How to build a daily cocoa market research routine
4 min read · Free public research
A practical routine for checking prices, supply reports, positioning and scheduled events without confusing fresh news with fresh evidence.
A daily cocoa research routine should make your reasoning easier to review. It does not need a new market prediction every morning. Start with a small set of repeatable questions, record the evidence and finish with a clear account of what remains unknown.
Start with a dated price observation
Research workflowVISUAL EXPLAINER · ILLUSTRATION
From market evidence to a reviewable plan
0101 · Observe
Check the source
Report date, units, coverage and revision.
0202 · InterpretTest a hypothesis
Compare supply, demand, positioning and price.
0303 · PlanDefine conditions
Invalidation, event risk and exposure limits.
0404 · ReviewKeep the original note
Compare later evidence with what you knew.
A research process, not an automated signal or a guarantee of performance.
Record the benchmark, contract month, currency, observation time and price type. A broker quote, exchange settlement and continuous chart can describe different things. Keep the same reference when calculating a change from the previous observation.
The ICCO daily price is itself a composite based on quotations across active London and New York futures months. It should not be labelled as the live price of one specific futures contract. Check the original source methodology before comparing a composite with your trading screen.
Separate the calendar from the news feed
Before reading commentary, note the releases you expect and their scheduled dates. Then record whether each release actually arrived. “Expected today” and “published today” are different states.
For every update, distinguish publication time from the period measured. A new article can repeat an old observation. A newly published statistical release may describe conditions from an earlier snapshot. Both can be useful, provided the timing is explicit.
Use a four-question evidence note
What changed? Write the numerical revision or genuinely new observation.
Compared with what? Identify the previous report, comparable week, same quarter last year or other relevant baseline.
What might explain it? Separate the publisher's explanation from your own hypothesis.
What would challenge that explanation? Record a specific observation that could weaken your interpretation.
These four questions help prevent a forceful headline from becoming a conclusion before you have checked its supporting data.
Keep different data types distinct
Use arrivals to investigate reported port flows, inventories to investigate a defined stock series, grindings to investigate processing, and COT reports to investigate reported positioning. They are complementary evidence, not interchangeable measures of “demand” or “supply”.
For example, if arrivals rise while an inventory series falls, do not assume one report is wrong. First check geographical coverage and measurement dates. You may be looking at different parts of the supply chain or different periods.
Write a conditional summary
Finish with a short note in three parts: what the evidence supports, what it does not establish, and what you will watch next. Avoid replacing missing information with a precise forecast.
A useful example is: “This report changes my view of weekly port flow, but it does not yet establish the full-season crop. I will compare the next cumulative report on the same basis.” This is an example of research wording, not a description of current conditions.
Review the process, not just the outcome
At the end of the week, revisit your notes. Was the source reliable? Did you compare like-for-like periods? Did you recognise revisions? Did the later evidence support the explanation you recorded at the time?
A favourable price move does not prove that every part of the original explanation was correct. Preserve the note so the review is based on what you knew then.
The free preview provides selected observations and headlines. Full database membership adds the connected research workspace, historical comparisons and private trading journal for organising this process:
Source · cocoamarkethub.com ↗
This checklist is an original research workflow, not a signal service or a promise of trading performance. Source methodology was checked on 6 November 2026.
Additional reading context
Educational explanation added to help interpret this article. It is not a new market update or a revision to the original dated figures.
Reading the session in context
A closing price records the outcome of trading, while the news and physical reports help frame possible explanations. They are different kinds of evidence. Check the contract, session and publication times before linking them: a story published after the close can inform tomorrow’s discussion without explaining today’s completed move.
Look for agreement and disagreement between price and the underlying observations. Falling prices alongside a compatible warehouse build can fit a softer near-term availability picture. A rising price despite that build deserves further investigation; it does not, by itself, disprove the stock report or establish a supply squeeze. The size, persistence and timing of the changes matter more than the direction of one daily observation.
What would confirm the interpretation
Return to the next inventory release, comparable arrivals reports and demand evidence. Repeated observations can strengthen a working interpretation; a reversal or a correction can weaken it. Keep this recap as the dated baseline and use subsequent editions to track what changed. Do not read a rule-based market conclusion as a price target or as evidence that every participant is trading the same explanation.
Published research and personal commentary, not personalised investment advice. Trade ideas can fail; evaluate the assumptions and dated follow-ups. The original published post is preserved.