{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015151515151515152, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.497267759562842, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Normal Backwardation and the Inventory Effect

The existence of backwardation in futures markets has remained an intriguing and controversial issue since Keynes first argued that it was the "normal" state of affairs. Most theoretical explanations for the existence of backwardation are quite restrictive. Among the assumptions are pure forward as opposed to true futures trading, differences in probability beliefs, degrees of risk aversion, or the level of commodity commitments among long and short hedgers. In a simple model of short and long commodity hedgers, we show that a backwardation equilibrium can occur in a true futures (as opposed to forward) market even when hedgers are identical in these respects and speculators hold the same probability beliefs as hedgers. This result is driven by Houthakker's completely neglected intuitive notion that one possible explanation for backwardation is the high correlation between cash and futures prices when inventories of a commodity are large. While the simple existence of such an "inventory effect" does not necessarily imply backwardation, we prove that backwardation will occur under an appropriately specified inventory effect.