SPIMEX exec Anton Karpov: Russian fuel market gets through year in most challenging conditions
Anton Karpov
Photo: Press-office
The Russian fuel market has new challenges to contend with each year. Exchange trading in petroleum products, which already accounts for a third of the domestic market, reflects acute fuel market conditions immediately in the form of price rises, and regulators and the government immediately take note.
Oil refineries came up against mounting external pressure in 2025 in the form of drone attacks. More frequent unscheduled refinery maintenance and repairs reduced fuel supply on the exchange, where gasoline prices increased constantly, hitting all-time highs in late summer. To stem rapid price growth, the Saint Petersburg International Mercantile Exchange (SPIMEX) tightened petroleum product trading conditions for the first time in September.
SPIMEX Senior Vice President Anton Karpov told Interfax in an interview about how the fuel market fared in the past year, the challenges facing exchange trading, and short-term prospects.
Q.: The past year could be described as one of the most challenging for the fuel market in recent times. The key factor was the external interference in the work of refineries and subsequent unscheduled repairs. What other factors played a role in your opinion?
A.: The fuel market is seasonal - demand and consumption are high in late spring, summer, and early fall, and low in winter. Market participants try to stockpile fuel for peak consumption to balance demand and avoid making life difficult for themselves. There were no specific reasons for the situation within the Russian fuel market to deteriorate in 2025.
But external factors did have a major adverse impact. They became the hallmark of the problems that emerged in the market compared to previous years. Difficulties arose with the availability of commodities and with shipments. I would like to give credit to all my fuel market colleagues for getting through the year in the most challenging conditions.
The Energy Ministry responded promptly to the problems - the issue of banning petroleum product exports was raised and carried out when needed. Oil producers acted on the ministry's recommendations promptly throughout the year, supplying regions where petroleum product shortages were becoming more acute. Refineries found ways to restore capacity quickly after unscheduled maintenance.
Buyers empathized with sellers, agreeing to reschedule deliveries of goods that various refineries had difficulties with for the reasons given, and to mutually terminate obligations without penalty. Overall, both sellers and buyers fully understood that the situation was not straightforward and that in some cases they needed to accommodate each other.
Q.: In past years, the ban on petroleum product exports had a rapid effect, flooding the domestic market with fuel. This did not happen in 2025. Why do you think that was?
A.: There was a certain production base in 2023 and 2024, which was not subject to the same major interventions as the unscheduled shutdowns of 2025. The ban on petroleum product exports from the country in 2023 and 2024 incorporated the effect of redirecting flows from exports to the domestic market, and fuel production remained generally balanced. But the decision to ban exports in 2025 was made against the backdrop of dwindling production volumes, which could not be sourced elsewhere. So rapid oversupply on the domestic market did not occur.
But on the whole, the export ban remains one of the key decisions supporting the domestic market. This is now a way of controlling the balance, I'd say. There is a fuel damper - an economic tool that encourages companies to supply goods to the domestic market. When this economic incentive is insufficient, a regulatory one is added in the form of an embargo on petroleum product exports.
By the way, the ban on fuel exports for third parties, that is, non-producers, is the right signal. It could well become standard. It's unacceptable for goods purchased on the exchange to be exported, given the damper payments from the Russian budget.
Q.: Sales data for SPIMEX have shown a drop in volumes in recent months. What are the preliminary petroleum product trading figures for the year?
A.: Petroleum product sales amounted to 37 million tonnes in 2024. We expect similar volumes for 2025.
SPIMEX is one of the main fuel sales outlets, where a third of the country's petroleum products are sold. The exchange supplies most gasoline to independent participants, while a lot of industrial enterprises buy diesel fuel on the exchange.
Petroleum product trading participants interact with representatives of other industries, sharing their exchange sales know-how. It turns out that companies in the forestry sector, mineral fertilizer producers and coal miners use the services of commodity brokers. These connections become part of the business cycle.
Q.: It was planned that the full transition of SPIMEX to the Commodity Delivery Operator (CDO) would be completed in 2025, but this did not happen. What stage is the project's implementation at? And what other important instruments were developed on the exchange in 2025?
A.: The CDO is a key infrastructure change for the exchange in the outgoing year. It's true that we planned to finalize this work in 2025, but there are no analogues to this system - we have to learn directly during implementation. In the process of implementing the CDO, many rough edges were revealed; we listen to comments and suggestions from market participants, we are fixing shortcomings and working on improvements. No one has ever linked trading infrastructure with railway infrastructure before, the exchange turned out to be a pioneer here.
