Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

S&P GSCI

The S&P GSCI is a production-weighted that tracks the returns of a diversified of futures contracts on physical commodities, serving as a for overall performance and exposure to global production trends. Originally developed by and launched in 1991 as the Goldman Sachs Commodity Index, it was the first major investable , enabling unleveraged, long-only investment strategies via futures rollovers. assumed responsibility for its calculation and maintenance in 2007, broadening its use as a standard reference for investors seeking to or diversify portfolios beyond equities and bonds. The index comprises 24 exchange-traded futures contracts spanning (e.g., crude oil, ), metals (e.g., , ), (e.g., corn, soybeans), and (e.g., ), with weights determined annually by world production quantities rather than or , resulting in a heavy emphasis on energy commodities—often over 50% allocation. This reflects causal drivers of commodity supply, such as volumes, but has drawn for potential overexposure to volatile energy prices, limiting diversification compared to equally weighted alternatives. Widely tracked and replicated through exchange-traded products like ETFs, the S&P GSCI functions as a gauge of macroeconomic pressures, including and supply disruptions, with historical data showing sensitivity to geopolitical events and economic cycles rather than consistent equity-like returns.

History

Origins and launch

The Commodity Index (GSCI), the predecessor to the S&P GSCI, was developed by in 1991 as the first major investable index, comprising a basket of exchange-traded futures contracts across multiple sectors. The index was designed to serve as a reflecting the economic significance of commodities in global , using a production-weighted to represent the relative importance of each based on world output quantities. Its launch on April 11, 1991, marked the introduction of a standardized, publicly available tool for investors seeking exposure to markets without direct physical ownership. Historical data for the GSCI was back-calculated by from December 31, 1969, providing a long-term performance record prior to the official launch, which facilitated analysis of trends over decades. At , the included s for 18 , emphasizing products due to their dominant share in production values, and was calculated daily based on nearby prices with provisions for rolling to maintain continuity. This structure aimed to capture the performance of as an asset class, distinct from equities or , amid growing institutional interest in diversification benefits during the early environment. The GSCI quickly became a reference point for commodity-linked investments, including futures, swaps, and exchange-traded products, underscoring ' role in pioneering systematic indexing before the proliferation of similar benchmarks in the late 1990s and 2000s.

Evolution and acquisition

The Commodity Index (GSCI) was originally developed and launched by on April 11, 1991, marking the inception of the first major investable index designed to track a diversified basket of futures contracts weighted by global production levels. Historical back-tested data for the index extends to 1970, though live calculation and investability commenced with the 1991 launch. On February 6, 2007, Standard & Poor's, then a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies, announced its acquisition of the GSCI along with two equity index families, aiming to expand its commodities benchmarking capabilities. The transaction transferred ownership and operational control from , which had managed the index's calculation since . S&P Dow Jones Indices assumed responsibility for the index's daily calculation effective May 7, 2007, rebranding it as the S&P GSCI while retaining its foundational methodology of production weighting and futures rolling. Post-acquisition, the index has seen targeted methodological updates, including an increase in the investment support level from US$170 billion to US$190 billion to accommodate growing and the relaunch of certain sub-indices, such as the S&P GSCI 2X Inverse variants in May 2022 following prior suspensions. These refinements have focused on enhancing thresholds and mathematical consistency without altering the core emphasis on world production data for annual reweighting.

Methodology

Commodity selection criteria

The S&P GSCI includes commodities that meet stringent and economic relevance criteria, prioritizing those with sufficient trading and global scale to ensure investability and representation of the broader . Eligible commodities must involve physical assets, excluding financial instruments or derivatives thereof, and futures contracts must be denominated in U.S. dollars, traded on exchanges in countries, and offer daily reference prices with continuous availability for at least two years prior to inclusion. Liquidity is assessed primarily through Total Dollar Value Trading (TDVT), with thresholds varying by status: new commodities require at least $15 billion in annualized TDVT, while existing sole-contract commodities must maintain $5 billion annualized (or $10 billion in one of three annual observation periods), and new contracts for established commodities need $30 billion annualized. For multi-contract commodities, existing contracts must exceed $10 billion annualized TDVT ($20 billion in one period), and contract selection within a favors the highest Total Quantity Traded (TQT), with secondary contracts eligible if their TQT reaches 25% of the primary's, subject to Total Volume of Monthly Trades (TVM) not surpassing predefined upper limits to prevent over-concentration. Volume data must cover at least three months (annualized if shorter), and contracts must remain viable for trading at least five months before expiration. Economic significance is determined via world production weighting, using a five-year World Production Average (WPA) derived from lagged World Production Quantity (WPQ) data sourced from agencies such as FAOSTAT, USDA, USGS, UN Data, and IEA. This production-based approach assigns initial weights reflecting global output shares, with a minimum Reference Percentage Dollar Weight (RPDW) of 1.00% required for new inclusions and 0.10% for retention, triggering reallocation of Contract Production Weights (CPWs) if thresholds falter. Commodities undergo annual eligibility reviews from September to August, with quarterly checks for TVM shortfalls, enabling additions of high-TQT candidates if TVM capacity permits or removals if trading halts or criteria fail; replacements take effect in the subsequent monthly roll period (typically the 5th–9th of the month). These rules, updated as of September 1, 2025, maintain the index's focus on liquid, production-dominant futures while adapting to market evolution without discretionary intervention.

