The Cheese Maker's Hedge: WMP Futures Versus an OTC Milk-Fat Swap
A Waikato specialty cheese maker, Kaimai Creamery, expects to buy 480,000 kg of milk fat over the next six months. Its bank offers an OTC milk-fat swap at a fixed price of NZD 8.10/kg, with a break fee equal to 2.5% of remaining notional if cancelled. A derivatives broker proposes NZX whole milk powder (WMP) futures instead. WMP futures are priced in USD, based on WMP rather than milk fat, and each contract is 10 tonnes; the front-month price is USD 3,050/tonne. The creamery has annual turnover of NZD 9 million, EBITDA margin of 6%, and a NZD 250,000 overdraft. The finance director wants 'the cheapest hedge' and asks whether 48 WMP contracts match the exposure. The NZD/USD rate is 0.6100. The bank swap has no margin calls, while the futures account requires initial margin of USD 1,800 per contract.
1. Compare the two hedging alternatives for Kaimai Creamery, including basis risk, liquidity and operational implications.
Read the worked answer
The OTC swap directly references milk fat and fixes the price at NZD 8.10/kg, so it removes the price risk the creamery actually faces. Its costs are transparent only if the break fee and bank credit terms are priced; the 2.5% break fee creates a real exit cost if volumes fall. It also introduces counterparty credit exposure to the bank, though no daily margin calls.
WMP futures are exchange-traded, transparent and collateral-efficient per contract, but they hedge WMP, not milk fat. The creamery faces basis risk from the fat/protein composition of WMP, NZD/USD movements, and local milk-fat supply conditions. A WMP hedge may move differently from the creamery's input cost. Futures also require daily mark-to-market, initial margin and variation margin, which consumes overdraft capacity and creates liquidity risk.
Operationally, futures need a derivatives account, margin funding, daily reconciliation and accounting for hedge effectiveness. The swap needs credit approval, documentation and break-fee monitoring. 'Cheapest' must include margin funding, basis risk and exit costs, not just the quoted price.
2. Is 48 WMP contracts the right size? Show the calculation and explain what a value-based hedge would imply.
Read the worked answer
The 48-contract answer comes from matching tonnage: 48 contracts x 10 tonnes = 480 tonnes, equal to 480,000 kg. That is a coincidence, not a hedge. The exposure is 480 tonnes of milk fat at NZD 8.10/kg, a value of 480,000 x 8.10 = NZD 3.888 million. Each WMP contract is 10 tonnes x USD 3,050 = USD 30,500; at 0.6100 that is NZD 50,000. So 48 contracts have a notional of about NZD 2.4 million, only 62% of the milk-fat value.
A crude value-based hedge would be NZD 3.888m / NZD 50,000 = about 78 contracts. But that still does not fix the product mismatch. A proper hedge ratio would adjust for the historical relationship between WMP futures and the creamery's milk-fat cost, plus FX exposure. The creamery should not treat 48 or 78 as a precise answer without regression or at least a sensitivity analysis. At 78 contracts, initial margin would be 78 x USD 1,800 = USD 140,400, about NZD 230,000, nearly exhausting the overdraft before variation margin.
3. What would you recommend to the finance director, and why?
Read the worked answer
Recommend hedging the core milk-fat exposure with the OTC swap, provided the bank's credit terms and break fee are acceptable and the creamery can absorb the exit cost if volumes fall. The swap matches the risk and avoids daily margin funding. If the creamery wants exchange transparency or a tactical overlay, use a smaller WMP futures position only for the portion where WMP basis risk is understood, and size it to the value and correlation, not to tonnage.
A staged approach is sensible: hedge 50-70% of expected milk-fat purchases, retain some upside, and stress-test a 15% adverse milk-fat move plus a 5% NZD/USD move. Confirm the overdraft can fund initial margin and a plausible variation margin call. Document the hedge objective, effectiveness testing and break-fee contingency. The finance director should compare total cost of hedging, not just the headline swap price versus futures price.