there is a fair chance that the market will be dissapointed on Thursday. That there will be no firm decission even though there will be firm support for further cuts if needed. And if OPEC/non-OPEC actually do make a firm decission to maintain cuts all to the end of 2018 then there may not be much upside price action since that decission is already so highly priced in already.

Thus buying a put option on the front month WTI contract with short time to expiry may be a good strattegy in the run-up to this week’s digital OPEC/non-OPEC decission risk on Thursday.

Our general stand on OPEC/non-OPEC cuts for 2018 is that further cuts are likely needed but also that if needed we expect OPEC/non-OPEC to manage the market in order to prevent inventories from rising back up.
Needed cuts will likely be of a magnitude which are perfectly manageable for the group. Why through away all they have acchieved in 2017 with inventory draw downs when they can hold back a little supply.

Ch1: OECD inventories with extrapolation to end of 2017 of the 0.7 mb/d draw down in Q2 and Q3 2017
Getting closer to the 2010-2014 average in December 2017

OECD inventories with extrapolation to end of 2017 of the 0.7 mb/d draw down in Q2 and Q3 2017

Ch2: OECD inventories. Which 5 year normal should you use? The 2013-2017?
If the latter then mission acomplished in December 2017, but we won’t know before February

OECD inventories. Which 5 year normal should you use? The 2013-2017?

Ch3: Call-on-OPEC 2018? – Big dissagreement!
Who knows OPEC NGL the best? Account for 0.6 mb/d difference to the IEA!

Call-on-OPEC 2018? – Big dissagreement!

Oil

Ch4: Close to record USD allocation in net long speculative Brent crude oil positions
Makes it vulnerable to downside corrections and OPEC/non-OPEC dissapointments
Net long Brent crude oil speculative positions are now at the 3rd highest over the past 52 weeks

Close to record USD allocation in net long speculative Brent crude oil positions

Ch5: US oil rig count has started to rise again

US oil rig count has started to rise againOil

Ch6 The increas in rig count we see now came from price signals some 6-8 weeks ago
Since then the WTI curve price has moved from $51/bl to $55/bl.
The effect of the price rise over the past 6-8 weeks will be visible in terms of rig count over the coming 6-8 weeks

The increas in rig count we see now came from price signals some 6-8 weeks ago

Ch7: Risk of rising rig count in the weeks to come
Could weight bearishly on the WTI crude oil price

Risk of rising rig count in the weeks to come

Ch8: While US crude oil production continues to rise
Will it rise 0.7 mb/d or 1.5 mb/d next year?

While US crude oil production continues to rise

Ch9: WTI crude oil curve shifted into backwardation following the outage of the Keystone pipeline which feeds 590 kbl/d of Canadian oil into Chushing Oklahoma
The Keystone pipeline is likely going to be back on line within a week or so which could push the WTI curve back into contango again

WTI crude oil curve shifted into backwardation following the outage of the Keystone pipeline

Kind regards

Bjarne Schieldrop
Chief analyst, Commodities
SEB Markets
Merchant Banking

Fortsätt läsa
Annons
Klicka för att kommentera

Skriv ett svar

Din e-postadress kommer inte publiceras. Obligatoriska fält är märkta *

Analys

Fundamentals trump geopolitical tensions

Publicerat

den

SEB - analysbrev på råvaror

Throughout this week, the Brent Crude price has experienced a decline of USD 3 per barrel, despite ongoing turmoil in the Middle East. Price fluctuations have ranged from highs of USD 91 per barrel at the beginning of the week to lows of USD 87 per barrel as of yesterday evening.

Ole R. Hvalbye, Analyst Commodities, SEB
Ole R. Hvalbye, Analyst Commodities, SEB

Following the release of yesterday’s US inventory report, Brent Crude once again demonstrated resilience against broader macroeconomic concerns, instead focusing on underlying market fundamentals.