Production-based weighting

The S&P GSCI employs a production-based weighting scheme to assign relative importance to its constituent commodities, prioritizing their global economic significance over factors like or . This approach uses fixed quantity weights derived from average world levels, ensuring that commodities with higher global output—such as products—receive proportionally larger allocations, reflecting their broader impact on the . Unlike capitalization-weighted indices, which adjust dynamically with prices, the production weights remain stable in physical units (e.g., barrels of or bushels of ) until annual rebalancing, providing a consistent measure of commodity supply fundamentals. The core calculation begins with the World Production Quantity (WPQ), defined as the sum of total world for a given over a five-year period, typically lagged by three years to incorporate stable historical data. The World Average (WPA) is then computed by dividing the WPQ by five, yielding an annualized figure in appropriate units (e.g., metric tons). For each eligible , a Contract Weight (CPW) is determined by multiplying the WPA by the contract's percentage share of the Total Quantity Traded (TQT) across all designated contracts for that commodity, then dividing by 1,000,000 to normalize the weights; the result is rounded to seven decimal places. This TQT share incorporates annualized trading volume data from the prior through , ensuring influences contract selection without overriding primacy. Adjustments to CPWs occur only if a contract's Trading Value Multiple falls below a predefined threshold (e.g., 50), which is rare and aimed at maintaining tradability. Annual reweighting of the index occurs during the January futures roll period, using production data from authoritative sources including the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization's FAOSTAT database, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Data, the , and the U.S. Geological Survey's Mineral Yearbook (e.g., 2019 edition for certain minerals). For specialized commodities, adaptations apply: livestock weights draw from industrial production proxies, while relies on North American consumption data due to fragmented global futures markets. This methodology, effective as of the September 1, 2025, update, underscores the index's emphasis on empirical production metrics to capture causal economic relevance, though it can lead to heavy energy sector dominance (often exceeding 60% allocation) given petroleum's outsized global output.

Futures contract rolling and index calculation

The S&P GSCI, as a futures-based commodity index, requires periodic rolling of contracts to avoid physical delivery obligations inherent in commodity futures, which typically expire monthly. This rolling process transitions exposure from the near-term (front-month) contract to the longer-dated (second-month or roll) contract, capturing the potential roll yield or cost arising from the term structure of futures prices (contango or backwardation). Rolling occurs over a standardized five-business-day period each month, specifically from the fifth to the ninth S&P GSCI business day, with daily adjustments to the relative weights between the two contracts to mitigate market impact from concentrated trading volume. During the roll period, the index allocates weights progressively from the front-month to the second-month contract as follows:
Business DayFront-Month WeightSecond-Month Weight
5th80%20%
6th60%40%
7th40%60%
8th20%80%
9th0%100%
These weights apply uniformly across eligible commodities, though the specific contract months vary by commodity to align with liquidity and production cycles—for instance, (WTI) crude oil rolls into designated months such as January (F), February (G), April (J), May (K), July (N), August (Q), September (U), October (V), and December (Z). Post-roll, the former second-month contract becomes the new front-month, and the process repeats monthly unless disrupted by market closures or exchange holidays, in which case the schedule shifts to the next . The Excess Return (ER) version of the S&P GSCI, the primary benchmark, calculates daily index levels by compounding the previous day's value with one plus the daily index return, derived from production-weighted contract daily returns (CDR). Each commodity's CDR during the roll incorporates the blended prices of the front- and second-month contracts per the schedule above, multiplied by the commodity's contract production weight (CPW), which reflects its average five-year world production share adjusted annually. The aggregate daily return is the sum of these weighted CDRs across all commodities, ensuring the index reflects a diversified, production-proportional exposure to commodity futures performance without collateral income. The Total Return (TR) variant adds a collateralized return (typically based on short-term interest rates) to the ER calculation. Official daily settlement prices for the index are published by around 3:45 PM Eastern Time on each business day, using closing prices from underlying exchanges.

