"This paper attempts to differentiate among the theories of hedging by using disclosures in the annual reports of 400 UK companies and data collected via a survey. I find, unlike many previous US studies, strong evidence linking the decision to hedge and the expected costs of financial distress. The tests show that this is mainly because my definition of hedging includes all hedgers and not just derivative users. However, when the tests employ the same hedging definition as previous US studies, financial distress cost factors still appear to be more important for this sample than samples of US firms. Therefore, a secondary explanation for the strong financial distress results might be due to differences in the bankruptcy codes in the two countries, which result in higher expected costs of financial distress for UK firms. The paper also examines the determinants of the choice of hedging method distinguishing between non-derivative and derivatives hedging. My evidence shows that larger firms, firms with more cash, firms with a greater probability of financial distress, firms with exports or imports and firms with more short-term debt are more likely to hedge with derivatives. Thus, differences in opportunities, in incentives for reducing risk and in the types of financial price exposure play an important role in how firms hedge their risks." Copyright Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 2006.

For 366 large non-financial U.K. firms, this paper reports the factors that are important in determining their decision to hedge foreign currency exposure. The results provide strong evidence of a relationship between expected financial distress costs and the foreign currency hedging decision and more significantly the foreign currency only hedging decision. These findings seem stronger than those found in similar studies using U.S. data. The paper argues that this might be due to the fact that several U.S. studies include in their non-hedging sample other hedging firms, such as firms using non-derivative methods for currency hedging and interest rate only hedgers, which might bias the results against the a priori expectations. However, it might also be due to a country specific institutional factor, that is, U.K. firms face higher expected costs of financial distress due to differences in the bankruptcy codes in the two countries (JEL:F30, G32, G33).

This paper compares the effect on firm value of different foreign currency (FC) financial hedging strategies identified by type of exposure (short-or long-term) and type of instrument (forwards, options, swaps and foreign currency debt). We find that hedging instruments depend on the type of exposure. Short-term instruments such as FC forwards and/or options are used to hedge short-term exposure generated from export activity while FC debt and FC swaps into foreign currency (but not into domestic currency) are used to hedge long-term exposure arising from assets located in foreign locations. Our results relating to the value effects of foreign currency hedging indicate that foreign currency derivatives use increases firm value but there is no hedging premium associated with foreign currency debt hedging, except when combined with foreign currency derivatives. Taken individually, FC swaps generate more value than short-term derivatives.

No abstract

No abstract