Nevertheless, the recent drop in prices may come as somewhat surprising given the array of conflicting signals observed. Despite an increase in US inventories—a typically bearish indicator—we’ve also witnessed escalating tensions in the Middle East, coupled with the reinstatement of US sanctions on Venezuela. Furthermore, there are indications of impending sanctions on Iran in response to the recent attack on Israel.

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has indicated that new sanctions targeting Iran, particularly aimed at restricting its oil exports, could be announced as early as this week. As previously highlighted, we maintain the view that Iran’s oil exports remain vulnerable even without further escalation of the conflict. It appears that Israel is exerting pressure on its ally, the US, to impose stricter sanctions on Iran, an action that is unfolding before our eyes.

Iran’s current oil production stands at close to 3.2 million barrels per day. Considering additional condensate production of about 0.8 million barrels per day and subtracting domestic demand of roughly 1.8 million barrels per day, the net export of Iranian crude and condensate is approximately 2.2 million barrels per day.

However, the uncertainty surrounding the enforcement of such sanctions casts doubt on the likelihood of a complete ending of Iranian exports. Approximately 80% of Iran’s exports are directed to independent refineries in China, suggesting that US sanctions may have limited efficacy unless China complies. The prospect of China resisting US pressure on its oil imports from Iran poses a significant challenge to US sanctions enforcement efforts.

Furthermore, any shortfall resulting from sanctions could potentially be offset by other OPEC nations with spare capacity. Saudi Arabia and the UAE, for instance, can collectively produce an additional almost 3 million barrels of oil per day, although this remains a contingency measure.

In addition to developments related to Iran, the Biden administration has re-imposed restrictions on Venezuelan oil, marking the end of a six-month reprieve. This move is expected to impact flows from the South American nation.

Meanwhile, US crude inventories (excluding SPR holdings) surged by 2.7 million barrels last week (page 11 attached), reaching their highest level since June of last year. This increase coincided with a decline in measures of fuel demand (page 14 attached), underscoring a slightly weaker US market.

In summary, while geopolitical tensions persist and new rounds of sanctions are imposed, our market outlook remains intact. We maintain our forecast of an average Brent Crude price of USD 85 per barrel for the year 2024. In the short term, however, prices are expected to hover around the USD 90 per barrel mark as they navigate through geopolitical uncertainties and fundamental factors.

Fortsätt läsa

Analys

Brace for Covert Conflict

Publicerat

den

SEB - analysbrev på råvaror

In the past two trading days, Brent Crude prices have fluctuated between highs of USD 92.2 per barrel and lows of USD 88.7 per barrel. Despite escalation tensions in the Middle East, oil prices have remained relatively stable over the past 24 hours. The recent barrage of rockets and drones in the region hasn’t significantly affected market sentiment regarding potential disruptions to oil supply. The key concern now is how Israel will respond: will it choose a strong retaliation to assert deterrence, risking wider regional instability, or will it revert to targeted strikes on Iran’s proxies in Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, and Iraq? While it’s too early to predict, one thing is clear: brace for increased volatility, uncertainty, and speculation.

Ole R. Hvalbye, Analyst Commodities, SEB
Ole R. Hvalbye, Analyst Commodities, SEB

Amidst these developments, the market continues to focus on current fundamentals rather than unfolding geopolitical risks. Despite Iran’s recent attack on Israel, oil prices have slid, reflecting a sideways or slightly bearish sentiment. This morning, oil prices stand at USD 90 per barrel, down 2.5% from Friday’s highs.

The attack

Iran’s launch of over 300 rockets and drones toward Israel marks the first direct assault from Iranian territory since 1991. However, the attack, announced well in advance, resulted in minimal damage as Israeli and allied forces intercepted nearly all projectiles. Hence, the damage inflicted was limited. The incident has prompted US President Joe Biden to urge Israel to exercise restraint, as part of broader efforts to de-escalate tensions in the Middle East.

Israel’s response remains uncertain as its war cabinet deliberates on potential courses of action. While the necessity of a response is acknowledged, the timing and magnitude remain undecided.

