Today’s Daily Angle comes from Wikinvest Wire member Lara Crigger of Hard Assets Investor. You can read the full article on the Hard Assets Investor Blog.

Flash Player 9 or higher is required to view the chart Click here to download Flash Player now

View the full NYSE:OIL chart at Wikinvest

As readers of HardAssetsInvestor.com know, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission spent all summer pushing for tighter regulation of commodity ETFs, which the agency blames (rightly or wrongly) for running up energy prices last year.

For the CFTC, it’s not a question of whether they should impose new regulations, but how much: Position limits, tighter regulation of swaps contracts and higher capital and margin requirements for derivatives are all possibilities currently on the table.

Exactly what shape the new rules will take will be decided later this fall, but already the debate has sent convulsions throughout the industry. Several futures-based exchange-traded products, like the U.S. Natural Gas Fund (NYSE Arca: UNG) and the iPath DJ-UBS Natural Gas ETN (NYSE Arca: GAZ), suspended the creation of new shares (although UNG has recently reopened). And at least one product, the PowerShares DB Crude Oil Double Long ETN (NYSE Arca: DXO), was entirely liquidated.

But what about the indexes themselves? After all, an ETF is really only as good as the index it tracks, and ifcommodities indexes don’t evolve, how then can the products?

Last week, several indexing companies announced their ideas for new commodities benchmarks, making it clear they didn’t plan to wait around for the CFTC to get its act in gear. But will any of their approaches work?

The CRB Index, Redefined

Last week, Thomson Reuters and Jefferies & Co. launched a revamped version of their famous CRB Index that focused not on commodity futures, but equities.

The original Reuters-Jefferies CRB Index, one of the most widely followed indices around, tracks 19 futures contractsfrom across the commodities spectrum, including crude oil, natural gas, industrial and precious metals, and softs.

In comparison, the new benchmark, the Thomson Reuters/Jefferies In-The-Ground CRB Global Commodity Equity Index, tracks 150 commodity producers and distributors worldwide. It includes equities of 50 energy companies, 35 agricultural producers, 35 industrial metals firms and 30 precious metals companies. The fund’s associated ETF, sponsored by ALPS Funds, launched last week under the ticker CRBQ. (Check out the CRBQ prospectus here.)

CRBQ definitely isn’t the first equity-based commodity fund: It has competition from existing broad-based ETFs like Van Eck’s Market Vectors RVE Hard Assets Producers ETF (NYSE Arca: HAP), and iShares‘ S&P North American Natural Resources Sector ETF (NYSE Arca: IGE).

But the new Reuters/Jefferies index does mark the first equity-based benchmark launched specifically as a reaction to the CFTC’s moves. It’s “an alternative for investors looking for exposure to commodities without exposure to the commodities futures market,” said Art Hogan, chief market strategist at Jefferies & Co, to the WSJ last week. On paper, it’s not a bad idea: A pick-and-shovel commodities index does avoid the volatility common to the derivatives market, and it places any ETFs tracking it outside the reach of the CFTC. Plus, in some cases, equities are the only way to score exposure to illiquid or difficult-to-access markets, like coal or steel.

But equities-based commodities ETFs have their own issues to contend with—namely, equity risk. As Larry Swedroe pointed out in last week’s interview, equity-based funds tend to correlate higher to equities than to commodities. Stock-based ETFs simply aren’t the “pure plays” on commodities that many investors are looking for.

Click here to continue reading this article on Hard Assets Investor.