Daily Cocoa Market Report (13 April 2026): Cocoa Rebound Continues
Cocoa futures extended their recovery into the latest session, with both London and New York markets posting consistent gains across the front and mid-curve. The move has been orderly rather than impulsive, with price action supported by strong volume, particularly in New York while remaining capped below key technical resistance levels. The structure suggests a short-term rebound driven by positioning and flow dynamics, rather than a fundamental shift in the broader bearish trend.
Recent developments on the supply side remain broadly constructive and continue to lean bearish for prices in the medium term. Favorable weather conditions across Ivory Coast are supporting the development of the mid-crop, with adequate rainfall and soil moisture improving pod growth and yield expectations. Field conditions are reported to be stable, reinforcing expectations for a more consistent mid-crop supply compared to the disruptions seen earlier in the season.
Cocoa Intel
Cocoa Intel
Port arrivals data further supports this narrative. Ivory Coast cocoa arrivals are up +0.3% year-on-year as of April 12, indicating a gradual normalization in flows. While the increase is marginal, it confirms that supply is stabilizing and aligns with expectations of improved availability as the mid-crop progresses through the coming months.
Cocoa Intel
On the demand side, attention is shifting to the upcoming Q1 grind data (ECA, CAA, NCA) due on Thursday. Current expectations point to a contraction across all regions. CRA forecasts ECA -2.9%, CAA -11.5%, and NCA -13.5%, while Expana estimates are more conservative for Europe (ECA between -3% and -7%) but still weak overall, with NCA between -8% and -12% and CAA around -10%. This confirms ongoing demand softness, particularly in North America and Asia, and introduces a counterbalance to the improving supply outlook.
Futures Performance
NY Cocoa Futures (CC)
| Contract | 10-Apr | 13-Apr | Change | % Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| May-26 | 3,242 | 3,284 | +42 | +1.30% |
| Jul-26 | 3,326 | 3,372 | +46 | +1.38% |
| Sep-26 | 3,391 | 3,437 | +46 | +1.36% |
| Dec-26 | 3,478 | 3,528 | +50 | +1.44% |
| Mar-27 | 3,525 | 3,570 | +45 | +1.28% |
In New York (CC), the move is both stronger in absolute terms and more evenly distributed across the curve. Percentage gains range from +1.28% to +1.44%, with a slight bias toward Dec-26. This indicates broader-based buying interest across maturities, consistent with systematic or fund-driven participation rather than localized hedging flows. The lack of a pronounced front-end spike suggests that, similar to London, the move is not being driven by immediate physical tightness but by a generalized repricing of forward risk.
London Cocoa (C)
| Contract | 10-Apr | 13-Apr | Change | % Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| May-26 | 2,416 | 2,443 | +27 | +1.12% |
| Jul-26 | 2,432 | 2,473 | +41 | +1.69% |
| Sep-26 | 2,451 | 2,494 | +43 | +1.75% |
| Dec-26 | 2,491 | 2,528 | +37 | +1.49% |
| Mar-27 | 2,524 | 2,561 | +37 | +1.47% |
In London (C), gains are concentrated in the mid-curve, with Jul-26 and Sep-26 posting the strongest percentage increases (+1.69% and +1.75%). This pattern typically indicates repositioning activity rather than purely front-end short covering, suggesting improved sentiment extending beyond immediate delivery concerns. The relatively tighter range of gains further out (Dec-26 and Mar-27) implies that the long-term structure remains stable, with no aggressive steepening or backwardation pressure.
On a relative basis, CC outperforms C in absolute price changes, but London marginally leads in percentage terms in the mid-curve. This divergence implies some compression in relative volatility but continued strength in dollar-denominated cocoa pricing. Overall, the parallel nature of the curve shifts across both markets confirms a macro-driven bullish adjustment, with mid-curve leadership and no significant disruption to the existing term structure.
EFP, EFS and Spread Activity
The Exchange for Physical (EFP) activity shows a clear divergence between London and New York. In London cocoa (C), EFP volumes remain minimal across the curve, with only small prints concentrated in Jul-26 and Dec-26. This indicates limited physical-to-futures conversion and suggests that the rally is not being driven by strong merchant hedging or origin-related flows. By contrast, New York (CC) records materially higher EFP volumes, particularly in May-26 and Jul-26, pointing to more active participation from physical market players. This supports the view that ICE US is absorbing more of the commercial flow, reinforcing its relative outperformance.
Exchange for Swaps (EFS) activity is largely negligible in both markets, with only isolated prints in London (notably in deferred contracts such as Mar-27). The absence of meaningful EFS flow implies that structured or OTC-linked hedging activity is not a key driver of the current move. In practical terms, the rally appears to be occurring in relatively “clean” futures space, without heavy involvement from swap counterparties or index-linked adjustments.