Composition

Eligible commodities and sectors

The S&P GSCI includes 24 eligible commodities, categorized into four primary sectors: , , , and metals. These commodities are selected for inclusion based on criteria such as being physical assets, trading primarily in U.S. dollars on exchanges in member countries or certain other facilities, having continuous daily closing prices for at least two years, and meeting minimum thresholds, including a total dollar volume traded (TDVT) of at least $15 billion over the prior 12 months for new entrants. The energy sector, which dominates the index due to high global production volumes, encompasses six key commodities: (WTI) crude oil, oil, , reformulated gasoline blendstock for oxygen blending (RBOB gasoline), gasoil, and . These reflect major liquid fuels and energy sources traded via futures contracts on exchanges like NYMEX and . Agriculture covers eight commodities essential to global food and soft commodity markets: Chicago wheat, Kansas City wheat, corn, soybeans, , sugar #11, , and . These are weighted according to production data from sources like the UN's (FAO), ensuring representation of staple crops and beverages. Livestock includes three animal products: lean hogs, live cattle, and , sourced from U.S. exchanges and tied to meat production cycles. The metals sector comprises industrial and precious metals: aluminum, copper, nickel, lead, zinc, gold, and silver, providing exposure to base metals used in and , as well as stores of value. Eligibility emphasizes futures contracts with sufficient and volume to ensure tradability, with annual reviews to confirm ongoing compliance. Sector allocations are not fixed but emerge from production-weighted using five-year world production averages (WPAs), updated quarterly via contract production weights (CPWs).
SectorCommodities
EnergyWTI Crude Oil, Brent Crude Oil, , RBOB Gasoline, Gasoil,
AgricultureChicago , Kansas , Corn, Soybeans, , Sugar #11, ,
LivestockLean Hogs, Live Cattle,
MetalsAluminum, , , Lead, , , Silver

Annual weight adjustments

The S&P GSCI determines weights through Contract Production Weights (CPWs), which are recalculated annually to reflect the relative global production significance of each eligible . These weights derive from a five-year World Production Average (WPA), computed as the World Production Quantity (WPQ)—the sum of annual production over the prior five years—divided by five, using data lagged by three years to ensure availability and stability. CPWs are proportional to each commodity's relative to the total WPA across all commodities, adjusted for the Total Quantity Traded (TQT) in futures markets to maintain thresholds. data is sourced from authoritative databases, including FAOSTAT for agricultural and commodities, the USDA , Supply, and Demand database for grains and oilseeds, UN Data for metals, the (IEA) for energy products, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for minerals. The annual rebalancing occurs during the roll period, with new CPWs effective from the fifth to ninth business days of the month, aligning with the index's monthly rolls. A is applied post-rebalancing to preserve historical in index levels, mitigating discontinuities from weight shifts. Quarterly composition reviews supplement this, potentially triggering intra-year adjustments if trading volume multiples fall below specified thresholds, though weight updates remain annual. For instance, the 2025 CPWs, announced on November 8, 2024, and effective from the January 8 roll, featured no contract additions or deletions but included sector reallocations: the sector rose to 9.303231% from 7.730085% in 2024 (driven by live cattle at 4.672884% and at 2.156991%), while declined to 16.69446% from 18.68306% (with corn at 4.558413% and wheat at 2.501533%). retained dominance at 57.41139%, underscoring the index's sensitivity to production trends like those in crude oil.

Performance Characteristics

Historical returns and volatility

The S&P GSCI, as an excess index tracking futures, has delivered modest annualized over various historical periods, offset by substantial inherent to markets. As of September 30, 2025, the index achieved a 10-year annualized of 4.35%, a 5-year of 9.45%, and a 3-year of -3.28%. These figures reflect the index's to global economic cycles, inflationary pressures, and supply disruptions, with stronger performance in periods of rising demand for and metals. Over longer backtested horizons since , excess have averaged near zero in real terms, underscoring the challenges of in futures rolling and the lack of persistent upward drift in prices absent monetary expansion. Volatility, quantified as annualized standard deviation of monthly returns, has consistently exceeded that of major equity indices like the S&P 500. The same period-end data shows 10-year at 20.62%, 5-year at 17.88%, and 3-year at 12.35%. This elevated risk stems primarily from the index's heavy weighting toward energy commodities, whose prices exhibit sharp swings; for example, oil futures often amplifies index drawdowns during geopolitical events or recessions. Tracking instruments like the S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust, which approximates total returns including collateral yields, report a 30-year of 1.89% with 21.33% standard deviation as of September 2025, highlighting that even collateralized exposure yields low risk-adjusted returns over extended periods. Yearly illustrates the index's cyclical nature, with outsized gains in boom years and severe losses in busts:
YearApproximate Annual (Total Proxy via GSG )
20248.52%
2023-5.51%
202224.08%
202138.77%
2020-23.94%
Such variability—driven by events like the 2020 demand shock and 2021 energy rebound—contrasts with steadier asset classes, positioning the GSCI as a high-beta diversifier rather than a consistent growth vehicle. Empirical analysis confirms negative skewness in returns, with fat-tailed downside risks from synchronized commodity slumps.

