Must-know: WTI continues to trade slightly wide of Brent
WTI and Brent used to trade in line, but prices had diverged over the past few years
The spread between West Texas Intermediate (WTI) and Brent crude represents the difference between two crude benchmarks, with WTI more representing the price that US oil producers receive and Brent more representing the prices received internationally. The two crudes are of similar quality and theoretically should price very close to each other. However, the prices had differed greatly between the two crudes because a recent surge in production in the United States has caused a buildup of crude oil inventories at Cushing, Oklahoma, where WTI is priced. This created a supply and demand imbalance at the hub, causing WTI to trade lower than Brent. Before this increase in US oil production, the two crudes had historically traded in line with each other.
(Read more: Why ethane stopped trading like crude and started trading like nat gas (part II))
The above graph shows the WTI-Brent spread over the past few years. Note that when the spread moves wider, it generally means that crude producers based in the United States receive relatively less money for their oil production compared to their counterparts that are producing internationally.
(Read more: Natural gas continues to lose market share to coal year-over-year due to price gains)
Spread relatively unchanged last week
The WTI-Brent spread was relatively flat last week, moving from $5.76 per barrel to $5.62 per barrel. From a longer-term view, earlier this year, WTI traded at points as low as $23 per barrel under Brent crude.
Background: The WTI-Brent spread over 2013
Over the course of the year, the spread has narrowed due to several factors. Firstly, increased midstream infrastructure has come online that has facilitated the movement of crude from inland to refiners on the coast. One notable example is the expansion of the Seaway Pipeline in January 2013, which allows more crude to flow from the Oklahoma crude hub at Cushing to the Gulf Coast, where a great amount of refining capacity sits. Plus, Sunoco’s Permian Express Pipeline and the reversal of Magellan Midstream Partners’ Longhorn Pipeline are allowing more crude from the Permian Basin in West Texas to flow directly to the Gulf Coast. Also, increased pipeline capacity and crude transportation by rail have allowed inland domestic crude to more efficiently travel to refiners on the East and West coasts, which has also backed out Brent-like imports.
Lastly, US refineries began running at higher rates than earlier in the year, which caused increased demand for crude. Since spring 2013, many US refineries started to come back online from performing routine maintenance, and the EIA reported that in July domestic refineries were running crude through their facilities at a rate of ~16.3 million barrels per day through June 2013. This is a ~2.1 million barrel a day increase over the first week of March. Plus, new refining capacity opened up in the Gulf Coast, helping increase refiners’ demand for crude.
So the spread between WTI and Brent closed in through the year until the two crudes traded nearly at par in mid-July. Since then, the spread has moved wider and experienced volatility. WTI traded nearly at par with Brent in mid-July, and since then the spread gradually widened to levels as wide as ~$8 per barrel. One reason is because supply from Libya had dropped sharply due to unrest, though oil supplies from Libya have since begun to recover. Plus, the recent escalation of tensions in Syria had caused traders to take bullish bets on the international oil benchmark of Brent crude and has also possibly driven the price differential between WTI and Brent. Recently, fears about Syria have eased somewhat (please read Why the oil market reacted to recent news on the Syria conflict for more background). However, further action in the Middle East could again drive the WTI-Brent spread wider.
The future of the Brent-WTI spread
As we’ve seen, WTI and Brent had historically traded at near par and reached near par at points earlier this year. However, given the structural change of significantly more oil being produced from the US (with projections of continued future growth), many market participants expect WTI to continue to trade under Brent. The US Energy Information Administration, for example, notes in its monthly report titled “Short Term Energy Outlook” that it expects a spread of ~$6 per barrel in 2014.
The EIA also noted in an article in June, “The future of the Brent-WTI price spread will be determined, in part, by the balance between future growth in U.S. crude production and the capacity of crude oil infrastructure to move that crude to U.S. refiners.” One such major piece of infrastructure is expected to come online in the next few weeks. TransCanada Corp., a midstream company, announced that the southern portion of the Keystone XL pipeline, a 700,000-barrel-per-day pipeline from Cushing, Oklahoma, to Nederland, Texas, will be completed in early November and will begin filling the line shortly afterwards. The completion of the pipeline brings on significant capacity to move crude oil away from Cushing towards seaborne markets. This could bring the spread tighter.
The spread’s effect on oil companies
When WTI trades below Brent, this generally means that companies with oil production concentrated in the United States will realize lower prices compared to their international counterparts, as WTI is the de facto US benchmark and Brent is the international benchmark.
For example, see the table below for a comparison of oil prices realized by US-concentrated companies versus companies with a global production profile.
(Read more: Introduction to the Permian Basin — Part 2: Geography of the Permian Basin)
2Q13 Average Price Per Barrel | |
BENCHMARK OIL PRICES | |
West Texas Intermediate | $94.12 |
Brent | $102.44 |
2Q13 Realized Oil Prices Per Barrel (excluding hedge gains/losses) | |
DOMESTIC PRODUCERS | |
Chesapeake Energy (CHK) | $92.53 |
Concho Resources (CXO) | $89.87 |
Range Resources (RRC) | $83.87 |
Oasis Petroleum (OAS) | $91.15 |
INTERNATIONAL PRODUCERS | |
Total Corp. (TOT) | $96.60 |
ConocoPhillips (COP) | $100.07 |
From an investment point of view, if Brent is expected to continue to trade significantly above WTI, you might favor buying oil names that receive crude prices closer to the Brent benchmark than the WTI benchmark. Generally speaking, this would represent oil names with more international production relative to domestic US production.
Monitor the spread
Investors may want to monitor the spread, as a wider spread may make international producers more attractive relative to domestic producers. The difference between Brent and WTI has caused domestic producers such as those ones mentioned in the above table (CHK, CXO, RRC, and OAS) to realize lower prices on oil compared to international producers. But over the medium term, the spread has closed dramatically and now signals better takeaway capacity for inland US oil. Investors should note that many international names are in the XLE ETF (Energy Select Sector SPDR), an ETF (exchange-traded fund) whose holdings are primarily large-cap energy stocks with significant international exposure.
More From Market Realist
