Skip to content
GT
๐ŸŒฟ Voluntary Carbon Markets 101
Pricing, Trading & Market DynamicsLesson 2 of 45 min readTSVCM Phase II Report, Section 5

Spot, Forward & Futures Markets

Spot, Forward & Futures Markets

Carbon credits do not move through a single, centralised exchange. The voluntary carbon market (VCM) operates through a patchwork of over-the-counter (OTC) bilateral deals, broker intermediaries, exchange-listed contracts, and increasingly standardised forward and futures instruments. Understanding the structure of this trading ecosystem is essential for anyone seeking to buy, sell, or finance carbon credits efficiently.

Over-the-Counter Trading: The Dominant Mode

The majority of VCM transactions by volume still occur over-the-counter, meaning they are negotiated directly between a buyer and a seller (or through a broker) rather than on a formal exchange. OTC deals allow bespoke credit specifications: the buyer and seller agree on a specific project, vintage, registry, quantity, price, and delivery timeline without conforming to a standardised contract.

OTC markets favour buyers who know exactly what they want and have the due diligence capability to assess individual projects. They are the natural home for large corporations with dedicated sustainability teams, institutional investors seeking specific portfolio characteristics, and developers selling forward production. The trade-off is limited price transparency: without a central clearing house, prices are private and difficult for smaller buyers to benchmark.

Brokers such as South Pole, 3Degrees, EcoAct, and Respira International facilitate OTC deals by connecting buyers and sellers, providing market intelligence, and sometimes warehousing credits on their balance sheets. Broker fees typically range from 5% to 15% of transaction value for smaller deals, narrowing for institutional volumes.

Exchange-Listed Spot Markets

Exchange trading emerged as market participants sought greater price transparency and liquidity. The most important exchange-listed VCM instruments are operated by CBL (a division of Xpansiv, the largest spot marketplace for carbon credits) and the Intercontinental Exchange (ICE).

CBL / Xpansiv operates a digital spot registry where credits listed on underlying registries (Verra, Gold Standard, ACR, CAR) can be traded electronically. Xpansiv's platform hosts the Global Emissions Offset (GEO) contract, which aggregates eligible credits into a standardised benchmark, as well as the N-GEO (nature-based credits) and C-GEO (CORSIA-eligible credits for aviation) contracts. CBL provided the closest thing the VCM had to a real-time price benchmark for fungible-category credits from 2021 onwards.

ICE lists futures contracts on nature-based global emission offsets (N-GEO futures) and CORSIA-eligible offsets (C-GEO futures), as well as the broader GEO benchmark. ICE contracts are financially settled, meaning delivery obligations are met in cash at expiry rather than through physical credit transfer, which makes them accessible to financial market participants without direct registry access.

OTC vs Exchange: The Tailored Suit vs Ready-to-Wear Analogy

OTC trading is like commissioning a bespoke suit: you specify every detail to your precise requirements, but it takes time, requires expertise, and costs more per unit. Exchange trading is like buying off-the-rack: the product conforms to a standard specification, you get instant price information, and execution is fast and cheap, but you cannot request customisation. Sophisticated buyers use both channels, sourcing premium bespoke projects OTC while using exchange contracts for price hedging or when speed matters.

Forward Contracts

A forward contract is an agreement to deliver a specified quantity of credits at a specified price at a future date, typically three months to five years forward. Forward contracts are the primary financing tool used by project developers, who sell future production to secure upfront capital needed for project development and monitoring costs.

From the buyer's perspective, forward contracts offer price certainty and the ability to lock in credits from specific projects at known volumes, useful for multi-year climate commitment planning. From the developer's perspective, they provide revenue certainty that enables financing from commercial lenders. The structural risk in a forward is counterparty risk: if the project underperforms or the developer fails, the buyer may not receive the contracted credits. Buyers mitigate this risk through performance bonds, escrow arrangements, and credible developer due diligence.

Forward contracts are typically negotiated OTC and documented under the International Emissions Trading Association (IETA) Emissions Reduction Purchase Agreement (ERPA) templates, which provide standardised legal terms for voluntary credit transactions and reduce transaction costs for repeat buyers.

Standardised Futures and Their Role

Exchange-listed futures contracts, unlike OTC forwards, are standardised, centrally cleared, and subject to daily mark-to-market settlement through a central counterparty (CCP). Clearing eliminates bilateral counterparty risk: the exchange's clearinghouse stands between buyer and seller, guaranteeing performance even if one party defaults.

For VCM futures, this means that a corporate buyer hedging future credit purchases or a financial institution taking a view on carbon prices can do so without assessing the creditworthiness of a specific seller. The trade-off is standardisation: futures contracts specify eligible credit categories but cannot specify individual projects, which means buyers seeking co-benefit certification or particular geography must still use OTC channels for those attributes.

InstrumentStandardisationPrice TransparencyCounterparty RiskProject Specificity
OTC bilateralNone (bespoke)Low (private)High (bilateral)Full
OTC via brokerLowLow-mediumMediumHigh
Exchange spot (CBL/Xpansiv)Medium (category-level)HighLowCategory only
Exchange futures (ICE)HighHighVery low (cleared)Category only
Forward (ERPA)Medium (IETA template)LowHigh (bilateral)Full

Settlement and Delivery

Physical settlement in the VCM means the transfer of specific serial-numbered credit units from the seller's registry account to the buyer's registry account, followed by retirement when the buyer claims the associated emission reduction. Exchange spot markets facilitate physical settlement by connecting trade execution to registry systems, while futures markets typically use financial settlement at expiry.

Settlement timelines vary. OTC spot trades typically settle within five business days (T+5). Exchange-listed spot trades on CBL/Xpansiv settle more rapidly, often same-day to T+2. OTC forward contracts settle on the agreed future delivery date, which can be years ahead, with milestone payments or progress reporting required in the interim under many ERPAs.

The Integrity Tension in Standardisation

Standardised exchange contracts improve price discovery and liquidity, but they require treating credits from very different projects as fungible. The GEO contract, for example, accepts eligible credits from multiple registries and project types into a single pool. This creates a tension: market efficiency benefits from standardisation, but credit quality varies significantly within any eligible pool. Buyers who rely solely on exchange-listed instruments without project-level due diligence may unknowingly hold lower-quality credits that happen to meet the minimum eligibility criteria.

Key Takeaways

  • 1Most VCM volume is still traded over-the-counter (OTC), where buyers and sellers negotiate bespoke deals through brokers, offering project specificity but limited price transparency
  • 2CBL/Xpansiv operates the leading spot exchange for standardised credit categories (GEO, N-GEO, C-GEO), while ICE lists centrally cleared futures contracts
  • 3Forward contracts (ERPAs) are the primary financing tool for project developers, providing revenue certainty in exchange for delivery risk borne by buyers
  • 4Exchange futures eliminate counterparty risk through central clearing but cannot provide project-level specificity, creating a persistent role for OTC markets alongside exchanges

Knowledge Check

1.A corporate sustainability team wants to purchase REDD+ credits from a specific project in the Amazon, including CCB certification and a 2022 vintage. Which market channel is most appropriate for this purchase?

2.What is the primary purpose of a central counterparty (CCP) clearinghouse in exchange-traded carbon futures?

3.An Emissions Reduction Purchase Agreement (ERPA) is signed between a buyer and a project developer for delivery of 50,000 credits in three years at $18 per tonne. Which of the following risks is most significant for the buyer under this arrangement?