Why hedge? Rationales for corporate hedging and value implications

被引:23
|
作者
Aretz, Kevin [1 ]
Bartram, Sohnke M. [2 ]
Dufey, Gunter [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Lancaster, Grad Sch Management, Lancaster, England
[2] Univ Lancaster, Sch Management, Lancaster, England
[3] Univ Michigan, Ross Business Sch, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[4] Nanyang Technol Univ, Nanyang Business Sch, Singapore, Singapore
关键词
Corporate finances; Risk management; Foreign exchange;
D O I
10.1108/15265940710834735
中图分类号
F8 [财政、金融];
学科分类号
0202 ;
摘要
Purpose - In the presence of capital market imperfections, risk management at the enterprise level is apt to increase the firm's value to shareholders by reducing costs associated with agency conflicts, external financing, financial distress, and taxes. The purpose of this paper is to provide an accessible and comprehensive account of these rationales for corporate risk management and to give a short overview of the empirical support found in the literature. Design/methodology/approach - The paper outlines the main theories suggesting that corporate risk management can enhance shareholder value and briefly reviews the empirical evidence on these theories. Findings - When there are imperfections in capital markets, corporate hedging can enhance shareholder value through its impact on agency costs, costly external financing, direct and indirect costs of bankruptcy, as well as taxes. More specifically, corporate hedging can alleviate underinvestment and asset substitution problems by reducing the volatility of cash flows, and it can accommodate the risk aversion of undiversified managers and increase the effectiveness of managerial incentive structures through eliminating unsystematic risk. Lower volatility of cash flows also leads to lower bankruptcy costs. Moreover, corporate hedging can also align the availability of internal resources with the need for investment funds, helping firms to avoid costly external financing. Finally, corporate risk management can reduce the corporate tax burden in the presence of convex tax schedules. While there is empirical support for these rationales of hedging at the firm level, the evidence is only modestly supportive, suggesting alternative explanations. Originality/value - The discussed theories and the empirical evidence are described in an accessible way, in part by using numerical examples.
引用
下载
收藏
页码:434 / 449
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] CORPORATE INCENTIVES FOR HEDGING AND HEDGE ACCOUNTING
    DEMARZO, PM
    DUFFIE, D
    REVIEW OF FINANCIAL STUDIES, 1995, 8 (03): : 743 - 771
  • [2] The Real and Financial Implications of Corporate Hedging
    Campello, Murillo
    Lin, Chen
    Ma, Yue
    Zou, Hong
    JOURNAL OF FINANCE, 2011, 66 (05): : 1615 - 1647
  • [3] Why Do States Hedge in East Asia? An Empirical Study on Hedging
    Wu, Charles Chong-Han
    ASIAN PERSPECTIVE, 2019, 43 (03) : 557 - 584
  • [4] Hedging the Hedge Funds
    Paidas, Alex
    FORTUNE, 2009, 159 (08) : 10 - 10
  • [5] Capital expenditures, corporate hedging and firm value
    Ullah, Subhan
    Irfan, Muhammad
    Kim, Ja Ryong
    Ullah, Farid
    QUARTERLY REVIEW OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE, 2023, 87 : 360 - 366
  • [6] Corporate Hedging, Stakeholderinteresse und Shareholder Value
    Kürsten W.
    Journal für Betriebswirtschaft, 2006, 56 (1): : 3 - 31
  • [7] Why should firms hedge?-Review on Corporate Risk Management
    Huang Jie
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 5TH (2013) INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON FINANCIAL RISK AND CORPORATE FINANCE MANAGEMENT, VOLS I AND II, 2013, : 812 - 817
  • [8] Financial Hedging, Corporate Cash Policy, and the Value of Cash
    Sun, Wenyi
    Yin, Chao
    Zeng, Yeqin
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, 2022, 33 (03) : 1271 - 1303
  • [9] EFFECTIVE BASEMETAL HEDGING: THE OPTIMAL HEDGE RATIO AND HEDGING HORIZON
    Dewally, Michael
    Marriott, Luke
    JOURNAL OF RISK AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, 2008, 1 (01): : 41 - 76
  • [10] Hedging performance of multiscale hedge ratios
    Sultan, Jahangir
    Alexandridis, Antonios K.
    Hasan, Mohammad
    Guo, Xuxi
    JOURNAL OF FUTURES MARKETS, 2019, 39 (12) : 1613 - 1632