The one question I get asked constantly: can AI really predict commodity prices?
It’s a conversation I’ve had countless times. And while I absolutely love the ambition, let’s be brutally honest: nobody has a crystal ball. AI isn’t going to magically solve one of procurement’s most persistent, headache-inducing challenge. After years working with large FMCG companies in price forecasting, my biggest takeaway is this: successful commodity forecasting is far more art than science. Crucially, it should never replace the deep intelligence you’ve gathered from your suppliers and your years of category experience.
But that doesn’t mean we’re flying blind. There are systematic, proven ways to build reliable price benchmarks for your indices. Let’s dive into the four main options, when to use each one, and how the real winners combine them effectively.
Option 1: Human Market Intelligence – The Old-School Way
This is the classic approach, and for good reason. It relies on experienced analysts reading supply reports, visiting plantations to check crop evolution, tracking inventory levels, talking to suppliers and monitoring weather patterns. Companies like Mintec Expana have built their entire reputation on this model, employing analysts with decades of experience who deliver transparent, explainable forecasts based on market fundamentals.
When to use it: This approach shines for specialty categories with limited historical data or truly unique market dynamics. If you’re buying a niche chemical with only three global suppliers, or dealing with a commodity affected by specific regional politics, human intelligence is often your absolute best bet. The transparent framework makes it explainable and defensible to stakeholders—which is crucial when you’re justifying a million-euro hedging decision to the CFO.
The limitations: It’s inherently unscalable and, let’s face it, subject to human bias. Even the best analysts missed 2024’s insane cocoa surge. More critically, there’s no automatic framework for early warnings. By the time an analyst writes their monthly report, the market may have already moved.
Option 2: Statistical decomposition – the mathematical baseline
Here, we take historical price signals and break them down into their core component parts: the underlying trend, seasonality, and cyclical patterns. Using techniques like ARIMA models or exponential smoothing, we can forecast purely based on what has happened before.
When to use it: This works beautifully for stable indices with predictable patterns. Think labor cost indices, regulated utilities, or commodities with strong, reliable seasonal patterns (like natural gas in winter). If your historical data shows clear, repeating patterns without major disruptions, statistical models can provide a reliable, low-cost baseline.
The limitations: Try explaining aluminum’s volatility with a linear trend model. When black swan events hit or market dynamics shift, these models break down spectacularly. They are, by their very nature, backward-looking—great for stable environments, but downright dangerous in volatile markets.
Option 3: Multivariate analysis – the data science play
This is where modern data science (AKA AI) gets truly interesting. We search for correlations between your commodity and external indicators: weather patterns affecting crop yields, FX rates influencing import costs, or shipping data signaling supply constraints. The key is finding lagged relationships—when an indicator moves today, your commodity follows in three weeks. That lag is your predictive edge.
Companies like Vesper are pioneering this approach, having invested heavily in collecting and structuring the disparate data sources needed to make these models work.
When to use it: This is your most scalable solution for commodities with rich data ecosystems. Agricultural commodities, energy products, and widely-traded metals often have enough surrounding data to build robust multivariate models.
The limitations: The promise often exceeds the reality. Crop yield data arrives yearly, but procurement needs monthly forecasts. Weather data updates daily, commodity prices weekly. Supply and demand figures are delayed, inconsistent, and frequently revised.
Complex AI models can become black boxes—good luck explaining to your board why the neural network thinks prices will spike next quarter.
Option 4: Feedstock models – the supply chain secret weapon
This is the often-overlooked approach that can provide truly remarkable insights. Instead of trying to predict polyethylene prices directly, we model the underlying feedstocks: ethane from natural gas processing, naphtha from crude oil refining. By understanding the cost structure and tracking raw material prices, we can anticipate downstream price movements.
When to use it: This approach excels when you’re buying processed materials rather than raw commodities. Buying plastic resins? Track crude oil and specific petrochemical intermediates. The further you are from the raw commodity, the more valuable this approach becomes.
The limitations: You need a deep, intimate understanding of the supply chain and production economics. Conversion costs, capacity utilization, and technical substitution effects all matter. It’s also vulnerable to structural changes—if a new, disruptive production technology emerges, your carefully calibrated model becomes instantly obsolete.
The winning strategy: ensemble forecasting
Here’s the hard truth nobody wants to admit: no single forecasting technique is inherently right or wrong. A model that worked perfectly last year might fail spectacularly tomorrow. Markets evolve, relationships break down, and new factors emerge constantly.
The most successful procurement organizations I work with don’t rely on one approach. They create ensemble forecasts that intelligently combine:
• Statistical models for the stable baseline
• Multivariate analysis for known relationships
• Feedstock models for supply chain intelligence
• Human expertise for context and sanity checks
But here’s the crucial part: they benchmark different forecast types continuously. They track which approaches work for which commodities under which conditions. They understand that forecasting isn’t about being perfectly right—it’s about being less wrong than your competition and anticipate faster.
Building your competitive edge
The organizations that win in commodity procurement aren’t the ones with perfect forecasts. They’re the ones that have built a robust, agile framework. They:
- Acknowledge uncertainty: They quantify confidence levels and plan for multiple scenarios.
- Combine approaches: They use ensemble methods that leverage multiple forecasting techniques.
- Build narratives: They create compelling, data-backed stories that align stakeholders and drive action.
- Stay agile: They continuously update models and switch approaches as markets evolve.
- Learn systematically: They track forecast accuracy and understand why models succeed or fail.
The goal isn’t to predict the future perfectly. It’s to make better-informed decisions than your competitors, backed by transparent logic that your organization can understand and act upon.
Because at the end of the day, procurement success isn’t about having the best forecast—it’s about having the best framework for making decisions under uncertainty. And that requires combining the art of market intelligence with the science of data analysis, all wrapped in a narrative that drives organizational alignment.
.png)
.png)