Natural Gas Future Price Forecast: NG=F Retreats After $6.80 Surge

Natural Gas Price Reset – Winter Storm Fern, Curve Distortion And What It Really Means For NG=F

Front-Month NG=F Spikes Toward $6.80 While Spot Henry Hub Blows Past $30

U.S. natural gas went from sleepy to violent in a few sessions. Front-month February NG=F ripped almost 30% in a day, trading around $6.80/mmBtu at the peak, the highest level since late 2022, as Winter Storm Fern froze a big chunk of Lower-48 production and sent heating demand vertical. Average January output dropped to about 106.9 bcfd versus December’s record 109.7 bcfd, with peak freeze-off losses near 20 bcfd at the worst point. Physical tightness showed up even more aggressively in the cash market: Henry Hub day-ahead deals briefly printed above $30/mmBtu, while constrained regional hubs in the Northeast saw double-digit prices as pipeline capacity and deliverability struggled to keep up with demand. As the worst of the Arctic air eased and wells, plants and compressor stations restarted, February NG=F pulled back about 6% to roughly $6.53 ahead of expiry, but that move down does not change the fact that the spike was a classic short-squeeze and weather shock concentrated in the front of the curve, not a structural repricing of every contract on the strip.

Extreme February–March Backwardation Shows Where The Real Stress Sits In Natural Gas

The most important piece of information is the curve shape, not just the February print. While February NG=F has been trading in the $6.50–$6.80 band, March has sat closer to $3.67–$3.82. That is extreme backwardation: the prompt month at almost double the price of the next contract. The signal is straightforward. The market is paying a huge premium for immediate molecules in a storm week, while simultaneously telling you that, five to six weeks out, it expects a return to a well-supplied system at something like “normal” pricing for a U.S. market with abundant production. March around $3.67 effectively assumes Fern is in the rear-view mirror, production is back near or above 109.7 bcfd, and late-winter demand has rolled over. That gap between roughly $6.50 in February and around $3.70 in March is not random; it is the price tag on short-term risk. If a second major cold shot appears on the models, March and April will have to reprice higher and flatten the curve from the back. If forecasts stay mild and supply comes back faster than expected, the front contract has to bleed down toward the $3.50–$4.00 zone. Either way, the current backwardation is a temporary stress configuration, not a new permanent state.

Chart ‘Crashes’ Of 50% In Natural Gas Are Mostly Just Contract Rollover Noise

The dramatic 50% “collapse” that some retail traders saw on natural gas charts was not Natural Gas losing half its value overnight; it was a rollover artifact. Platforms typically plot a continuous front-month chart. One day the front contract is February, trading around $6–$7/mmBtu with maximum winter risk and storm premium. The next day, after expiry, the front becomes March, anchored near $3.70 with far less weather risk. If the platform simply flips from Feb to Mar, the chart visually jumps from ~6.50 to ~3.70 and shows a huge percentage drop that never actually occurred in a single tradable instrument. Real P&L depends on which specific contract a trader held and how they handled the roll. Someone long February NG=F would have ridden the volatility inside that contract; they do not automatically lose 50% just because the chart now plots March. A real 50% hit only happens if a position is closed in the high-priced front month and reopened unhedged in a much cheaper deferred month. For professionals, the Feb–Mar spread itself is a trade. For retail, misreading that spread as a true crash is one of the fastest ways to take losses in a market that did exactly what the term structure was signalling.

Mid-February Weather Volatility Keeps Natural Gas Demand Uncertain

Seasonally, the middle of February is often a swing period for the Lower-48: late-winter Arctic reloads can alternate with early-spring warm spells. That pattern usually leaves the market exiting January with strong realized heating demand but very little visibility on how long elevated consumption will last. The current tape fits that pattern. Demand and prices were forced higher by Fern, and current heating load is clearly strong, but the further you look out on the strip, the more doubt is embedded in prices. The strip beyond March reflects skepticism that another Fern-scale event will repeat quickly. Traders are now hyper-sensitive to each new weather model run. A shift toward another sustained cold pattern would justify keeping prompt-month NG=F at a premium and extending backwardation deeper into the curve. A clear pivot to warmer-than-normal conditions across key consuming regions would leave the front end with no justification to stay at a multiple of March and April, forcing a repricing lower. That weather-driven uncertainty is why intraday swings remain large even as the absolute level of the front contract starts to ease off the peak.

Freeze-Offs, Output Recovery And EIA Storage Data Define The Fundamental Floor For NG=F

Under the surface of the price action, the real test is storage and how fast production normalizes. January output averaging 106.9 bcfd versus December’s 109.7 bcfd means the system has already taken a meaningful hit, with around 2.8 bcfd lower average supply and freeze-off losses near 20 bcfd at the worst point. That is significant, but it is not permanent impairment. As temperatures rise and infrastructure thaws, those shut-in volumes come back; the U.S. remains a structurally high-production market. The U.S. Energy Information Administration’s weekly storage report at 10:30 a.m. ET will show how much of the storm’s impact has translated into inventory drawdown versus short-term price spikes. A very large draw that pushes stocks materially below the five-year average would support the idea that Fern did more than just trigger a temporary squeeze and has shifted the medium-term balance in favor of Natural Gas. A modest draw would imply that, once the weather premium disappears, the market still sits on comfortable storage and can tolerate lower prices again. On top of that, EIA projections pointing to roughly 5.8% U.S. gas demand growth over the next two years against only 3.6% supply growth are the structural context: if that gap holds, storage buffers will grind lower over time and the price floor for NG=F will trend higher, even if individual storms still cause violent, short-term deviations.

