Fuel hedging,operational hedging and risk exposure — Evidence from the global airline industry

The aviation industry is characterized by low profit margins and a constant struggle with skyrocketing fuel costs. Financial and operational hedging strategies serve aviation managers as a tool to counteract high and volatile fuel prices. While most research on fuel hedging has concentrated on the U.S. airline market, this paper is the first study to include airlines from Asia and Europe. We analyze 64 airlines over 11 years and find that Asian carriers are more negatively exposed than European airlines but less exposed than North American airlines. In contrast to Treanor, Simkins, Rogers and Carter (2012), this study finds less significant negative exposure coefficients among U.S. carriers. Using a fixed effects model we reject the hypothesis that financial hedging decreases risk exposure. One possibility is that the decreased volatility in jet fuel prices over the past few years has perhaps made airlines less exposed to fuel prices and hence, financial hedging is less effective. Operational hedging, defined by two proxies for fleet diversity, does not reduce exposure significantly, either. In contrast, a one percentage point increase in fleet diversity, calculated with a dispersion index using different aircraft types, increases the risk exposure coefficient by 1.83%. On the other hand, fleet diversity, calculated with different aircraft families, increases exposure by only 0.63%. These results are supported by the global trend of airline managers to reduce fleet diversity. Airlines have reduced their fleet diversity by 7.70% or 10.77% (depending on the proxy) between 2002 and 2012. The greatest reduction can be found among European airlines with 23.12% (28.04%).     

Currency hedging for single-currency equity portfolios: Does cross-asset risk matter?

Foreign investors who are fully invested in a single-currency domestic equity portfolio are exposed to domestic equity risk, but also to currency risk. The standard approach to hedging the currency risk optimally is to estimate a single optimal hedge ratio, but this approach hedges only exchange rate risk, not cross-asset risk. We provide an alternative approach that estimates two optimal hedge ratios to adjust the currency exposures—one associated with the domestic currency and one associated with the foreign currency—and hedges both exchange rate risk and cross-asset risk. This alternative approach can significantly reduce risk.     

Does global economic uncertainty matter for the volatility and hedging effectiveness of Bitcoin?

We assess whether the long-run volatilities of Bitcoin, global equities, commodities, and bonds are affected by global economic policy uncertainty. Empirical results provide evidence supporting this hypothesis, except in the case of bonds. For Bitcoin investors, the results imply the ability to use information about the state of global economic uncertainty to enhance the predictions of Bitcoin volatility. We further examine whether the correlation between Bitcoin and global equities, commodities, and bonds are affected by global economic policy uncertainty. Empirical results reveal that global economic policy uncertainty has a negative significant impact on the Bitcoin-bonds correlation and a positive impact on both Bitcoin-equities and Bitcoin-commodities correlations, suggesting the possibility of Bitcoin acting as a hedge under specific economic uncertainty conditions. Interestingly, the hedging effectiveness of Bitcoin for both global equities and global bonds enhances slightly after considering the level of global economic policy uncertainty. Such a weak effect of the state of global economic uncertainty on the hedging ability of Bitcoin implies that investors cannot substantially enhance the hedging performance of Bitcoin under different economic uncertainty conditions.     

Does the location of stock exchange matter? A within-country analysis

The current study documents an interesting phenomenon that retail investors prefer to invest in stocks listed at the stock exchange that is geographically close to them in China. This pattern is robust when we control for the well-documented local bias within a country. Among companies with similar distances to both stock exchanges and companies headquartered locally, investors still display a strong tendency to invest in locally-listed stocks. Among stocks with similar distances to both stock exchanges, those listed in Shanghai (Shenzhen) co-move more in returns and trading volumes, with the benchmark at the Shanghai (Shenzhen) stock exchange. Such a preference for local exchange seems not to be motivated by information advantage, because investors do not obtain abnormal returns from their trades on stocks listed nearby. Our findings provide additional evidence that non-information-based familiarity bias induces investment and that such investor bias and exchange-level sentiment influence asset price formation.     

Does individualistic culture impact operational risk?

