Dutch Power Base Futures
Energy · Monthly series · CM-DPB1.ICEENDEX
Latest, October 2026
225.92 EUR/MWH
+33.7% from September 2026
Forecast
Forecast for October 2027: 163.98 EUR/MWH, with an 80% interval of 62.73 EUR/MWH to 447.09 EUR/MWH.
| Period | Forecast | 80% low | 80% high |
|---|---|---|---|
| November 2026 | 231.36 EUR/MWH | 138.63 EUR/MWH | 353.03 EUR/MWH |
| December 2026 | 213.45 EUR/MWH | 116.50 EUR/MWH | 368.91 EUR/MWH |
| January 2027 | 190.05 EUR/MWH | 85.34 EUR/MWH | 385.59 EUR/MWH |
| February 2027 | 163.88 EUR/MWH | 79.95 EUR/MWH | 346.83 EUR/MWH |
| March 2027 | 149.66 EUR/MWH | 46.05 EUR/MWH | 390.70 EUR/MWH |
| April 2027 | 146.07 EUR/MWH | 65.57 EUR/MWH | 340.76 EUR/MWH |
| May 2027 | 141.85 EUR/MWH | 28.17 EUR/MWH | 425.96 EUR/MWH |
| June 2027 | 142.89 EUR/MWH | 54.20 EUR/MWH | 373.02 EUR/MWH |
| July 2027 | 149.37 EUR/MWH | 42.75 EUR/MWH | 429.93 EUR/MWH |
| August 2027 | 155.53 EUR/MWH | 55.41 EUR/MWH | 427.41 EUR/MWH |
| September 2027 | 164.55 EUR/MWH | 77.86 EUR/MWH | 410.21 EUR/MWH |
| October 2027 | 163.98 EUR/MWH | 62.73 EUR/MWH | 447.09 EUR/MWH |
AI confidence
Mixed evidenceThe tests show no consistent, material advantage over the no-change baseline.
Model: Agentic Investor TSFM (foundation model)
- Accuracy vs naive
- +8%Matches the no-change baseline over 6 tests (6 tests, 3 won)
- Direction
- 50%No clear edge over a coin flip (36 of 72 calls right in 6 tests)
- Turning points
- 10 of 25Anticipated some turns (25 turns in 6 tests, 0 without a turn)
- Error vs baseline
- 8% lowerError ratio 0.92; 1.00 is a tie.
- Tests won
- 3 / 6Complete recent tests excluded from model selection; ties count as no win.
- Test period
- 2020-11-01 to 2026-10-0112 observations ahead per test.
- 80% band coverage
- 78%Observed outcomes inside the band across all stored test windows.
- Band coverage uses all stored test windows, including model-selection windows when present; it does not determine the confidence label.
- Evaluated 2026-11-14 against the cached history through 2026-10-01.
How this assessment is made
AI confidence describes historical evidence for this forecast, not a probability of being correct. Each backtest fits on data available before its test window. The baseline carries the last value forward. Supported evidence requires at least six complete, non-overlapping tests, an error ratio below 0.90 (rounded to two decimals), and wins in a majority of tests. Ratios from 0.90 to below 1.10 are on par; 1.10 or above is weak evidence. Inconsistent wins produce mixed evidence. For a selected model, only the recent tests excluded from model selection determine this label. These are historical simulations using the available data, not a live trading track record; revisions and foundation-model pretraining can limit how closely they reproduce a past decision. Past performance can change.
Model comparison
5 of 5 models evaluatedModels are selected on older tests and evaluated on separate recent tests. All four classes completed their backtests.
Models tested
Agentic Investor TSFM scored lowest on the 4 older tests (0.78) and was chosen. The 6 recent tests played no part in the choice and give its grade (0.92). The search for a model that beats the naive forecast on both sets of tests goes on. Scores are MASE: a model's errors divided by the naive forecast's, so 1 is a tie.
4 model classes completed the tests: Foundation model, Statistical, Machine learning, Neural network.
| Model | Class and compute | Older tests | Recent tests | Role |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic Investor TSFM (foundation model) | Foundation model · CPU | 0.78 | 0.92 | Serving |
| State-space model, 167M (foundation model) | Foundation model · CPU | 0.79 | 1.00 | Tested |
| Exponential smoothing (statistical) | Statistical · CPU | 0.87 | 0.98 | Tested |
| Gradient-boosted trees (machine learning) | Machine learning · CPU | 0.96 | 1.24 | Tested |
| Naive forecast (last value held) | Benchmark · CPU | 1.00 | 1.00 | Benchmark |
| Hierarchical neural network (neural network) | Neural network · CPU | 1.64 | 2.07 | Tested |
Reading
It is above 92% of the 119 earlier readings since November 2016.
Recent history (24 observations)
| Period | Value |
|---|---|
| October 2026 | 225.92 EUR/MWH |
| September 2026 | 168.99 EUR/MWH |
| August 2026 | 146.63 EUR/MWH |
| July 2026 | 136.35 EUR/MWH |
| June 2026 | 103.17 EUR/MWH |
| May 2026 | 102.81 EUR/MWH |
| April 2026 | 90.83 EUR/MWH |
| March 2026 | 90.50 EUR/MWH |
| February 2026 | 74.00 EUR/MWH |
| January 2026 | 99.17 EUR/MWH |
| December 2025 | 91.13 EUR/MWH |
| November 2025 | 96.85 EUR/MWH |
| October 2025 | 95.54 EUR/MWH |
| September 2025 | 92.51 EUR/MWH |
| August 2025 | 82.34 EUR/MWH |
| July 2025 | 88.50 EUR/MWH |
| June 2025 | 74.95 EUR/MWH |
| May 2025 | 72.39 EUR/MWH |
| April 2025 | 67.04 EUR/MWH |
| March 2025 | 63.75 EUR/MWH |
| February 2025 | 76.50 EUR/MWH |
| January 2025 | 106.50 EUR/MWH |
| December 2024 | 111.07 EUR/MWH |
| November 2024 | 115.59 EUR/MWH |
Source
Data: public market data feeds.
More from Agentic Investor
- Open Dutch Power Base Futures in the app: the interactive chart and a fresh forecast
- World and commodity series: every stored series
- Vietnam indicators
Also stored for Energy
- API2 Rotterdam Coal Futures
- Argus LLS vs. WTI (Argus) Trade Month Futures
- Argus Propane (Saudi Aramco) Futures
- Argus Propane Far East Index Futures
- Argus Propane Far East Index vs. European Propane CIF ARA (Argus) Futures
- Argus Propane Far East Index vs. Japan C&F Naphtha (Platts) Futures
- Argus WTI Diff vs. CMA NYMEX Trade Month Futures
- Austrian CEGH VTP Natural Gas Futures
- Belgian Power Base Futures
- Belgian Power Financial Base Futures
- Belgian Power Financial Peak Futures
- Brent Crude Futures