Soybean futures in Chicago approached $418 per ton this week, recovering from lows of $378 reached in January, though the market closed Friday at $416.31 per ton after a $1.56 decline. The May soybean contract at the local exchange closed at $317, a 0.6% decrease from the previous session.
The price fluctuations reflect broader market dynamics, as investors weigh factors including geopolitical developments and weather patterns. According to Jeremías Battistoni, an analyst at AZ Group, corrections often follow strong reactions in Chicago. “Soybeans in Chicago hit lows of $378 per ton in January and are now at $417 per ton. That’s a 10% increase. Meanwhile, soybeans in Argentina, the May position, went from peaks of $321 in January to the current $317, a 2% decrease,” he noted.
Battistoni explained that Argentina is not fully capturing the international gains due to seasonal factors and the pressure of regional supply. “Why is it down here and up over there? Because we are in South America and are seeing a different picture, which has to do with the entry of the Brazilian harvest and then the overlap with our harvest. Whereas they have already harvested and are running out of merchandise; these are different moments,” he said.
Lorena D’Angelo, also an analyst at AZ Group, concurred with this assessment. “The behavior in the international market has not been replicated in the national market, because those increases in Chicago responded more to factors that directly impact the oilseed in the United States and not in South America, where the harvest is advancing and the pressure of the Brazilian supply is felt in the market, mainly lowering the premiums of Brazilian and Argentine values.” The downward pressure is largely attributed to Brazil, where despite some weather issues in Mato Grosso, the anticipated volume entering the market is substantial and acts as a ceiling for regional prices. The U.S. Department of Agriculture recently increased its estimate of the Brazilian harvest to 180 million tons, up from 178 million tons.
Domestically, the available price hovered around $465,000 pesos, stable in local currency but down in dollar terms due to the exchange rate slide. Adding to external pressures is the weather outlook. “The crop in Argentina will be defined in the coming days by what happens with the rains. There is much expectation that they can improve the crops. Although soybean fields are showing deterioration due to the lack of previous rainfall, there are forecasts for next week that could improve them generally,” D’Angelo added.
This climate uncertainty, combined with prices that are not fully convincing, is generating a standstill in the commercialization of the new harvest (2025/26), according to experts.
In fact, the new 2025/26 campaign shows a significant delay in price setting. According to Battistoni, of an estimated production of 48.9 million tons, only 2.73 million tons have a defined value, representing only 5.6% of the total. Of that volume, 0.83 million tons correspond to exports with a price, and 1.9 million to purchases by the industry already fixed. The rest of the deals remain mostly “to be fixed,” reflecting caution on the part of producers in the current market context.
In contrast, the old 2024/25 campaign presents a significantly more advanced level of price fixing. With a production of 50.9 million tons, about 40.7 million tons already have a price, equivalent to 80% of the total. This volume consists of 11.3 million tons for export and 29.4 million acquired by the industry with a confirmed price, showing a practically consolidated commercial process.
According to Granar, soybeans in Chicago closed the week with a positive balance despite Friday’s decline, gaining 1.59% versus the previous Friday.
The firm said: “After rising for the three previous days, soybeans closed lower on the Chicago board, but the weekly balance was positive for its prices for the second consecutive week. Today’s losses were mainly related to profit-taking by investors, which affected the grain and oil. Other factors influencing the downside were the advance of the record harvest in Brazil, which is increasing the volume of new grain entering the commercial circuit; the year-on-year lag in U.S. Exports, which appear to depend almost exclusively on what Chinese demand does in light of expectations generated by Trump; and the rains that occurred – and others that would occur in the coming days – on agricultural areas of Argentina, which could improve crop conditions.” It is worth remembering that the U.S. President suggested that China would increase purchases from 12 to 20 million tons.
