Candy Asset Exchange Rates
by Johnny DebacleMarket values of popular candies, serving size is “fun size” unless noted otherwise, based on actual market trading.* Does not include any candy broker fees or other transaction costs.
SKITTLES : 2.9 MILKY WAYS
SNICKERS : 15 units of CANDY CORN
CHARLESTON CHEW : 0.46 SNICKERS
ROLO’s : 0.7 SKITTLES
APPLE : 1/30 of a SNICKERS
M&M’s : 1.3 CHARLESTON CHEW’s
M&M’s : 1.01 PEANUT M&M’s
REESES PIECES : 0.6 SKITTLES
5 GUMMY BEARS : 7 units of CANDY CORN
KIT-KAT : 11 units of CANDY CORN
NESTLE CRUNCH : 2 SNICKERS
FUN-DIP : 3g of CRACK
HERSHEY’S MILK CHOCOLATE BAR : 20 APPLES
THREE MUSKETEERS : 0.20 SOURPATCH KIDS
SWEDISH FISH : 0.78 SOURPATCH KIDS
POP ROCKS : 0.30 FUN-DIP’s
SMARTIES : 4 units of CANDY CORN
TOBLERONE : 2 APPLES
REESES PEANUT BUTTER CUPS : 95 MOUNDS
Oh HENRY : 4.5 units of CANDY CORN(3-6 bid-ask spread)
*We will update this based on current market data. Updated 11/2 1:25PM
Related Reseach:
shouldn’t you standardize the conversion rates to make this chart more pragmatic?
As we get more complete data, specifically something that bridges us to a SNICKER : SKITTLES, standardization will become possible.
But keep in mind, standardization would dillute the value of our propietary candy trading database. How can we most effectively steal candy from babies if there is full transparency on trading levels? This would cause a reduction in bid-ask spreads and have a negative impact on the profability of our trading desk.
TOBLERONE : 5 APPLES
APPLE : 1/50 of a SNICKERS
Arb the Toblerone to Snickers rate through Apple.
Go long the Peanut M&M’s and look for a significant revaluation over the near horizon. Don’t standardize because then you’d lose your triangular arbitrage opportunities.
Babies are among the most susceptible to arb opportunities precisely because they often have little to no education. In fact, Long or Short has done some proprietary work and found that the average baby has never attended any school in any form. They don’t even read at a Pre-K level.
It’s a modern tragedy that there are US citizens with so little education. Something should be done about it. But for now, we can profit.
Rumors are flowing in that the CMU (Candy Monetary Union) is on the verge of adopting candy corn as its standardized measure of candy value. This has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of candy corn; candy corn just happens to be the most convenient because it melts neither in your hand nor in your mouth; in short it doesn’t melt. As the candy market switches from a bilateral exchange market to a monetized market, the transactions demand for candy corn stands to go through the roof. Trade gummies for candy corn. A perfect hedge for this trade (given that the CMU may not in fact monetize) would be to simultaneously trade candy corn for gummies.
I smell Walrasian general equilibrium coming on
“This is great”- Yes you are correct, General Walrasian is a strong advocate for a monetized candy exchange
Go long the carry trade position of shorting candy corn against a diverse basket of kit kat and gummy bears. These assets are at higher risk (of melting), but the return on them is much greater. Of course, if there is a period of high cavitivity we would recomend unwinding this trade as quickly as possible and go long apple.
We are also initiating a short snickers long peanut M&M’s position at 1.07. It is rare to see snickers trading at this much of a premium to M&Ms. Our target price is 1.00, our stop is 1.10. The downside risk to this trade is that we may have entered a regime shift of high caramel valuation. If you see notable appreciation of rolos against skittles you may want to consider unwinding this trade.
Hella Sober-
If peanut M&M’s were to converge to a 1:1 basis with Snickers, this would probably have a negative effect on the Snickers : Charleston Chew rate. At these levels a better play is to be on convergence of M&M rates to the historical 1 M&M : 1.2 Peanut M&M rate. The price has already changed from 1 : 0.4 yesterday to 1 : 0.8.
I am losing my shirt on my long Peanut M&M’s! They have devalued vs the plain M&M’s! I might actually add to my position because I can’t possibly imagine plain trading 1:1 with peanut. The Peanut has added value because they put a frickin peanut in there! NO WAY would anyone ever pay more than one peanut M&M for a plain M&M. In any case I knew I should have played this one with tighter stops…
Have you considered the rise in peanut allergies which has been experienced globally? It’s a secular trend which is just killing peanut M&M values.
Mr Juggles, I had indeed considered the peanut allergy phenomenon. While this may push the value of a peanut lower, or at least increase volatility of said peanut, a plain M&M is still enhanced by inclusion of a peanut.
The market agrees with you less and less.
Can we get a price update?
I’m ultra-long Oh Henrys and I may want to make a market.
What are you offering it at? Seems like it would be an illiquid market.
3-6 units of Candy Corn? Send us your run.
Well that’s it. I’ve gone and Amaranth’d my way to steep losses on the peanut M&M. How does a plain M&M trade at a premium to a peanut M&M? I don’t quite understand. My prime broker just made a margin call that I can’t meet. Looks like I’ll have to hand in my nifty mesh-backed jacket and take a job in compliance at a middle market brokerage.
With your inability to adequately establish internal controls for yourself, why would a middle market brokerage hire you to maintain their internal controls in this regulatory environment?
My short “The Corner” position has been EXTREMELY profitable and I have no intention of closing it out. I’m riding this one to zero.
Haha to be honest, when I first posted, I had done the conversion wrong in my head. Had I thought of it right, .4 Peanut M&M’s to Plain is pretty much exactly what I think it should be and there really is no upside in a long position. Unfortunately I had already posted a bullish peanut M&M philosophy, so rather than change it I just decided it would be more funny to leave it as is. You can go ahead and take your profits on this one though, because like Mizuho would do, I’m suing the Exchange that allowed this order to go through.