The attack was allegedly in retaliation for an Israeli airstrike on Iran’s consulate in Damascus, resulting in significant casualties, including a senior leader in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ elite Quds Force. It’s notable that this marks the first direct targeting of Israel from Iranian territory, setting the stage for heightened tensions between the two nations.

Despite the scale of the attack, the vast majority of Iranian projectiles were intercepted before reaching Israeli territory. However, a small number did land, causing minor damage to a military base in the southern region.

President Biden swiftly condemned Iran’s actions and pledged to coordinate a diplomatic response with leaders from the G7 nations. The US military’s rapid repositioning of assets in the region underscores the seriousness of the situation.

Iran’s willingness to escalate tensions further depends on Israel’s response, as indicated by General Mohammad Bagheri, chief of staff of the Iranian armed forces. Meanwhile, speculation about a retaliatory attack from Israel persists.

Looking ahead, key questions remain unanswered. Will Iran launch additional attacks? How will Israel respond, and what implications will it have for the region? Moreover, how will Iran’s allies react to the escalating tensions?

Given the potential for a full-scale war between Iran and Israel, concerns about its impact on global energy markets are growing. Both the United States and China have strong incentives to reduce tensions in the region, given the destabilizing effects of a regional conflict.

Our view in conclusion

The recent escalation between Iran and Israel underscores the delicate balance of power in the volatile Middle East. With tensions reaching unprecedented levels and the specter of further escalation looming, the potential for a full-blown conflict cannot be understated. The ramifications of such a scenario would be far-reaching and could have significant implications for regional stability and global security.

Turning to the oil market, there has been much speculation about the possibility of a full-scale blockade of the Strait of Hormuz in the event of further escalation. However, at present, such a scenario remains highly speculative. Nonetheless, it is crucial to note that Iran’s oil production and exports remain at risk even without further escalation. Currently producing close to 3.2 million barrels per day, Iran has significantly increased its production from mid-2020 levels of 1.9 million barrels per day.

In response to the recent attack, Israel may exert pressure on its ally, the US, to impose stricter sanctions on Iran. The enforcement of such sanctions, particularly on Iranian oil exports, could result in a loss of anywhere between 0.5 million to 1 million barrels per day of oil supply. This would likely keep the oil market in deficit for the remainder of the year, contradicting the Biden administration’s wish to maintain oil and gasoline prices at sustainable levels ahead of the election. While other OPEC nations have spare capacity, utilizing it would tighten the global oil market even further. Saudi Arabia and the UAE, for example, could collectively produce an additional almost 3 million barrels of oil per day if necessary.

Furthermore, both Iran and the US have expressed a desire to prevent further escalation. However, much depends on Israel’s response to the recent barrage of rockets. While Israel has historically refrained from responding violently to attacks (1991), the situation remains fluid. If Israel chooses not to respond forcefully, the US may be compelled to promise stronger enforcement of sanctions on Iranian oil exports. Consequently, Iranian oil exports are at risk, regardless of whether a wider confrontation ensues in the Middle East.

Analyzing the potential impact, approximately 2.2 million barrels per day of net Iranian crude and condensate exports could be at risk, factoring in Iranian domestic demand and condensate production. The effectiveness of US sanctions enforcement, however, remains uncertain, especially considering China’s stance on Iranian oil imports.

Despite these uncertainties, the market outlook remains cautiously optimistic for now, with Brent Crude expected to hover around the USD 90 per barrel mark in the near term. Navigating through geopolitical tensions and fundamental factors, the oil market continues to adapt to evolving conflicts in the Middle East and beyond.

Fortsätt läsa

Analys

OPEC+ won’t kill the goose that lays the golden egg

Publicerat

den

SEB - analysbrev på råvaror

Lots of talk about an increasingly tight oil market. And yes, the oil price will move higher as a result of this and most likely move towards USD 100/b. Tensions and flareups in the Middle East is little threat to oil supply and will be more like catalysts driving the oil price higher on the back of a fundamentally bullish market. I.e. flareups will be more like releasing factors. But OPEC+ will for sure produce more if needed as it has no interest in killing the goose (global economy) that lays the golden egg (oil demand growth). We’ll probably get verbal intervention by OPEC+ with ”.. more supply in H2” quite quickly when oil price moves closer to USD 100/b and that will likely subdue the bullishness. OPEC+ in full control of the oil market probably means an oil price ranging from USD 70/b to USD 100/b with an average of around USD 85/b. Just like last year.