Employing a sample of 2,957 operational‐risk events across 31 countries from 1990 to 2011, we find that financial institutions located in countries with higher individualism tend to have higher operational risk. This positive relation is achieved through the risk‐taking channel and the earnings‐management channel. In addition, the magnitude of operational losses is higher in more individualistic countries. The results suggest that individualism serves as an important informal institutional determinant of operational risk in an international context. Endogeneity tests and various robustness checks confirm our findings.     

Does carbon risk matter for corporate acquisition decisions?

In this study, we examine whether carbon risk matters in acquisitions. Using a firm's carbon emissions to proxy for carbon risk, we examine whether an acquirer's level of carbon emissions is related to the decision to engage in acquisitions and achieve subsequent acquisition returns. The results show that firms with higher emissions have an increased likelihood of acquiring foreign targets while, at the same time, having a decreased likelihood of acquiring domestic targets. Acquirers with large carbon footprints seek out targets in foreign countries that have low gross domestic product (GDP) or weak environmental, regulatory, or governance standards. We also examine the relationship between carbon emissions and announcement returns. We find that cross-border acquisition announcement returns are higher when acquirers with high carbon emissions acquire targets in countries with fewer regulations or weaker environmental standards. Focusing on the interplay of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and carbon emissions, we find that investors censure acquirers that promote CSR while also having high carbon emissions, thus resulting in worse abnormal returns. This is particularly the case if the target country is wealthy or has stronger country governance or strong environmental protection. Our findings add insight on the channels through which a focus on reducing carbon risk can add value for shareholders.     

Does trust matter for the cost of bank loans?

This paper extends the literature related to the role of trust on economic activity, focusing on the influence of trust on lender-borrower relationships and analysing its effect on the interest rate spread for a sample of 20,699 loans from 47 countries over the period 2003–2018. We consider not just the role of trust, but also how its effect is moderated by the country's legal enforcement and degree of economic development. The results show that trust has no effect on loan spreads. However, trust is found to reduce loan spreads when a country's formal institutions are weak, in line with the existence of a substitutive effect between formal and informal institutions in reducing interest rates. As regards the degree of economic development, our results show that both trust and legal enforcement have a greater influence on the interest rate spread of bank loans in countries with a lower level of economic development.     

Does political risk matter for sovereign wealth funds? International evidence

We investigate the impact of political risk on the investment decisions of sovereign wealth funds (SWFs). Using an international sample of 302 targets involved in 427 SWFs' deals, we find that political risk matters in determining SWFs' portfolio strategies. Among the four dimensions of political risk, we show that conflicts and democratic tendencies are the main components that explain variations in SWF behaviour, whereas the quality of institutions and government action matter less. Our results are robust to a battery of sensitivity tests, alternative model specifications, subsample analysis, and cultural bias.     

How do risk attitudes of clearing firms matter for managing default exposure in futures markets?

This article proposes a theoretical framework that is built upon extreme value theory to study three instruments (i.e. margin, capital requirement and price limits) for managing default risk in futures markets. Specifically, the exceedances over a price threshold are modeled using a generalized Pareto distribution, and the models are static (one-period). We incorporate the risk attitudes of clearing firms into the framework to investigate the efficacy of these instruments under several risk measures, including value-at-risk measures, expected-shortfall measures and spectral risk measures. An empirical study on the VIX futures (or VX) data shows that the effectiveness of these market instruments rests not only on clearing firms' risk attitudes, but also on the tail fatness of the futures price distribution. Moreover, the shift in the risk attitudes of clearing firms may cause interactions among these instruments, which casts new light on the economic rationale of price limits.     

Does the independence of independent directors matter?

This paper analyzes the characteristics of firms that declare board directors as independents, although the directors are not strictly independent, and examines the consequences in terms of performance and corporate governance outcomes. Based on publicly available information, eight criteria of “independence” used to examine a panel of Spanish listed firms classify 14.2% of the directors as strictly independent, whereas the firms classify 32.5% of the board as independent directors. Firms with dispersed ownership structures misclassify directors more frequently than do firms with large controlling owners. In terms of consequences, we find weak evidence of a negative relation between misclassification and a firm's future operating performance. However, no relation is found between independents' misclassification and several relevant outcomes of the primary delegated committees with monitoring roles: the audit committee and the nomination and remuneration committee. There is no significance with regard to the non-strictly independent measures explaining executive directors' compensation, CEO turnover, audit qualifications or earning management behavior.     