Spread activity is the most dominant component of volume, especially in New York. CC shows very high spread volumes across the front and mid-curve (May-26, Jul-26, Sep-26), indicating active calendar trading and roll-related positioning. This is consistent with fund or systematic strategies adjusting exposure along the curve rather than outright directional positioning alone. London also shows elevated spread volumes, but at a significantly lower scale, reinforcing the idea that liquidity and positioning are more concentrated in the New York market.
The flow composition suggests that the upward price move is being driven primarily by spread trading and speculative/fund activity, with limited physical confirmation in London and stronger commercial engagement in New York via EFPs. The lack of EFS involvement further supports the interpretation that this is not a structurally hedged move, but rather a futures-led repricing with active curve participation
US–UK May Spread
$3,284 − (2443 x 1.351$/£) =$-14ton (down from $-10)
Volume and Open Interest
New York Cocoa (CC)
| Date | Total Volume | Open Interest |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 7, 2026 | 67,970 | 204,934 |
| Apr 8, 2026 | 67,319 | 202,332 |
| Apr 9, 2026 | 57,244 | 199,726 |
| Apr 10, 2026 | 58,879 | 195,819 |
| Apr 13, 2026 | 78,714 | N/A |
The recent session shows a material divergence between volume expansion and open interest behavior, particularly in New York cocoa (CC). CC total volume surged to 78,714, marking the highest print in the observed period and a clear acceleration versus the prior cluster (57–67k range). However, this spike in activity is not accompanied by a corresponding rise in open interest—in fact, OI data is absent for the latest day, but the preceding trend shows a decline from the peak of ~204k (early April) down to ~195.8k by Apr 10. This combination—rising volume with falling OI into the prior session—typically indicates liquidation or position turnover rather than fresh length entering the market. The latest surge therefore likely reflects short covering and/or aggressive rolling activity, consistent with the elevated spread volumes observed.
London Cocoa (C)
| Date | Total Volume | Open Interest |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 7, 2026 | 45,596 | 217,709 |
| Apr 8, 2026 | 31,513 | 218,854 |
| Apr 9, 2026 | 29,197 | 220,419 |
| Apr 10, 2026 | 25,020 | 220,525 |
| Apr 13, 2026 | 36,299 | N/A |
In contrast, London cocoa (C) presents a more stable structure. Volume increased to 36,299 on Apr 13, a notable rebound from the subdued levels seen on Apr 9–10 (25–29k range), but still well below the peaks observed earlier (e.g., 45k on Apr 7). Open interest in London has been steadily building over the entire period, rising from ~204k in late March to above 220k by Apr 10. This indicates a structural accumulation of positions, suggesting that London is seeing more persistent positioning rather than the shorter-term turnover dynamics evident in New York.
From a flow perspective, the contrast is clear. CC is exhibiting high-liquidity, high-turnover characteristics, with volume spikes likely driven by funds and spread traders adjusting exposure. Meanwhile, C is showing a gradual build in open interest with moderate volume, more consistent with strategic positioning or commercial hedging. The absence of a sharp OI increase in CC despite strong price gains reinforces the interpretation that the rally is not purely driven by new longs, but rather by position rebalancing and short-covering pressure.
Exchange Trading Volume
| MARKET | 10-Apr-2026 | 13-Apr-2026 | CHANGE |
|---|---|---|---|
| US (NY Cocoa) | 2,540,983 | 2,610,453 | +69,470 |
| UK (London Cocoa) | 616,719 | 648,750 | +32,031 |
These figures refer only to ICE Deliverable Stocks (Exchange-Visible)
Readers can explore detailed cocoa market datasets, futures statistics, and historical indicators in the CocoaIntel Data Hub:
Cocoa IntelWhat to expect tomorrow
The short-term bias remains slightly bullish following the recent recovery, but the move is approaching a key resistance zone. Price is likely to test the 3,380–3,420 area, where prior breakdown levels and moving averages converge. A sustained break above this zone would be required to extend the move toward 3,450, but current conditions do not yet confirm strong breakout momentum.
The base case for the next session is consolidation within the 3,300–3,400 range. The market has rebounded sharply from recent lows, and intraday momentum is beginning to stabilize, suggesting a pause rather than immediate continuation. This aligns with the broader technical structure, where higher timeframes remain bearish and limit upside follow-through.
On the downside, holding above 3,300 is critical. A break below this level would indicate that the recovery is losing strength and could trigger a pullback toward 3,250–3,200. Overall, the market is in a short-term recovery phase within a broader downtrend, implying a controlled move higher with resistance likely to cap gains unless supported by stronger buying interest.
If you notice any discrepancies in these figures or have extra information, please email [email protected] or leave a comment – corrections and additional insights are always welcome.
