Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
Why do some people refer to futures contracts as "cars"?
I always wondered why futures contracts are sometimes referred to as "cars". A little Googling and I found this. I thought some of you might wonder the same thing.
Interesting find, was curious myself. Since I had only seen it when referring to the ES I thought hm..1 contract at 1050 = $52,500 nominal value..a 'car'? Way off!
Cars ...
if memory service me right...
it goes back to "old times" and commodities markets when and where almost all commodities were shipped by railway wagons cars. a lot of commodities still shipped/measured by railway cars.
so, that's why 1 car = 1 contract
A loose quantity term sometimes used to describe the amount of a commodity underlying one commodity contract; e.g., "a car of bellies." Derived from the fact that quantities of the product specified in a contract once corresponded closely to the capacity of a railroad car."
One contract used to represent the amount of physical material that could fit inside a railway car, that's why buying 1 contract = 1 car. The term stuck when the S&P futures came around, even though there is no physical material behind that contract.
