Blame to spare in UK energy supplier debacle
Price cap was part of the problem, but lack of hedging and oversight also contributed
When the UK introduced a cap on household energy prices in 2019, the idea was to protect consumers from predatory suppliers charging above the odds for gas and electricity. Now, the shoe is on the other foot, with suppliers blaming the cap for driving more than 20 firms out of business when wholesale energy prices surged 250% in August and September.
They have a point. The cap sets the maximum amount a supplier can charge a retail customer on a variable tariff for their gas and electricity annually and is reset twice a year to take account of market prices.
When wholesale prices for gas and electricity jumped above the cap, suppliers were unable to pass on the costs of sourcing energy to customers. This has been the case in gas since April, and while prices have retraced in recent weeks, no end to the situation appears in sight.
But it’s not all the cap’s fault. Some of the blame lies with the suppliers themselves.
Going by the annual reports of the energy suppliers, few saw the cap as a problem until wholesale energy prices began to explode.
Firms offering variable tariffs largely assumed they would be able to adjust retail prices to match what they were paying for energy in the wholesale market. Those that hedged only did so out to a maximum of six months, meaning they were only protected for a short period of time once prices went above the cap.
Few saw the cap as a problem until wholesale energy prices began to explode
This begs a number of questions. First, why did suppliers sit on their hands while prices were racing towards the cap? Some may have run into credit limit issues, or had difficulty devising and executing a hedging strategy when prices were moving rapidly. But Risk.net’s conversations with market participants uncovered no real evidence of a change in supplier behaviour leading up to the point when the cap was breached.
Second, was no-one checking to see if these firms were prudently managing their risks? Actually, no. The UK energy regulator, Ofgem, has a mandate to protect consumers, not to oversee energy suppliers. From a risk management perspective, UK energy suppliers were largely left to their own devices
Then, there’s the structure of the retail energy supply market. Ofgem encouraged new entrants into the market to break the stranglehold of the so-called big six energy firms, and made it easy for retail customers to switch between suppliers, meaning competition is intense.
That means prices are low, which is great for customers. But it also left suppliers operating with razor thin margins. That may have contributed to some being unable to hedge as much as they would have liked because they simply couldn’t afford it – or because they wanted to keep their market share and gambled on the market retracing.
When these firms collapsed, the so-called big six energy suppliers scooped up many of their customers, who may now see higher tariffs. So at the end of the day, the market is heading back more or less to where it started – with higher prices and a concentration of suppliers.
It’s not clear how or when this crisis will end and more pain is tipped to be on the way. But when the situation does calm, all those involved need to have a serious think about how risk management is applied in this sector.
コンテンツを印刷またはコピーできるのは、有料の購読契約を結んでいるユーザー、または法人購読契約の一員であるユーザーのみです。
これらのオプションやその他の購読特典を利用するには、info@risk.net にお問い合わせいただくか、こちらの購読オプションをご覧ください: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
現在、このコンテンツを印刷することはできません。詳しくはinfo@risk.netまでお問い合わせください。
現在、このコンテンツをコピーすることはできません。詳しくはinfo@risk.netまでお問い合わせください。
Copyright インフォプロ・デジタル・リミテッド.無断複写・転載を禁じます。
当社の利用規約、https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/(ポイント2.4)に記載されているように、印刷は1部のみです。
追加の権利を購入したい場合は、info@risk.netまで電子メールでご連絡ください。
Copyright インフォプロ・デジタル・リミテッド.無断複写・転載を禁じます。
このコンテンツは、当社の記事ツールを使用して共有することができます。当社の利用規約、https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/(第2.4項)に概説されているように、認定ユーザーは、個人的な使用のために資料のコピーを1部のみ作成することができます。また、2.5項の制限にも従わなければなりません。
追加権利の購入をご希望の場合は、info@risk.netまで電子メールでご連絡ください。
詳細はこちら 我々の見解
Can AI be the great equaliser in e-FX?
FX market-makers see real benefits for agentic AI in code generation and data analysis
モデル・リスク・マネージャーの孤独
取締役会は、それらをイノベーションの足かせと見なすかもしれません。リスク管理部門は、効率性を重視していることを示す必要があります
複雑なボラティリティ曲面へのスムーズフィット
Quantは、オプティマイザーを用いたインプライド・ボラティリティの新たな捕捉手法を示しています。
マレックスの急成長を支える「中毒性のある」働き方
スタッフの皆様には、何が効果的で何がそうでないかを把握するため、数多くの小さな実験を積極的に行っていただくようお勧めしております。
トランプ氏の最新の「真実」が伝統的金融業界を不安にさせる理由
ウォール街はトランプ氏のクリプト映画の中の悪役となりつつあります
ファニーメイとフレディマックによる住宅ローン買い入れが金利上昇を招く可能性は低い
9兆ドル規模の市場において2,000億ドルのMBSを追加しても、従来のヘッジ戦略を復活させることはできません。
2025年の影響度合い:デリバティブ価格設定が主導的役割を担い、クオンツはAIの群れに追随しない
金利とボラティリティのモデリング、ならびに取引執行は、クオンツの優先事項の最上位に位置しております。
株式には、投資家が見落としている可能性のある「賭け要素」が存在する
投機的取引は、対象となる株式によって異なる形で、暗号資産と株式市場との間に連動関係を生み出します。