It's important that the market saw how the CDO makes the movement of the exchange-traded product as transparent as possible: when a buyer and seller conclude a product purchase-sale deal in the CDO personal account, they track its movement along the railway, receive all documentation electronically, and so on. Throughout the year, a significant number of new participants began using the institution of the commodity supply operator. We are currently in the final stage of implementing the CDO.
Among other important instruments being developed by the exchange is trading based on Transneft's bases, including linear production dispatcher stations (LPDS). This is in high demand by the market, and sales levels are growing year after year (for January-November, sales amounted to 848,700 tonnes, which is 52% higher than in the same period in 2024).
We are also expanding small-scale wholesale; in particular, connecting small-scale wholesale trade at independent oil depots to our system. Previously, this segment did not fall within the purview of regulators and the platform. Now, when private companies come to the exchange with offers, there is clear buyer interest in them. This direction can bring transparency to a previously closed segment. For 2025, the small-scale wholesale segment on exchange trades showed growth of approximately 35% compared to last year. And we aim to further increase the role of small-scale wholesale sales, as they are logistically simpler, more understandable, and more accessible to end consumers.
A separate task remains the development of the petroleum products derivatives market. Last year, a decision was made to include permission in a joint order of the Federal Antimonopoly Service and the Energy Ministry that if oil companies want to use derivatives market instruments, then 1% of the sales of deliverable futures will be counted towards the norm. But oil companies have not shown such initiative yet. Simply because derivatives market instruments are very different from spot instruments, there is the issue of variation margin, and much more. In today's risk management policy, it is difficult for oil companies to account for all this. Companies live by the principle of "production-sales-supply". They view an instrument involving risk practice cautiously.
We took a different path and introduced cash-settled instruments. This raised the need for integration with financial market participants, and questions arose regarding the old trading system of SPIMEX. Since early December, the exchange, in partnership with VK , has introduced a new system on the petroleum products derivatives market. Now we can have substantive discussions with major financial players. We will try to move towards an instrument such as a cash-settled gasoline futures.
Q.: Representatives of the fuel market also complain about the outdated trading system of SPIMEX. How do you respond to their complaints?
A.: The trading system currently operating on the exchange was created by a contractor in 2008 using technologies of that time exclusively for the petroleum products market; there were no other markets then. Gradually, trades in gas, timber, coal and other commodities appeared on the exchange. These are completely different markets, and the principles of contract execution differ fundamentally.
We realized long ago that the trading system at SPIMEX needed updating, and have been working on its development for the last several years. Now the moment for its operational implementation has arrived. As I already said, a pilot version of the new system was launched in early December on the derivatives market; at the end of 2026 we will begin gradual implementation in the spot segment of petroleum products.
Again, I must note that we face an important task - there are no similar developments; the system is unique, made exclusively for SPIMEX. Colleagues from VK approached the task with great enthusiasm; for them it is a challenge. We have held several meetings with fuel market participants and we're discussing integration points with oil companies, because they will have to do work internally on IT interfacing with us.
The new system does not imply fundamental changes to the parameters of exchange trading, but it will ensure faster terminal performance, expand their functionality, make it possible to offer modern digital solutions, and integrate almost all client services into the terminal. As for other markets, the system will account for their diversity; we plan to structure it on a modular principle like building blocks to perform specific tasks for different industries.
Q.: The main exchange innovation of the year in the fuel market was the sharp restriction in September of the price increase step for gasolines, and then for diesel fuel - from 0.05% to 0.01%. It is difficult to call this a market-based measure. It was announced as a short-term one, but its effect continued until December. Will such a strict limitation on the upward trading step now become common practice for the exchange?
A.: Circumstances required such a decision at that moment. When external factors continued to affect refineries, there was a shortage of product and prices on the exchange were constantly rising. An urgent cooling measure was needed under such conditions. Collectively, the Energy Ministry, the FAS, the Central Bank of Russia and SPIMEX, after consultations with oil companies and market participants, opted for a serious restriction of the upward price step for gasolines.
In September, this was a forced action, but it played a significant role; the rise in gasoline prices slowed down. Then the same thing happened in the diesel segment. The restriction on the upward trading step lasted for several months because regulators are being cautious. It's the same as with the ban on petroleum product exports. Rather than canceling and then suddenly reintroducing it if the situation worsens again, it is more logical to maintain it and thereby provide a signal to the market about the conditions of its operation in the near future.
Winter is a traditional period of reduced demand for petroleum products; prices have turned downwards, so the limit on the upper boundary of the exchange price step for gasolines and diesel fuels has returned to the level of 0.5% again. For aviation kerosene, the upward price step is maintained at plus 1%. The downward step for all types of fuel is minus 10%.