Economic and inflationary correlations

The S&P GSCI demonstrates positive correlations with global economic growth, primarily due to its production-weighted composition emphasizing energy and industrial metals, sectors that experience heightened demand amid industrial expansion and trade activity. Empirical analysis of industrial metals sub-indices within the GSCI reveals a strong historical linkage to worldwide GDP and trade volumes, as rising economic output drives commodity consumption in manufacturing and infrastructure. For example, during periods of robust global growth, such as the commodity supercycle from 2000 to 2008, the index benefited from synchronized demand surges in emerging markets like China, reflecting causal ties between real economic activity and commodity pricing rather than mere financial speculation. In inflationary contexts, the S&P GSCI has historically outperformed during episodes of elevated price pressures, aligning with the economic principle that commodities serve as inputs to production and thus respond to cost-push and dynamics. Data from 1970 onward shows the delivering substantial returns in high- environments, including the "Great Inflation" era when its energy-heavy weighting captured surging oil prices, and more recently with gains of 40% in and 26% in amid post-pandemic supply disruptions and monetary expansion. When U.S. rates ranged between 2% and 4%, the averaged one-year returns of 14.8%, underscoring its sensitivity to moderate inflationary upticks. Diversified baskets, akin to the GSCI's structure, averaged quarterly returns of 3.93% during periods of unexpected inflation spikes. Notwithstanding these patterns, rigorous econometric evidence reveals limitations in the GSCI's reliability as a consistent . A Markov-switching analysis of monthly GSCI total returns from January 1983 to December 2021 concluded that futures broadly failed to over the full period, with performance varying by —stronger in high- inflationary states but weaker in stable ones—attributable to factors like futures roll yields and speculative flows rather than pure inflationary passthrough. Over five decades, while have mitigated shocks empirically, long-term annualized returns have sometimes lagged -adjusted benchmarks, as seen in the GSCI's exposure to that can decouple from CPI measures. These findings, drawn from issuer data and peer-reviewed models, highlight the index's utility for tactical in inflationary cycles but caution against over-reliance absent diversification.

Investment Applications and Impact

Benchmarking and tradable products

The S&P GSCI functions as a leading benchmark for performance, providing a production-weighted measure of returns from a diversified of futures contracts across energy, metals, agriculture, and livestock sectors. Launched in 1991 by and later acquired by , it represents global beta by emphasizing world production quantities in its weighting scheme, enabling comparisons of strategies against real economic output rather than equal or market-cap approaches. Institutional investors and funds utilize it to gauge broad commodity exposure, with over $10 billion in assets historically benchmarked to variants of the index as of the early , though this figure fluctuates with market conditions. Tradable products directly tied to the S&P GSCI include futures contracts listed on the , which settle based on the index's daily value and allow leveraged or hedging without physical . Exchange-traded funds such as the S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed (ticker: GSG), managed by , aim to track the 's total return by holding collateralized futures positions, offering retail investors liquid access with an expense ratio of approximately 0.75% as of 2023. Exchange-traded notes (ETNs), including legacy products like the iPath S&P GSCI Total Return ETN, provide uncollateralized debt instruments linked to the , though some have been redeemed or restructured due to dynamics and issuer decisions. These instruments facilitate in portfolios but introduce in ETNs and potential tracking errors from futures rolling in ETFs.

Role in portfolio diversification

The S&P GSCI enhances diversification by exhibiting historically low correlations with equities and negative correlations with bonds, enabling it to offset drawdowns in traditional assets during divergent market conditions. From September 30, 2004, to September 30, 2024, the index demonstrated low correlation with the and negative correlation with the S&P U.S. Aggregate Bond Index, as cross-asset analyses illustrate reduced when commodities are included. This dynamic stems from commodities' distinct drivers, such as supply disruptions and global production cycles, which differ from corporate earnings or sensitivities influencing and bonds. Over the longer period from January 1979 to June 2022, commodity indices like the S&P GSCI showed an average correlation of 0.27 with equities and -0.07 with , supporting their role in lowering overall risk without sacrificing expected returns. Empirical portfolio constructions confirm these benefits, with additions of S&P GSCI exposure improving risk-adjusted metrics in stock-bond mixes. For instance, since its 1969 inception, the index's monthly returns correlated at -0.03 with the , allowing a 50/50 allocation to deliver superior diversification compared to equities alone during volatile eras. Research on strategic further indicates that production-weighted portfolios, exemplified by the S&P GSCI, outperform equal-weighted alternatives in diversifying nominal holdings, yielding more stable variance reduction. The index's across 24 commodities adds internal diversification, as average pairwise correlations among them remain moderate, further dampening sector-specific shocks. In inflationary regimes, the S&P GSCI's high sensitivity—evidenced by an of 12.9 from 1984 to 2022—amplifies its hedging utility, when equity-bond correlations often rise, preserving real portfolio value where other assets falter. Optimal allocations, such as 3-13% in balanced portfolios depending on return assumptions, can elevate Sharpe ratios by exploiting these uncorrelated returns, though benefits vary with roll yields and market regimes. Overall, its alignment with global production volumes ensures economic relevance, distinguishing it as a robust diversifier amid trends that occasionally elevate short-term correlations.

