This paper provides survey evidence on the use of derivatives among Swedish nonfinancial firms. The evidence is compared with the findings by , 1996) and Berkman et al. (1997 for the USA and New Zealand, respectively. By comparing firms in Sweden with firms in New Zealand and the USA differences in derivative usage can be related to differences in their underlying economies and history of trading in derivatives. Among other issues, the results showed that (1) 52% of the nonfinancial firms in Sweden used derivatives compared with 53% in New Zealand and 39% in the USA; (2) the usage of derivatives was more common among larger than among smaller firms; (3) the principal use of derivatives was for hedging purposes and those firms that engaged in speculative activity tended to be larger rather than smaller firms; and (4) lack of knowledge about derivatives within the firm was the issue of most concern for financial directors. The latter was in contrast with the USA where lack of knowledge was the issue of least concern. * We would like to thank the editor Richard M. Levich and two reviewers for excellent criticism.

This study examines index futures and options expiration day effects on the Swedish market. While the results for the period 1988-1998 indicate that trading volumes on the cash market were significantly higher on expiration days than on other days, no evidence suggesting that price distortions occurred is found. This could be due to the longer settlement period on the Swedish market, compared with that on the Canadian, German, and the US markets, where price distortions have been documented. However, some price distortion may have been experienced for the first half of the sample period, a finding which the cause for is discussed.

No abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to investigate Swedish non‐financial firms’ use of derivatives in 2003 and to compare the results with an earlier study investigating Swedish firms in 1996. This comparison is motivated by our interest in if and how the derivative practices of firms have changed over the seven years that passed between the two surveys.Design/methodology/approachSurveys are used to make comparisons between years. For this study, the authors used a similar questionnaire as Alkebäck and Hagelin, and investigate a similar sample of firms. Firms are classified according to firm size and industry to study changes in derivative usage for different types of firms.FindingsThe results show among other things that: 59 per cent of the Swedish firms use derivatives today compared to 52 per cent in 1996; this relatively modest change for the total sample hides significant increases in derivatives usage for small and medium sized firms; the use of derivatives for hedging the balance sheet among Swedish firms in 2003 is higher than for other countries but lower than for Swedish firms in 1996 suggesting that Swedish firms conform to international practice; and the issue of greatest concern to Swedish firms in 1996, lack of knowledge about derivatives within the firm, concerns Swedish firms little today.Research limitations/implicationsAs with other survey research, a major caveat is that responses represents opinions. It cannot be verified that the opinions coincide with actions. Further research could improve on the understanding of firms derivatives use by including more detailed data, different time spans, and larger samples.Originality/valueProvides evidence of the changes in the use of derivatives of Swedish firms.

No abstract