Changing the price step is in principle an ordinary measure for the exchange. It's just that this time such strict parameters as 0.01% were introduced for the first time. And yes - apparently, in critical situations it makes sense to use such a practice. After all, it is a rather technical measure, quickly implementable at the market infrastructure level. It can be promptly introduced by an exchange decision. Unlike a resolution banning petroleum product exports, which requires government approval and the publication of a decree.
Q.: Another pressing issue raised by fuel market participants in the second half of 2025 was so-called "air trading" on the exchange, when there is an exchange transaction, but the goods are not delivered, and the delivery is postponed several times. Does the exchange see any solutions to this problem?
A.: All trading participants must comply with exchange trading rules, which outline mutual responsibility for fulfilling exchange contracts. Both sellers and buyers are obligated to fulfill the relevant terms in the event of default, including paying penalties. The exchange monitors this issue daily. We conduct monitoring and see all violations.
Regarding sellers, oil companies find it more difficult to formulate these payments, because they lack collateral for the transactions. This has historically been a feature of the exchange market for petroleum products. Sometimes obligations accumulate, but they are ultimately paid. Therefore, there is no widespread problem with companies failing to pay penalties.
The worsening problem with unscheduled shutdowns this year has certainly contributed to an increase in cases where goods have been sold, but could not be delivered for objective reasons. However, we have not seen a sharp increase in complaints regarding these cases. Buyers are well aware of the underlying causes. Another issue is that the buyer itself is then stuck with money, usually received on credit, but the goods are still missing. However, the vast majority of exchange contracts end with delivery.
Q.: The issue of robotic manipulation of petroleum product trading on the exchange was raised again this year. This problem cannot simply be eradicated?
A.: SPIMEX is constantly improving its digital trading monitoring program, which allows for the rapid identification of violators using so-called robots. Identification of a violator becomes the basis for submitting the materials to the Oil Products Section Board for review and subsequent retaliatory measures, to which no one wants to be subject. Trading participants strive to comply with the trading rules and the Code of Ethics as much as possible. In recent years, everyone has been very careful about these issues, and the number of violations and violators has decreased.
It was decided just recently at a meeting of the Oil Products Section Board to prohibit the use of any software designed to automate user interaction with exchange-provided software, including order submission. Violations of the prohibition are considered misconduct that is specified in the relevant exchange documents.
Another issue is that technology is constantly evolving, so the exchange must constantly improve. We are currently analyzing various methods to detect instances of such practices. It is safe to say that these methods will take the solution to a new level. For example, we could install official software from SPIMEX on a trading participant's computer with the relative permission, which would confirm the transparency of the purchase of an exchange-traded commodity.
Q.: The exchange was supposed to explore the idea of introducing a separate trading session for petroleum products for end users. What is the preliminary analysis; how popular is the session?
A.: The exchange is developing the initiative jointly with the Energy Ministry, the Federal Anti-monopoly Service, and the Central Bank of Russia. Following the process, the necessary amendments to the Trading Rules will be submitted for review by the Oil Products Section Board in accordance with the procedure, and then submitted to the exchange's board of directors for approval.
Q.: SPIMEX has proposed creating a system similar to NAUFOR, the National Association of Securities Market Participants, for the commodities market. How has the fuel market responded to the idea?
A.: It is high time for professional fuel market participants to unite under the auspices of a single self-regulatory organization (SRO) that would help them formulate a common position and present it to regulators and the government. This way, their concerns and proposals would surely be heard. A good example of this is NAUFOR. SPIMEX has proposed a similar name for the fuel market, NAUTOR.
The fuel market has never had such a representative organization despite its development. There are those providing services on the fuel market, namely traders and brokers, though there are no regulatory processes. As far as we understand, the Central Bank is not yet ready to introduce licensing for representatives of the segment of the petroleum products market. Therefore, some form of regulation or self-regulation is needed. The Federal Anti-monopoly Service welcomes the proposal for NAUTOR, and the Central Bank also supports it.
Professional fuel market associations are expressing positive opinions. We have two such associations, namely the Association of Commodity Market Participants (AUTSR) and the Association of Commodity Brokers (ACB). They operate in parallel, with minimal external interaction, apparently for their own reasons. Furthermore, there are market players that are not members of associations. However, the regulator cannot negotiate with dozens of participants. The professional community must be consolidated somehow for this dialogue. On December 22, AUTSR and ACB signed a memorandum establishing NAUTOR. It will likely take 2026 to form a new SRO and develop approaches to operation.
Self-regulation on the fuel market would be a positive step in improving its exchange infrastructure for SPIMEX.
