Hedging,financing, and investment decisions: Theory and empirical tests

In this paper we theoretically and empirically examine the interaction between hedging, financing, and investment decisions. A simple equilibrium model with costly financial distress suggests that as firms become more efficient at risky investments vis a vis low risk investments, they will borrow less, invest more in risky assets, and hedge more. The model also predicts a positive relationship between hedging and leverage – a result consistent with debt capacity arguments. We test the model empirically using a simultaneous equations framework to investigate the determinants of firm-level hedging, financing and investing decisions. The results strongly support the hypothesis that the hedging, financing and investment decisions are jointly determined. In addition, we find strong support for the central hypothesis that firms more efficient investing in risky technologies more aggressively hedge and use less debt financing in order to maximize their comparative advantage.     

Family Control and Financing Decisions

This study uses a comprehensive European dataset to investigate the role of family control in corporate financing decisions during the period 1998–2008. We find that family firms have a preference for debt financing, a non‐control‐diluting security, and are more reluctant than non‐family firms to raise capital through equity offerings. We also find that credit markets are prone to provide long‐term debt to family firms, indicating that they view their investment decisions as less risky. In fact, our empirical results demonstrate that family firms invest less than non‐family firms in high‐risk, research and development (R&D) projects, but not in low‐risk, fixed‐asset capital expenditure (CAPEX) projects, suggesting that fear of control loss in family firms deters risk‐taking. Overall, our findings reveal that the external financing (and investment) decisions of family firms are in greater (lesser) conflict with the interests of minority shareholders (bondholders).     

金融发展与企业债务融资

本文通过我国各地区金融发展的差距研究了金融发展对公司债务融资决策的影响,研究结果表明:①金融越发展,企业的短期债务比率越高;②金融发展有助于可抵押资产较少的企业获得债务融资;③金融发展有助于规模较小的企业获得债务融资和长期债务融资;④金融发展有助于那些依赖无形资产投资的企业获得债务融资和短期债务融资。这些研究结果不仅可以深化我们对金融发展如何影响公司融资决策的理解,而且可以使我们对金融发展促进经济增长的微观机理有更加深入的了解。     

INFLATION,INVESTMENT, AND DEBT

In this paper the effect of inflation on firms' investment and debt-financing decisions is examined. Inflation affects optimal investment and financing directly through the probability of accounting loss and the real value of depreciation and interest tax shields. In addition, when corporate and differential personal taxes cause investment and financing decisions to interact, inflation has indirect effects on these decisions through their interactions. In general, the overall effects of inflation on optimal investment and debt are ambiguous in sign. For tax-exempt firms, however, optimal investment and debt are independent of inflation. For firms that are always in a tax-paying position, higher inflation reduces optimal investment without affecting optimal debt. Furthermore, inflation causes total firm value to decrease if the depreciation rate exceeds the firm's debt/asset ratio.     

Real Estate Risk,Corporate Investment and Financing Choice

This paper empirically examines how real estate risk impacts corporate investment and financing decisions. Using a panel of United States firms from 1985 to 2013, we document that real estate risk is negatively associated with firms’ long-term investments and long-term external financing in equity and debt. The results are robust to different risk measurements and in particular salient during the financial crisis period when the endogeneity between risk and investment is less of a concern. The effect on firm leverage, however, depends on risk measures. Overall, in contrast to previously documented positive effects of the real estate value, real estate risk exposure exhibits mostly the opposite effects on investment, financing and capital structure. This difference is consistent with option value determinants. Findings in this paper shed new lights on the impact of real estate holding on corporate decisions, offer a new explanation for the underperformance of hedge funds’ real estate strategies, and confirm the theoretical predictions in Deng et al. (2015).     

Short‐Term Debt as Bridge Financing: Evidence from the Commercial Paper Market

We analyze why firms use nonintermediated short‐term debt by studying the commercial paper (CP) market. Using a comprehensive database of CP issuers and issuance activity, we show that firms use CP to provide start‐up financing for capital investment. Firms’ CP issuance is driven by a desire to minimize transaction costs associated with raising capital for new investment. We show that firms with high rollover risk are less likely to enter the CP market, borrow less CP, and borrow more from bank credit lines. Further, CP is often refinanced with long‐term bond issuance to reduce rollover risk.     