Advantages

Alignment with global production realities

The S&P GSCI determines commodity weights using average world production quantities over the most recent five-year period for which complete data are available, drawn from sources such as the United Nations, government agencies, and international organizations. This methodology assigns higher weights to commodities with greater global output volumes, thereby mirroring their proportional significance in the physical economy where supply is fundamentally tied to production capacity and extraction rates. By prioritizing empirical production metrics over financial proxies like trading liquidity, the index avoids distortions that could arise from market microstructure biases, ensuring representation of commodities' roles in upstream supply chains and downstream industrial uses. This production-centric approach contrasts with liquidity-weighted alternatives, which may allocate disproportionate influence to niche commodities with high futures turnover but limited real-world output, potentially decoupling the from underlying supply realities. For example, commodities, which account for over 60% of the index weight due to their outsized share of global —crude alone often comprising around 55%—capture the sector's dominance in fueling transportation, , and power generation worldwide. Such enhances the index's relevance as a gauge of , reflecting causal drivers like resource endowments, technological extraction efficiencies, and geopolitical supply constraints rather than transient speculative flows. Annual reweighting, effective January 1 each year based on updated production data, maintains this fidelity to evolving global output patterns, such as shifts in agricultural yields or expansions, without arbitrary caps that could mask sectoral imbalances. Consequently, the S&P GSCI serves as a structurally realistic for investors seeking exposure to commodities' production-weighted economic footprint, independent of liquidity-driven anomalies prevalent in futures markets.

Empirical benefits for hedging

Empirical analyses indicate that the S&P GSCI provides hedging benefits primarily through its low historical correlation with equity returns, enabling reduced portfolio volatility. For instance, from 1969 to 2004, the correlation between S&P GSCI excess returns and S&P 500 excess returns was -0.03, allowing a 50/50 allocation to lower standard deviation from 15.64% (equities alone) to 11.86%. This diversification effect improves risk-adjusted returns, with optimal portfolios incorporating commodity futures achieving a Sharpe ratio of 0.64 compared to 0.44 for a traditional 60/40 stock-bond mix. The index has demonstrated efficacy as an during periods of rising prices, where traditional assets often falter. Between 1970 and 1979, amid with average annual exceeding 7%, the S&P GSCI generated a cumulative of 586%, substantially outperforming equities and bonds that suffered real losses. More recently, during the post-pandemic inflationary surge, it posted gains of 40% in and 26% in , contrasting with subdued equity performance in inflationary contexts. When ranged between 2% and 4%, the index averaged 14.8% one-year s, underscoring its responsiveness to moderate price increases. In bear markets, while the S&P GSCI has occasionally amplified drawdowns due to shared economic pressures—such as average losses of 33.5% in joint decline years versus 17.9% for the —its overall low correlation (0.43 through mid-2019) supports tactical hedging by mitigating systemic equity risk over longer horizons. Allocations of 4% to 9% to commodities like those tracked by the GSCI have empirically enhanced portfolio Sharpe ratios, particularly when equities and bonds correlate positively during stress.

Criticisms and Limitations

Energy sector dominance debate

The S&P GSCI employs a production-weighted methodology, calculating commodity weights based on average production quantities over the preceding five years, which inherently assigns the largest allocation to the sector due to the substantial volume of crude , , and refined products produced worldwide. As of recent compositions, has comprised the dominant sector, exceeding 60% in periods like 2019 and remaining the heaviest weight in the 2025 index update, though exact figures fluctuate with annual production data. This structure reflects the index's design to mirror the relative significance of commodities in the economy, akin to market-capitalization in indices. Advocates of the approach maintain that energy's prominence provides an authentic gauge of dynamics, capturing the sector's outsized role in trade, consumption, and economic activity without imposing artificial caps that could distort representation. emphasizes that production weighting ensures the index tracks investable futures contracts proportional to real-world supply, and historical trends show energy's share declining from peaks above 70% in the early as agricultural and metal production grew. This alignment, they argue, enhances the index's utility for hedging against tied to costs, where energy inputs predominate. Critics, however, argue that the energy skew transforms the GSCI into an inadvertent sector bet, amplifying to geopolitical risks, supply disruptions, and price inherent to and gas markets, which can overshadow diversification benefits across commodities. Studies indicate drives the bulk of the index's overall , contributing to suboptimal risk-adjusted returns in non- bull cycles and prompting comparisons to more balanced alternatives like the , which caps any sector—including —at around one-third to promote equitable . from long-term performance analyses supports this view, showing the GSCI lagging diversified benchmarks during periods of underperformance, such as the . In response to these concerns, S&P offers variant indices like the S&P GSCI Light Energy, which deliberately lowers energy weighting to approximately 25-30% through sector adjustments, aiming to retain production-based principles while mitigating concentration risks for investors seeking broader representation. The ongoing debate underscores a tension between fidelity to economic realities and practical portfolio needs, with no on optimal weighting absent evolving production data.

