Bank of America published a note telling clients which country offers the best hedge against El Niño wrecking the global food supply chain. They got paid to write this. Someone read it and nodded.
The premise assumes you can predict severe weather shocks. Then assumes those shocks will hit specific crops in specific regions at specific times. Then assumes you know which country's markets will benefit while others starve. Then assumes you'll time the trade correctly. Then assumes the hedge won't get obliterated by currency swings, political instability, or the fifteen other variables that make food commodity markets move like a drunk driver on ice.
BofA analysts built a model. Fed it historical El Niño data. Ran correlations. Found one country that outperforms when the Pacific warms up and rain patterns shift. They won't tell you which country in the headline because that would eliminate the need to download their forty-seven page PDF. The PDF has charts. The charts have colors. The colors mean nothing.
Retail traders will read this and immediately open positions in agricultural ETFs they can't pronounce. They'll check weather maps twice a day. They'll join Discord servers about La Niña versus El Niño. They'll calculate crop yields in countries they couldn't find on a map last week. They'll feel like scientists. They'll lose money like artists.
The food supply chain operates on contracts signed months in advance, political export bans that materialize overnight, and logistical nightmares that no analyst in midtown Manhattan will ever understand. But sure, hedge it with equities. That'll work. Nothing says inflation protection like buying shares in a country whose central bank might decide to print money, ban exports, or nationalize farms the second things get tight.
BofA found the best place to hedge severe El Niño shocks. The best place is a savings account, far away from this f*cking idea.
Photo by on Unsplash
Leave a Comment