Screen-print style poster of a delivery calendar over an LNG terminal

CASE STUDIES / SCHEDULING · DEC 2​025

How delivery months change an ADP’s profit.

The study ranks the permitted delivery schedules for a four-cargo European DES sales contract.

+$0.84M

BEST OF 56 SCHEDULES · WORST LOSES ABOUT $3.2M

View as slides (PDF) →

Apply the delivery rules.

01 · CONTRACT RULES

Four cargoes must deliver between April and December 2​026. One is fixed in May. Selecting three other months from the eight remaining months gives 56 schedules.

ADP = annual delivery programme. This comparison uses forward prices; price simulations are outside its scope.

THE CONTRACT ON THE TABLE

DES sales · Europe (Gate)4 X 3.5M MMBTU · 125% HH + $5
Spot purchases · DES100% TTF - $0.20 · supply assumed available
May cargoFixed delivery month · negative margin
HorizonAPR TO DEC 2​026 · ONE CARGO PER MONTH
Feasible schedulesC(8,3) = 56

Price each schedule.

02 · PRICE SPREAD

The sale is HH-linked and the replacement supply is TTF-linked. Their monthly spread determines the margin for each delivery.

-0.4-0.20+0.2+0.4APRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDEC+0.10+0.11+0.32-0.30 · LOCKED INOPTIMAL MATCHES: JUL · AUG · DECMONTHLY SPREAD: DES SHORT (125% HH + $5) MINUS COVER (100% TTF - $0.20) · $/MMBTU
Monthly selling price minus supply cost, in $/MMBtu.

Compare the ranked alternatives.

03 · SCHEDULE RANKING

May, July, August and December produce the highest value. The best programme earns about $0.06/MMBtu. By rank ten, the programme is loss-making.

00.020.040.060.060#1 · MAY JUL AUG DEC0.029#2 · MAY AUG SEP DEC0.025#3 · MAY JUL SEP DEC0.019#4 · MAY AUG OCT DEC0.018#5 · MAY AUG NOV DEC0.015#6 · MAY JUL OCT DEC0.014#7 · MAY JUL NOV DEC0.006#80.002#9-0.016#10DECEMBER SITS IN EVERY TOP-10 SCHEDULEFORWARD-CURVE PROFIT PER SCHEDULE · $/MMBTU · RANK 10 IS LOSS-MAKING
The 10 best schedules out of 56 permitted combinations. Results use the study’s forward prices.

Price changes to the contract rules.

04 · CONTRACT RULES

Removing the May requirement raises the best result from $0.84M to $1.75M. Excluding December makes every remaining schedule loss-making. The study also tests narrower windows and a different sourcing index.

00.10.20.06BASE · MAY LOCKED0.125NO MAY LOCK-0.03MAY LOCKED + DEC EXCLUDED0.08INTRA-MONTH WINDOWS0.23NBP-SOURCED COVERBEST FEASIBLE SCHEDULE PER REGIME · $/MMBTU · SAME CONTRACT, SAME FORWARDS
Removing the fixed May delivery raises the best result from $0.84M to $1.75M. Other tests change delivery timing or indexation.

05 · RESULT

The best schedule earns $0.84M; the worst loses about $3.2M under the study’s prices.

The ranking uses a single set of forward prices. Different market inputs can change the order of the schedules.

What this comparison shows.

06 · TAKEAWAYS

✓

Price each schedule

The sale is HH-linked and the replacement supply is TTF-linked. Their monthly spread determines the margin for each delivery.

✓

Price changes to the contract rules

Removing the May requirement raises the best result from $0.84M to $1.75M. Excluding December makes every remaining schedule loss-making. The study also tests narrower windows and a different sourcing index.

!

Scope of the result

The ranking uses a single set of forward prices. Different market inputs can change the order of the schedules.

How the study was calculated.

07 · CALCULATION

1

Set up the comparison

Four cargoes must deliver between April and December 2​026. One is fixed in May. Selecting three other months from the eight remaining months gives 56 schedules.

2

Calculate the alternatives

May, July, August and December produce the highest value. The best programme earns about $0.06/MMBtu. By rank ten, the programme is loss-making.

3

Review the result

The best schedule earns $0.84M; the worst loses about $3.2M under the study’s prices.

Modelled results depend on the contracts, prices and operating assumptions used.