Futures market distortions and roll yield issues

The S&P GSCI, as a futures-based commodity index, relies on rolling over expiring contracts into new ones to maintain continuous exposure, a process that introduces roll yield—the return differential arising from the futures curve's shape relative to spot prices. In contango markets, where distant futures trade at a premium to nearer ones (common in commodities like crude oil due to storage costs and convenience yields), rolling incurs a cost as investors sell low (near-term) and buy high (farther-term), generating negative roll yield that erodes total returns beyond spot price changes. This drag has been pronounced for the GSCI, whose weighting toward energy commodities—often in persistent contango—amplifies the effect; for instance, traditional indices like the GSCI experienced significant negative roll yields in the 2010s, contributing to underperformance relative to risk-free rates despite spot volatility exceeding 20% annually. Empirical analyses confirm this limitation: from to , the GSCI's inclusion of roll yields reduced long-term annualized returns compared to spot-only benchmarks, with negative contributions averaging several percentage points in contango-heavy periods, such as post-2008 when futures curves steepened due to ample supply. Critics argue this mechanical rolling fails to optimize curve positioning, as the GSCI's fixed monthly roll into the second-nearest contract captures suboptimal yields without adapting to curve dynamics, unlike enhanced strategies that target flatter segments. In alone, the GSCI's roll yield reached -28.3%, though offset by positive returns that year, highlighting how reliance on roll mechanics can decouple index performance from underlying commodity fundamentals. Futures market distortions exacerbate these issues, as synchronized rolling by large index-tracking funds—holding billions in notional exposure—creates predictable order flows that influence prices. The "Goldman roll," named after the GSCI's origins, refers to this clustered activity around roll dates, potentially causing temporary backwardation or price impacts as arbitrageurs front-run index traders, widening spreads and increasing transaction costs. Studies indicate such flows contributed to boom-bust cycles in commodity prices since the mid-2000s, with index investors amplifying volatility disconnected from physical supply-demand, as evidenced by elevated futures-spot divergences during high index fund participation. While some research finds minimal long-term detrimental effects on market functioning due to improved liquidity, the consensus among skeptics is that these distortions undermine the GSCI's representation of "real" commodity returns, favoring physical or optimized futures approaches over passive indexing.

Comparisons to alternative indices

The (BCOM), a leading alternative to the S&P GSCI, employs a hybrid methodology that balances global data with futures metrics, enabling annual rebalancing and diversification caps that limit any single to 15% and any sector group to one-third of the . In contrast to the GSCI's -only , which assigns over 55% to commodities across its 24 constituents, the BCOM allocates just 30.01% to for 2025, distributing exposure more evenly among the same number of commodities and thereby reducing sensitivity to oil and —a primary limitation of the GSCI that can undermine its utility as a broad . This design in the BCOM has been associated with improved risk-adjusted returns in scenarios where prices lag other sectors, as evidenced by analyses favoring lower- allocations akin to BCOM over traditional -weighted approaches. The (RICI), developed by investor , addresses GSCI limitations through broader inclusion of 38 commodities weighted by economic contracts and significance, rather than strict production volumes, which dilutes sector concentrations and incorporates niche exposures absent in the GSCI's narrower framework. Similarly, the /CoreCommodity CRB Index uses an equal-weighted of select commodities with an averaging of relatives, avoiding heavy futures roll reliance and production biases that amplify GSCI's energy-driven distortions. Empirical comparisons reveal that diversified alternatives like BCOM often deliver lower and correlations to equities (e.g., around 0.25 for BCOM versus 0.20 for GSCI against a 60/40 stock-bond historically), enhancing hedging but highlighting the GSCI's constraint in capturing non-energy dynamics. Such differences underscore how the GSCI's , while aligned with real-world output, can limit its adaptability for investors seeking reduced sector-specific risks compared to liquidity- or diversification-focused peers.