Preemption,leverage, and financing constraints

This paper investigates the interactions between preemptive competition and leverage in a duopoly market. We investigate both a case in which the firms have optimal financial structures, and a case in which financing constraints require firms to finance their investments by debt. Our findings are that the second mover always leaves the duopoly market before the leader, although the leader may exit before the follower's entry. The leverage effects of debt financing can increase the value of a firm and accelerate investment, even in the presence of preemptive competition. Notably, financing constraints can delay preemptive investment and improve firm values in preemptive equilibrium. Indeed, the leader's high leverage due to financing constraints can lower the first-mover advantage and weaken preemptive competition. Especially with strong first-mover advantage, the financing constraint effects can dominate the leverage effects. These findings are almost consistent with the empirical evidence, which shows that high leverage leads to competitive disadvantage and mitigates product market competition.     

How do firms finance their investments?: The relative importance of equity issuance and debt contracting costs

This paper examines the financing decisions of firms in response to changes in investments and profits. We find that information frictions play important roles in firms' financing decisions. However, we find no evidence that asymmetric information about the value of a firm's assets causes equity to be used only as a last resort. Indeed equity is the predominant source of finance in situations, such as profit shortfalls, investment in intangible assets, and internally generated growth opportunities, where informational asymmetries and agency costs are likely to be high. We also find that firms respond asymmetrically to positive and negative profit shocks. In financing fixed assets, high asymmetric information firms use more short-term debt and less long-term debt, whereas firms with high potential agency problems use significantly more equity and less long-term debt and cash.     

Debt enforcement,investment, and risk taking across countries

We argue that the prospect of an imperfect enforcement of debt contracts in default reduces shareholder–debtholder conflicts and induces leveraged firms to invest more and take on less risk as they approach financial distress. To test these predictions, we use a large panel of firms in 41 countries with heterogeneous debt enforcement characteristics. Consistent with our model, we find that the relation between debt enforcement and firms’ investment and risk depends on the firm-specific probability of default. A differences-in-differences analysis of firms’ investment and risk taking in response to bankruptcy reforms that make debt more renegotiable confirms the cross-country evidence.     

Collateral and capital structure

We develop a dynamic model of investment, capital structure, leasing, and risk management based on firms' need to collateralize promises to pay with tangible assets. Both financing and risk management involve promises to pay subject to collateral constraints. Leasing is strongly collateralized costly financing and permits greater leverage. More constrained firms hedge less and lease more, both cross-sectionally and dynamically. Mature firms suffering adverse cash flow shocks may cut risk management and sell and lease back assets. Persistence of productivity reduces the benefits to hedging low cash flows and can lead firms not to hedge at all.     

THE FINANCING AND INVESTMENT OF A LEVERED FIRM UNDER ASYMMETRIC INFORMATION

This research extends the literature on financing and investment under asymmetric information by considering the effect of initial leverage. Because decisions affect the value of outstanding bonds, realistic behaviors arise that are absent in extant unlevered analyses. Leverage may induce social improvements in investment. Further, a stock offering may be a positive signal if lower-value firms face greater default risk and thus have lower debt values. Conditions that support positive reactions to equity funding appear to be present in the early 1990s.     

Investment timing under debt issuance constraint

This paper examines the optimal investment timing decision problem of a firm subject to a debt financing capacity constraint. We show that the investment thresholds have a U-shaped relation with the debt capacity constraint, in that they are increasing (decreasing) with the constraint for high (low) debt issuance capacity. Although the financing constraint distorts investment timing, it may encourage the constrained levered firm to overinvest compared with the non-constrained levered firm. Our result fits well with the related problems involving the internal financing constraint.     

Long-Term Financing Decisions: Views and Practices of Financial Managers of NYSE Firms

This paper reports the findings of a 1990 survey of a sample of NYSE firms conducted to learn about the managerial opinions and practices with respect to longterm financing decisions. Relying on a hierarchy of financing sources is discovered to be a far more common practice among the sample firms than maintaining a target capital structure. The risk-return dimensions of the investment being financed are found to be the most important inputs in determining financing decisions. In spite of the perceived lack of fairness in the market pricing of their securities, the sample firms do not report making financing decisions to signal a need for reevaluation of their securities. Financial managers display a much greater flexibility with capital structure decisions than with either dividend policy decisions or investment decisions. The firms which attempt to maintain target capital structures are found to perceive the average debt ratios in their respective industries to be important determinants of their own debt ratios. The firms which follow financing hierarchies on the other hand, are found to view their firms' past profits and past growth to be important determinants of their debt ratios.     

