Platts to Launch Weekly FOB Asia Group III Assessment

S&P Global Energy's Platts is set to introduce a weekly spot assessment for Group III base oil on an FOB Asia basis, with a proposed effective date of 2 September 2026. The new assessment would widen published coverage beyond the Korean marker that has anchored much of the region's Group III pricing. For buyers and sellers, it is a modest change in methodology with a practical effect on how contracts can be settled.

Assessment Design

As proposed, the assessment will reflect spot cargoes of 4 CST, 6 CST and 8 CST Group III on an FOB Asia basis. Cargoes are assessed in 1,000-tonne lots, with shipment expected roughly 15 to 45 days after the quote date.

The shipment window is part of the definition rather than a detail. A quote refers to cargoes expected to load some weeks after the assessment date, which makes the published number a forward indication of physical value rather than a record of trades already completed.

Loading ports are in South Korea and Malaysia. That matters for anyone comparing the published value against a delivered offer, because freight and routing assumptions sit between the two numbers.

Alongside FOB Korea

The new assessment will sit alongside the existing Group III FOB Korea assessment, which is based on Ulsan. It adds coverage rather than replacing what is already published.

The distinction matters for contracts already indexed to the Korean marker. Both references will exist side by side, and the relationship between them will be watched closely in the first weeks of publication, particularly in weeks when the two markets move for different reasons.

Publication Mechanics

Values will be published in US dollars per tonne, drawn from price information collected during the assessment week. Indications are normalised to a 16:30 Singapore time close each Wednesday to reflect physical cargo value at that point, following the Singapore publication calendar.

If a Wednesday falls on a Singapore public holiday, the assessment moves a day earlier. The rule is mechanical but consequential. A holiday-shifted close can land in a thinner trading window, and parties using the assessment for settlement should know in advance which day a given week refers to.

A weekly frequency also sets the rhythm of negotiation. Contracts that reference a weekly assessment align their pricing discussions to the publication calendar, which reduces the number of separate price conversations a supplier has to hold in a month.

What FOB Means in Practice

Because the assessment is on an FOB basis, it excludes freight. A published FOB Asia value is therefore not a delivered price, and any comparison against a delivered offer has to add the freight, insurance and routing assumptions that separate the two.

That is routine work, but it is a common source of disagreement when a published basis is used in a commercial discussion. The party that can show the components of a delivered price is in a stronger position than the party that can only assert the market has moved.

The 1,000-tonne lot size does similar work. It gives the market a standard parcel to compare against, so offers of different volumes can be normalised instead of argued over one at a time.

Proposed Specifications

Platts has also set out proposed specifications for the three grades. ASTM colour is no higher than 0.5 across the board.

Kinematic viscosity at 100°C is set at 4.0 to 4.5 mm²/s for 4 CST, 5.5 to 6.7 mm²/s for 6 CST and 7.0 to 8.2 mm²/s for 8 CST. Viscosity index is not below 120 for any of the three.

Defined specifications do more work than they appear to. They give a buyer a way to test whether a delivered parcel actually corresponds to the grade the published price refers to, which is where most disputes start. Colour, viscosity and viscosity index are fields a receiving laboratory can check quickly, and naming them makes an assessment usable in day-to-day operations rather than only as an index.

What Changes in Practice

An additional published reference gives an independent data point for index-linked contracts and for internal transfer pricing, and it makes it harder for any single quote to define the market.

It also raises the value of being able to explain, with documentation, why a delivered price differs from the published basis. Suppliers who can present quality data and route costs when they quote are better placed than those who rely on a general market argument.

For blenders, a weekly and unified close improves procurement comparison and lets contract settlement rest on a single basis, and the addition itself reflects growing trade activity for Group III in Asia.

Anyone holding a Group III position in the region should note the effective date and check whether existing contract language names a specific assessment or falls back on a generic reference. Contracts that name a publication are easier to settle than contracts that refer loosely to market prices.

Bottom line

A second published Group III reference for Asia is a practical improvement in price transparency rather than a restructuring of the market. Its real effect will show up in contract wording, in settlement practice and in the discipline it imposes on delivered-price discussions.