Commodities desk: Trading/Structuring/Sales -Anyone can explain the difference for each?

To be fair, given that banks are not as invested in the physical commodities space as they once were, many of the commodities S&T role functions are typical to other asset classes. That said in terms of technological landscape, I would say bar the highly liquid energy and metals derivatives most other commodities products are less automated simply because there is not much liquidity there. I will leave it to someone else who works on a commodities desk in a bank to describe their daily work routine.

Interesting point I should raise is how physical trading houses are offering similar financial services as the banks. Here are a couple of examples: - Trading houses have started offering trade-finance services such that they can gain extra leverage in negotiating supply contracts for bigger quantities - BP IST offers structuring capabilities in the form of their BP Structured Products arm - Glencore is the first foreign company to trade in China’s iron ore contracts (not sure exactly in what fashion Glencore is participating in this market but I guess its more physical hedging than market making)

In terms of similarities, and I do not intend to make this sound like a cop-out, both parties are closely tracking the commodities markets albeit from different vantage points.

The major difference between trading houses and banks is probably that trading house derive most of their income from the physical product and, for the most part, treat derivatives as strictly a hedging tool whereas banks are less inclined to trade the physical (due to major capital requirements imposed on banks) and make most of their income from offering hedging and risk management services to clients. These differences boils down to mean a physical trader has to figure out the best arbitrage opportunity for the physical product and financial trader has to figure out the best trading strategy for any given market condition.