Here’s the actual CFTC Bank Participation Report (BPR) data for COMEX silver futures that you asked to interpret — showing how U.S. banks vs. non-U.S. banks were positioned as of the most recent reporting cycle (January 6, 2026):
?? CFTC Bank Participation Report – COMEX Silver Futures (January 6, 2026) ?? U.S. Banks (5 reporting)
- Long futures: 16,146 contracts (~80.7 M oz)
- Short futures: 15,099 contracts (~75.5 M oz)
- Net position: Net long ˜ 1,047 contracts (~5.2 M oz)
?? Non-U.S. Banks (16 reporting)
- Long futures: 9,577 contracts (~47.9 M oz)
- Short futures: 50,766 contracts (~253.8 M oz)
- Net position: Net short ˜ 41,189 contracts (~206 M oz)
?? Combined Net (U.S. + non-U.S.)
- U.S. banks net long; non-U.S. banks net short, driving the aggregate banks’ net short position.
- Total banks holding silver futures for BPR purposes: 21 reporting.
?? How to Read These Figures 1) Net Position Explanation - Each COMEX silver futures contract = 5,000 oz of silver.
- So:
- U.S. banks’ net long ˜ ~5.2 million oz (1,047 contracts × 5,000 oz).
- Non-U.S. banks’ net short ˜ ~206 million oz (41,189 contracts × 5,000 oz).
2) What This Means in Market Structure - U.S. banks (as a group) have flipped to a net long position in silver futures. This aligns with market commentary that big U.S. banks (especially JPMorgan and others) have reduced or eliminated their net short futures exposure.
- Non-U.S. banks remain strongly net short, representing the lion’s share of short futures exposure in this data snapshot.
?? Key Takeaways ? U.S. Banks are Net Long COMEX Silver - A few U.S. banks now show a net long position in COMEX silver futures.
- This is historically notable because for many years U.S. banks as a group tended to be net short in silver futures — a positioning that has now reversed.
? Non-U.S. Banks Hold Most of the Net Short Exposure - The significant net short (˜206 M oz equivalent) sits with non-U.S. banks.
- These positions may include futures held by large bullion banks based in Europe, Asia, and other jurisdictions, but the BPR does not disclose individual bank names.
?? This Report Doesn’t Identify “Who Bought From JPMorgan” - The CFTC BPR does not show specific counterparties — it only aggregates positions into two categories: U.S. banks and non-U.S. banks.
- The data shows that U.S. banks’ short positions disappeared and turned into net long positions, while non-U.S. banks hold most of the remaining net shorts — it does not imply a direct sale from JPMorgan to a named party like UBS.
?? Summary in Plain Terms
CategorySilver Futures (Contracts)Net Position|
| U.S. Banks | Long: 16,146 | Net long ~1,047 contracts (~5.2 M oz) | | Short: 15,099 | | | Non-U.S. Banks | Long: 9,577 | Net short ~41,189 contracts (~206 M oz) | | Short: 50,766 | | | Total Bank Reported Positions | 21 banks | Aggregate net short remains, driven by non-U.S. banks |
This implies:
- Net long status for U.S. banks in COMEX silver futures.
- Major short burdens among non-U.S. banks.
- No direct allocation of JPMorgan’s former shorts to named EU banks in public data.
If you want, I can also chart how these U.S. vs. non-U.S. bank silver positions have changed over time (e.g., last several months) to show the trend visually. |
