Article thumbnail

DO AGRICULTURAL MARKET ADVISORY SERVICES BEAT THE MARKET? EVIDENCE FROM THE WHEAT MARKET OVER 1995-1998

By Mark A. Jirik, Scott H. Irwin, Darrel L. Good, Joao Martines-Filho and Thomas E. Jackson

Abstract

The purpose of this report is to address two basic performance questions for market advisory services in wheat: 1) Do market advisory services, on average, outperform an appropriate market benchmark? and 2) Do market advisory services exhibit persistence in their performance from year-to-year? Data on wheat net price received for advisory services, as reported by the AgMAS Project, are available for the 1995, 1996, 1997 and 1998 crop years. Not only do market advisory programs in wheat consistently fail to "beat the market," their performance is significantly worse than the market. On average, market advisory service performance is about $14 per acre below benchmark revenue, an economically non-trivial amount by any reasonable standard. The predictability results provide little evidence that future advisory service pricing performance can be predicted from past performance.Marketing,

OAI identifier:
Downloaded from http://purl.umn.edu/14778

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (1998). 1 At the time of analysis for this report, only a preliminary
  2. (1997). 1 At the time of analysis for this report, only preliminary
  3. (2000). 13 This comparison is not substantially affected by the exclusion of the cost of the programs.
  4. (1998). 2 At the time of analysis for this report, only a preliminary
  5. (1997). 2 At the time of analysis for this report, only preliminary
  6. (1995). 29Number Proportion Number of of Services of Services Market Benchmark/ Advisory above above Two-tail Sample Period Services Benchmark Benchmark Z-statistic p-value 24-Month Average
  7. (1996). 3 When the AgMAS study began in 1994, DTN and FarmDayta were separate companies. The two companies merged in
  8. 48Average Average Average Performance Quantile Revenue Rank Return in Year t in year t+2 in year t+2 in year t+2 ---$/acre ---percent---Top Third
  9. (1998). 5 Progressive Ag is included in the study for the 1996, 1997, and
  10. 8 These results originally are presented
  11. A Comparison Between Deviation from Trend Yield in West Southwest Illinois Crop Reporting District versus Southwest Kansas and Northeast South Dakota Crop Reporting Districts, 1972-1998 Crop Years Correlation =
  12. A Position Report for Farm-Level Marketing Management." Review of Agricultural Economics.
  13. (1999). A Random Walk Down Wall Street.
  14. A Reformulation of the Portfolio Model of Hedging.”
  15. Are Some Mutual Fund Managers Better Than Others? CrossSectional Patterns in Behavior and Performance."
  16. (1995). Comparison of the Daily Change in Prices Between the West Southwest Illinois Price Reporting District and the Western Kansas and East River South Dakota Price Reporting Districts,
  17. (1999). Crop Producer Risk Management Survey: A Preliminary Summary of Selected Data.”
  18. (1999). Debunking Some Mutual-Fund Myths." The Wall Street Journal,
  19. (1998). Development of a Market Benchmark for AgMAS Performance Evaluations."
  20. (2000). Do Agricultural Market Advisory Services Beat the Market? Evidence from the Corn and Soybean Markets Over 1995-1998."
  21. Efficiency Tests of July Kansas City Wheat Futures."
  22. (1970). Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work."
  23. Evaluation of Market Advisory Services for Corn and Soybeans."
  24. (1994). Farmers Want Market News, Not Advice." Farm Journal Extra,
  25. (1998). for a classification and review of marketing strategy studies.
  26. Forward Marketing Practices and Attitudes of Large-Scale Midwestern Grain Farmers." Review of Agricultural Economics.
  27. Hedging Hard Red Winter Wheat: Kansas City versus
  28. (1993). How to Measure Your Pro's Performance." Top Farmer,
  29. Information Sources and Risk Attitudes of Large-Scale Farmers, Farm Managers, and Agricultural Bankers."
  30. (1997). Log-Linear Models and Logistic Regression, Second Edition.
  31. Market Efficiency and Marketing to Enhance Income of Crop Farmers.” Review of Agricultural Economics.
  32. (1986). Marketing Matters -- How Well Do Market Advisors Deliver?" Prairie Farmer,
  33. On the Impossibility of Informationally Efficient Markets." The American Economic Review.
  34. Perceptions of Marketing Strategies; Farmers vs.
  35. Performance Evaluation with Transactions Data: The Stock Selection of Investment Newsletters."
  36. Performance Persistence for Managed Futures."
  37. Preharvest Marketing Strategies Increase Net Returns for Corn and Soybean Growers.” Review of Agricultural Economics.
  38. Professionally Managed, Publicly Traded Commodity Funds."
  39. (1971). Returns from Investing in Equity Mutual Funds
  40. (1996). Statistics for Business and Economics, Sixth Edition.
  41. Survivorship Bias and Attrition Effects in Measures of Performance Persistence.”
  42. Survivorship Bias in Performance Studies." Review of Financial Studies.
  43. The Long-Run Performance of Initial Public Offerings."
  44. The Magellan Fund and Market Efficiency.”
  45. The Performance of Investment Newsletters."
  46. The Predictability of Managed Futures Returns."
  47. (1995). The revenue results are presented in Appendix Tables A3 through A8.
  48. (1992). The Structure and Performance of the Money Management Industry." Brookings Papers: Microeconomics
  49. (1995). Through
  50. (1989). Trading is Hazardous to Your Wealth: The Common Stock Investment Performance of Individual Investors."
  51. (1998). Value-Added Crops, GPS Technology and Consultant Survey: Summary of a
  52. (1995). vs.