References

  1. [1]
    S&P GSCI | S&P Dow Jones Indices - S&P Global
    The S&P GSCI is the first major investable commodity index. It is one of the most widely recognized benchmarks that is broad-based and production weighted ...S&P GSCI Methodology · S&P GSCI Energy & Metals · S&P GSCI Non Livestock
  2. [2]
    [PDF] S&P GSCI Methodology
    Sep 1, 2025 · The S&P GSCI measures commodity market performance through futures and is a production-weighted index that is designed to reflect the ...
  3. [3]
    [PDF] A Brief History Of Commodities Indexes
    It arguably began in 1991 with the creation of the S&P GSCI (origi- nally the Goldman Sachs Commodity Index), an index compris- ing exchange-traded ...Missing: composition | Show results with:composition
  4. [4]
    S&P GSCI Definition, Commodity Types Listed, Potential Drawbacks
    The S&P GSCI is a benchmark commodities index that tracks the performance of the global commodities market. · It is made up of 24 exchange-traded futures ...What Is the S&P GSCI? · The S&P GSCI Methodology · Components
  5. [5]
    The S&P Goldman Sachs Commodity Index - Dummies.com
    The S&P GSCI is a production-weighted index because it assigns different weights to different commodities proportional to their current global production ...
  6. [6]
    S&P GSCI - Indices by Composition | S&P Dow Jones Indices
    The widely tracked S&P GSCI is recognized as a leading measure of general price movements and inflation in the world economy.
  7. [7]
    GSCI Commodity Index - Price - Chart - Historical Data - News
    The S&P GSCI is a composite index of commodity sector returns representing an unleveraged, long-only investment in commodity futures.
  8. [8]
    Standard & Poor's to Acquire Goldman Sach' GSCI
    Feb 6, 2007 · (NYSE: GS), the two companies announced today. Terms of the transaction were not disclosed. The GSCI, created in 1991, currently includes 24 ...
  9. [9]
    [PDF] What is the GSCI? - Goldman Sachs Research
    Apr 16, 2018 · We set our index to 100 on the start date (November. 1, 1995 for our sample index; January 2, 1970 for the GSCI). In early November, because ...<|separator|>
  10. [10]
    A Deep Dive into the Goldman Sachs Commodity Index - TradingSim
    Dec 3, 2023 · Established by Goldman Sachs in 1991, the index tracks the price movements of various commodities across sectors like energy, agriculture, ...
  11. [11]
    [PDF] The Order Flow Cost of Index Rolling in Commodity Futures Markets
    The S&P GSCI was launched in 1991 and has historical data availa- ble back to 1970. The index currently comprises 24 commodities from all sectors (energy,.
  12. [12]
    Standard & Poor's to Acquire Goldman Sachs' GSCI - S&P Global
    Feb 6, 2007 · The GSCI, created in 1991, currently includes 24 commodities and is designed to provide investors with a reliable and publicly available ...Missing: launch | Show results with:launch
  13. [13]
    [PDF] S&P GSCI® Index Methodology - Betashares
    The Investment Support Level (as set forth in the definition of that term) has been increased from US$ 170 billion to US$ 190 billion, to better reflect a ...Missing: evolution | Show results with:evolution
  14. [14]
    [PDF] S&P GSCI Reference Guide
    The S&P GSCI is a widely tracked commodity index, a leading measure of commodity prices, including 24 futures contracts on physical commodities.Missing: selection | Show results with:selection
  15. [15]
  16. [16]
    [PDF] S&P Dow Jones Indices Announces 2025 S&P GSCI Weights
    Nov 8, 2024 · The 2025 Contract. Production Weights (“CPWs”) become effective with the January 2025 roll period, beginning on. January 8, 2025. Please refer ...
  17. [17]
    iShares S&P GSCI Commodity Indexed Trust (GSG): Historical Returns
    As of September 2025, in the previous 30 Years, the iShares S&P GSCI Commodity Indexed Trust (GSG) ETF obtained a 1.89% compound annual return, with a 21.33% ...
  18. [18]
    iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) Performance ...
    Annual Total Return (%) History ; 2024. 8.52%: 5.84% ; 2023. -5.51%: -5.56% ; 2022. 24.08%: 15.74% ; 2021. 38.77%: 29.74% ; 2020. -23.94%: -3.09%.
  19. [19]
    Pumping Iron: How can metals prices help predict global growth?
    Jul 17, 2018 · The red and blue lines in Chart 2 show a high correlation between the S&P GSCI Industrial Metals price index and world GDP and trade.
  20. [20]
  21. [21]
    Why S&P GSCI? Diversification and Historical Inflation Mitigation
    The average one-year return when inflation measured between 2% and 4% was 14.8%. Exhibit 2 highlights how the S&P GSCI has performed during inflationary ...
  22. [22]
    [PDF] The Role of Commodities During Periods of Unexpected Inflation
    We find that a diversified basket of commodities performed the strongest during these periods, with an average quarterly return of 3.93%.
  23. [23]
    Are commodity futures a hedge against inflation? A Markov ...
    The data used in this study are monthly data of returns on the S&P Goldman Sachs Commodity Index (GSCI) Total Return Index for the period from January 1983 to ...
  24. [24]
    The Comeback of Commodities: Why Investors Must Reconsider ...
    Feb 14, 2025 · Empirical Evidence: Over the past five decades, commodities have demonstrated a consistent ability to hedge inflation shocks. For example, the ...
  25. [25]
    [PDF] Why Commodity Futures Provide Better Inflation Protection than ...
    The S&P GSCI and Bloomberg Commodity indices both have track records extending back to the Great Inflation of the 1970s (although the composition of the ...
  26. [26]
    S&P-GSCI Commodity Index Futures Quotes - CME Group
    Find information for S&P-GSCI Commodity Index Quotes provided by CME Group. View Quotes.
  27. [27]
    iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | GSG - BlackRock
    The iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (the 'Trust') seeks to track the results of a fully collateralized investment in futures contracts.
  28. [28]
    S&P GSCI Total Return Index - ETF Tracker - ETF Database
    The following table presents historical return data for ETFs tracking the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. ... Annual Dividend Rate. Dividend Date. Dividend.