Bjarne Schieldrop, Chief analyst commodities, SEB
Bjarne Schieldrop, Chief analyst commodities, SEB

Brent crude continues to trade around USD 90/b awaiting catalysts like further inventory declines or Mid East flareups. Brent crude ydy traded in a range of USD 88.78 – 91.1/b before settling at USD 90.38/b. Trading activity ydy seems like it was much about getting comfortable with 90-level. Is it too high? Is there still more upside etc. But in the end it settled above the 90-line. This morning it has traded consistently above the line without making any kind of great leap higher.

Netanyahu made it clear that Rafah will be attacked. Israel ydy pulled some troops out of Khan Younis in Gaza and that calmed nerves in the region a tiny bit. But it seems to be all about tactical preparations rather than an indication of a defuse of the situation. Ydy evening Benjamin Netanyahu in Israel made it clear that a date for an assault on Rafah indeed has been set despite Biden’s efforts to prevent him doing so. Article in FT on this today. So tension in Israel/Gaza looks set to rise in not too long. The market is also still awaiting Iran’s response to the bombing of its consulate in Damascus one week ago. There is of course no oil production in Israel/Gaza and not much in Syria, Lebanon or Yemen either. The effects on the oil market from tensions and flareups in these countries are first and foremost that they work as catalysts for the oil price to move higher in an oil market which is fundamentally bullish. Deficit and falling oil inventories is the fundamental reason for why the oil price is moving higher and for why it is at USD 90/b today. There is also the long connecting string of:

[Iran-Iraq-Syria/Yemen/Lebanon/Gaza – Israel – US]

which creates a remote risk that oil supply in the Middle East potentially could be at risk in the end when turmoil is flaring in the middle of this connecting string. This always creates discomfort in the oil market. But we see little risk premium for a scenario where oil supply is really hurt in the end as neither Iran nor the US wants to end up in such a situation.

Tight market but OPEC+ will for sure produce more if needed to prevent global economy getting hurt. There  is increasing talk about the oil market getting very tight in H2-24 and that the oil price could shoot higher unless OPEC+ is producing more. But of course OPEC+ will indeed produce more. The health of the global economy is essential for OPEC+. Healthy oil demand growth is like the goose that lays the golden egg for them. In no way do they want to kill it with too high oil prices. Brent crude averaged USD 82.2/b last year with a high of USD 98/b. So far this year it has averaged USD 82.6/b. SEB’s forecast is USD 85/b for the average year with a high of USD 100/b. We think that a repetition of last year with respect to oil prices is great for OPEC+ and fully acceptable for the global economy and thus will not hinder a solid oil demand growth which OPEC+ needs. Nothing would make OPEC+ more happy than to produce at a normal level and still being able to get USD 85/b. Brent crude will head yet higher because OPEC+ continues to hold back supply Q2-24 resulting in declining inventories and thus higher prices. But when the oil price is nearing USD 100/b we expect verbal intervention from the group with statements like ”… more supply in H2-24” and that will probably dampen bullish prices.

Not only does OPEC+ want to produce at a normal level. It also needs to produce at a normal level. Because at some point in time in the future there will be a situation sooner or later where they will have to cut again. And unless they are back to normal production at that time they won’t be in a position to cut again.

So OPEC+ won’t kill the goose that lays the golden egg. They won’t allow the oil price to stay too high for too long. I.e. USD 100/b or higher. They will produce more in H2-24 if needed to prevent too high oil prices and they have the reserve capacity to do it.

Data today: US monthly oil market report (STEO) with forecast for US crude and liquids production at 18:00 CET

Fortsätt läsa

Populära