The Relation Between Reporting Quality and Financing and Investment: Evidence from Changes in Financing Capacity

We use changes in the value of a firm's real estate assets as an exogenous change in a firm's financing capacity to examine (1) the relation between reporting quality and financing and investment conditional on this change, and (2) firms’ reporting quality responses to the change in financing capacity. We find that financing and investment by firms with higher reporting quality is less affected by changes in real estate values than are financing and investment by firms with lower reporting quality. Further, firms increase reporting quality in response to decreases in financing capacity. Our findings contribute to the literature on reporting quality and investment, and on the determinants of reporting quality choices.     

Financing constraints, cash-flow risk, and corporate investment

Using an analytically tractable two-period model of a financially constrained firm, we derive an investment threshold that is U-shaped in cash holdings. We show analytically the relevant trade-offs leading to the U-shape: the firm balances financing costs for present and future investment, respectively. Our main argument is that financing costs today are more important than the risk of future financing costs. The empirically testable implications are that low-cash firms facing financing costs today are more reluctant to invest if they have less cash, or if their future cash flows are more risky. On the other hand, cash-rich firms facing no financing costs today invest in less favorable projects (i.e., forgo their real option to wait) if they have less cash, or if their future cash flows are more risky. The magnitude of these effects is amplified by the degree of market frictions that the firms are facing.     

Severity of financing constraints and firms' investments

According to standard investment theory, the current investments of more financially constrained firms should be smaller than those of less constrained firms with similar investment opportunities. In this paper, I develop a dynamic investment model in which the project value and the severity of financing constraints can vary over time. My results contradict standard theory. To preempt further financing risk in the future, severely constrained firms may engage in more active investment behavior even if they face relatively high additional financing costs at the time. My numerical example demonstrates that a relatively low probability of future risk is sufficient to cause such preemptive behavior.     

Why does capital structure choice vary with macroeconomic conditions?

We develop a computable general equilibrium model explaining financing over the business cycle. To avert agency conflicts, managers must hold a high percentage of their firm's equity. During contractions, firms substitute debt for equity in order to maintain managerial equity shares. During expansions, risk-sharing improves, with increases in managerial wealth facilitating substitution of equity for debt. In calibrated simulations, (counter) cyclical variation in leverage is only exhibited by less constrained firms. All firms exhibit financial accelerator effects. However, the effect is decreasing in financial flexibility. The model's predictions regarding financing and investment are consistent with empirical evidence.     

Financially Constrained Stock Returns

We study the effect of financial constraints on risk and expected returns by extending the investment-based asset pricing framework to incorporate retained earnings, debt, costly equity, and collateral constraints on debt capacity. Quantitative results show that more financially constrained firms are riskier and earn higher expected stock returns than less financially constrained firms. Intuitively, by preventing firms from financing all desired investments, collateral constraints restrict the flexibility of firms in smoothing dividend streams in the face of aggregate shocks. The inflexibility mechanism also gives rise to a convex relation between market leverage and expected stock returns.     

DOES FINANCIAL FLEXIBILITY REDUCE INVESTMENT DISTORTIONS?

The average U.S. firm has less leverage than one would expect based on the trade‐off between tax shields and bankruptcy costs. We focus on firms’ financial flexibility and examine whether firms preserve debt capacity to reduce investment distortions in the future. We find that firms with high unused debt capacity invest more in future years than do firms with low unused debt capacity. Furthermore, firms that are reluctant to borrow in unconstrained periods are more likely to issue debt in periods in which access to capital markets is more constrained.     

How firms manage their cash flows: an examination of diversification’s effect

We extend recently documented evidence that diversified firms hold significantly less cash than specialized firms to consider differences in how diversified and specialized firms adjust their cash flows to achieve their target cash balance. We find that diversified firms have higher free cash flows as a result of equal operating cash flows and lower investment in comparison to specialized firms. Diversified firms save less cash by placing less reliance on external financing; by issuing less debt and equity, and distributing higher cash dividends. Our findings support the hypothesis that diversified firms are able to hold less precautionary cash as they are in better position to finance investment opportunities internally from operating cash flows.