  29. [29]
    [PDF] Why S&P GSCI?
    The S&P. GSCI's historical performance underscores its ability to deliver substantial returns in times of rising inflation and economic distress, while its low ...
  30. [30]
    [PDF] Commodity investing and its role in a portfolio - Vanguard
    This paper will address these questions by first introducing the key pillars of commodity investing: return and diversification. We will carry out an analysis ...
  31. [31]
    [PDF] The Tactical and Strategic Value of Commodity Futures
    Note: GSCI inception date is December 1969. During this time period, the S&P 500 and the GSCI had a monthly return correlation of -0.03. 50% S&P 500. 50% GSCI ...<|separator|>
  32. [32]
    Want To Beat Stagflation? Invest Like It's the 1970s | Kiplinger
    Jun 10, 2024 · The S&P GSCI Index, a measure of commodities investment performance, returned 586% between 1970 and 1979. "This was a phenomenal return for ...
  33. [33]
    [PDF] Understanding Commodities and the S&P GSCI
    S&P acquired the GSCI from Goldman Sachs on Feb. 2, 2007. store of value, but in order for a commodity to have a store of value similar to a stable currency ( ...Missing: origins | Show results with:origins
  34. [34]
    Will commodities protect you in bear markets? - CBS News
    Jun 21, 2012 · For the three years when both the S&P 500 and the S&P GSCI fell, on average the S&P 500 lost 17.9 percent and the S&P GSCI lost 33.5 percent.
  35. [35]
    When US sneezes, clichés spread: How do the commodity index ...
    One of the main characteristics of GSCI is that it is highly skewed to energy commodities. In 2019, energy weighted more than 62 percent in GSCI.3 Precious ...Missing: criticism | Show results with:criticism
  36. [36]
    [PDF] The Muddy Logic of Passive Commodity Investing
    The first investible benchmark wouldn't arrive until 1991 in the form of the Goldman Sachs Commodity Index (S&P GSCI), a basket of exchange-traded ...Missing: launch | Show results with:launch
  37. [37]
    [PDF] Box A: A Comparison of Commodity Indices
    For example, the S&P GSCI (GSCI) has around a two-thirds weight on energy commodities, while the Thomson Reuters Continuous Commodity. Index (CCI) places ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  38. [38]
    Improving on Traditional Commodity Indices - Research Affiliates
    Commodities provide inflation protection and valuable diversification benefits to traditional core stock and bond portfolios, but adoption has been muted, ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  39. [39]
    [PDF] Potential Advantages of a Lower Allocation to Energy - S&P Global
    These two indices are representations of a more equal-weighted view of commodities markets. Their performance is similar, and due to lower energy weights, each ...
  40. [40]
    The Commodity Futures Roll Return 'Tax': Addressing a ... - Two Sigma
    Oct 22, 2017 · The commodity futures roll return 'tax' is the cost of rolling futures contracts, which has been a negative drag on commodity index performance ...Missing: distortions issues<|separator|>
  41. [41]
    [PDF] Improving on Traditional Commodity Indices | Research Affiliates
    Simply put, investors in the S&P GSCI earned a return lower than T-bills despite being subjected to annualized volatility of nearly 20%. Traditional commodity ...
  42. [42]
    [PDF] Roll Yield: No Longer the Elephant in the Room - VanEck
    Roll yield is the return lost when rolling a futures contract to the next month in contango markets, or gained in backwardated markets.Missing: distortions issues criticism
  43. [43]
    [PDF] Deconstructing Futures Returns: The Role of Roll Yield | CME Group
    Roll yield is the divergence between futures and spot returns on the same asset, representing the net benefit or cost of owning the asset beyond spot price ...Missing: GSCI distortions
  44. [44]
    MAKING SENSE OF THE NEGATIVE ROLL YIELD
    ... roll yield of the Goldman Sachs Commodity Index. (GSCI) returned -28.3%. However, the GSCI Total Return Index (TR index) managed to return 7.8% over this ...
  45. [45]
    [PDF] Limits to Arbitrage and Commodity Index Investment: Front-Running ...
    Jul 15, 2011 · The "Goldman roll" is the rolling of futures contracts by the SP-GSCI, causing price impact. Commodity index funds roll to maintain long ...
  46. [46]
    [PDF] Commodity Index Traders and Boom/Bust in Commodities Prices
    ABSTRACT. Since 2005, the public has lived with high and volatile prices for basic energy and agricultural commodities.Missing: criticism | Show results with:criticism
  47. [47]
    [PDF] The price impact of the roll on commodities futures contracts
    Apr 15, 2019 · Our results contribute to the view that index investment has not been detrimental for the functioning of the commodity futures markets ...
  48. [48]
    The challenges of oil investing: Contango and the financialization of ...
    In this paper we contribute to this debate by uncovering new evidence that supports the idea that crowding and financialization may have distorted prices in the ...
  49. [49]
    S&P GSCI | S&P Dow Jones Indices
    ### Summary of S&P GSCI History, Evolution, Acquisition, and Changes
  50. [50]
    Bloomberg Commodity Index 2025 Target Weights Announced
    Oct 31, 2024 · Energy will remain the highest BCOM commodity group weight in 2025, despite a small decrease to 30.01%. Grains, Softs, and Livestock ...
  51. [51]
    Commodity Index: Everything You Need to Know - ETF.com
    S&P GSCI: Formerly known as the Goldman Sachs Commodity Index, the S&P GSCI is one of the most recognized commodity indexes. It measures the performance of a ...Missing: comparisons | Show results with:comparisons
  52. [52]
    Commodities In Portfolio Diversification | Russell Investments
    Mar 24, 2021 · ... Commodity Index (BCOM) to Goldman Sachs Commodity Index (GSCI). Correlation between 60/40 and GSCI was 0.20, whereas 60/40 and BCOM was 0.25.
  53. [53]
    A study of first generation commodity indices - ScienceDirect.com
    We find that commodity indices based on financial diversification offer better Sharpe ratios, lower volatilities, and lower correlation with bonds and equity.