LNG Export Demand Locks In A Structural Baseline For Natural Gas Consumption

Liquefied natural gas has changed the base case for Natural Gas in the U.S. Gulf Coast export plants now pull in more than 14% of total domestic production as feedgas. That demand is not seasonal in the same way as residential heating; it is closer to a constant industrial load as long as overseas hubs in Europe and Asia price gas significantly above Henry Hub. During Fern, port closures along the Gulf pushed exports of crude and LNG briefly to zero on Sunday, but flows bounced back rapidly once ports reopened. LNG plants reportedly cut gas intake by around 48% during the height of the disruptions, but that reflected logistics constraints, not a structural shift in appetite for U.S. gas. Once shipping channels and midstream flows normalized, the demand engine restarts. For NG=F, this means that even in a warm winter scenario, there is now a durable outlet for surplus production that did not exist at scale a decade ago. The more U.S. export capacity ramps, the stronger the structural bid under the market and the less likely it is that Henry Hub can spend long periods below the marginal cost of supply.

AI Data Centers And Gas-Fired Power Turn Natural Gas Into A Core Electricity Fuel

The next demand driver is not the weather; it is the power system behind AI. High-density data centers require enormous amounts of electricity, and a large share of those incremental megawatts will be supplied by gas-fired plants. Current projections suggest roughly 60% of new electricity demand from AI facilities over the coming years will be met by natural-gas-based generation. Developers are already positioning around cheap gas sources. In the Delaware Basin, for example, a “Data Center Alley” concept is being built around gas-fired power sites hooked directly into the Waha hub, monetizing low-cost molecules that were previously stranded, flared or heavily discounted. That is long-dated, price-insensitive demand anchored in infrastructure commitments and power-purchase agreements, not speculative positioning. When you combine this AI-driven load with LNG exports and traditional industrial and household use, the long-term case for Natural Gas shifts from a purely cyclical fuel to a core pillar of the electricity and export system. That does not remove volatility from NG=F, but it raises the baseline value of gas in any scenario where AI build-out and LNG growth stay on track.

Producers, LNG Names And UNG React More To The Strip Than To The Front Contract In Natural Gas

Equity market behavior confirms that the storm was treated as a front-end shock rather than a total repricing. While February NG=F screamed to multi-year highs and Henry Hub cash traded above $30, leading gas producers only moved modestly higher. EQT, one of the biggest dry-gas players, gained around 1.8% to roughly $39.55. Antero Resources and Range Resources added roughly 2–3%. Cheniere Energy, a flagship LNG exporter, edged up about 0.4%. The United States Natural Gas Fund ETF (UNG), which tracks front-month futures exposure, rose around 1.7%, reflecting the exposure to the most stressed part of the curve. The reason is simple. Producers and export names are priced on the full strip and their hedging programs, not on a single panicked front contract. A spike that lifts only the February leg of NG=F to $6.80 while leaving March around $3.80 does not transform the multi-year cash-flow profile of a hedged upstream operator or an LNG exporter. For investors, that divergence underlines the difference between trading weather and owning structure. If the goal is to express a long-term view on Natural Gas, equities and midstream are cleaner tools than naked front-month futures, which will continue to be dominated by weather and positioning.

Algorithmic Strategies, CTA Short Covering And The Microstructure Risk In NG=F

The way the move unfolded also shows how dangerous NG=F is when systematic shorts are crowded. Before Fern, many algorithmic and CTA strategies were positioned for a benign winter: high production, comfortable storage, and no major cold risk on the near-term models. When the weather flipped and freeze-offs hit, those same systems started to cover shorts into a market with thin liquidity and rising physical panic. That reflexive buy-back drove the February contract almost vertically higher while deferred months moved far less, concentrating the pain in the front. The process now runs in reverse as weather eases and liquidity in February dries up ahead of expiry. Systematic traders re-establish shorts or flatten, and the front contract falls toward the March level. For anyone trading NG=F directly, the lesson is that microstructure, curve spreads and positioning often dominate day-to-day price action more than the headline fundamental story. This is not a market where a simple narrative like “cold equals up, warm equals down” is enough; understanding who is positioned where, and in which contract, is crucial to avoid being the liquidity for someone else’s forced unwind.

Natural Gas / NG=F View – Structurally Bullish, Tactically High-Risk Buy On Weakness Rather Than Panic Spikes

Taking all the data together – February NG=F recently around $6.53 after touching $6.80, March near $3.70–$3.82, Henry Hub cash having traded above $30 at the peak of Fern, January output at 106.9 bcfd versus 109.7 bcfd in December with freeze-off losses near 20 bcfd, LNG plants absorbing more than 14% of U.S. production, and the EIA projecting demand growth of about 5.8% against 3.6% supply growth – the fundamental message is clear. In the very near term, the front contract is at risk of further normalization as the storm fades, production recovers, Gulf Coast logistics reset and the curve rolls into cheaper months. The extreme backwardation and the rollover optics of a 50% “crash” are both signals that a lot of the weather premium has already started to drain out. Over the medium to long term, the combination of structurally rising LNG exports, AI-driven gas-fired power demand and a demand growth rate that exceeds supply growth argues for a higher floor in Natural Gas and NG=F than the sub-$3 regime of past gluts. On that basis, the stance on natural gas is bullish rather than bearish. It screens as a Buy-biased asset on weakness once the storm premium and contract-roll distortions have washed out, not something to chase at panic highs. The trade is structurally long Natural Gas with acceptance of high volatility, not complacent leverage into the front month without understanding the curve.

That's TradingNEWS