Does the investment horizon of institutional investors matter for stock liquidity?

This paper examines the role of the investment horizon of institutional investors on stock liquidity of firms. We show that an increase in long-term institutional ownership is negatively associated with firm liquidity, while an increase in short-term ownership is positively related to a firm's stock liquidity. We identify the ownership-liquidity relationship by examining two major channels: the trading activity channel and the informational friction channel. Long-term investors reduce stock liquidity through low frequency trading and access to value-enhancing and private information, which induces adverse selection bias. In contrast, short-term investors improve liquidity through trading activity and competition with other investors, which lowers transaction costs. Our findings further suggest that the effects of an increase in long-term (short-term) institutional investors on liquidity weaken (strengthen) when a firm has more publicly available information. Finally, we show that the positive impact of an increase in long-term ownership on valuation is more pronounced for firms with higher liquidity and the valuation effect is persistent.     

What is the systemic risk exposure of financial institutions?

I compare the performance of three measures of institution-level systemic risk exposure — Exposure CoVaR (Adrian and Brunnermeier, 2016), systemic expected shortfall (Acharya et al., 2016), and Granger causality (Billio et al., 2012). I modify Exposure CoVaR to allow for forecasting, and estimate the ability of each measure to forecast the performance of financial institutions during systemic crisis periods in 1998 (LTCM) and 2008 (Lehman Brothers). I find that Exposure CoVaR forecasts the within-crisis performance of financial institutions, and provides useful forecasts of future systemic risk exposures. Systemic expected shortfall and Granger causality do not forecast the performance of financial institutions reliably during crises. I also find, using cross-sectional regressions, that foreign equity exposure and securitization income determine systemic risk exposure during the 1998 and 2008 crises, respectively; financial institution size determines systemic risk exposure during both crisis periods; and executive compensation does not determine systemic risk exposure.     

Has exchange risk depressed international trade? The impact of third-country exchange risk

This paper argues that the effect of exchange risk on bilateral and aggregate trade flows should be analyzed by including the impact of third-country exchange risk factors in addition to direct bilateral or multilateral risk. After a theoretical examination of these effects, US bilateral export flow to its six largest trading partners are analyzed empirically. I find individuality and jointly significant third-country risk effects in most cases. In contrast to some recent bilateral efforts, I find a steadily growing negative impact on trade flows from exchange risk during floating. And in contrast to recent aggregate trade flow studies, I conclude that there was no temporary decline in exchange risk during the late 1970s.     

Does tax convexity matter for risk? A dynamic study of tax asymmetry and equity beta

The purpose of this study is to explore the effect of tax convexity on firms’ market risk, where tax convexity measures the progressivity of firms’ tax function. We examine the relation between equity beta and tax convexity based on a standard contingent-claims model, in which firms face nonlinear tax schedules. We verify that in the presence of default and growth options, the effect of tax convexity on beta is significant and depends on several countervailing forces. Tax convexity has a direct, positive effect on beta, as well as two indirect countereffects through default and growth options. The overall effect is ambiguous and quantitatively significant. As asymmetric tax schedules are used in most countries, assuming a linear tax schedule in the valuation framework may misestimate beta and thus fail to assess risk accurately. Our theoretical model shows that tax convexity should be taken into consideration when estimating equity beta.     

Does the threat of takeover affect default risk?

We examine the impact of the threat of takeovers on default risk. Using a sample of 50,189 firm-year observations for US firms over the period 1990–2015, we find that the threat of takeovers has a negative relation with default risk. We use difference-in-difference analysis to address potential endogeneity concerns and propensity score matching to control for self-selection bias. The results are robust to alternative measures of default risk and exclusion of the dot com and financial crisis periods. Our results also hold after controlling for Governance Index and Entrenchment Index. We identify improvement in performance and earnings quality in response to the threat of takeovers as channels underlying our main result. The effect of the threat of takeovers on default risk is more pronounced for firms with opaque information environment and low institutional ownership. Our findings provide important insights for the market for corporate control as a disciplining mechanism in reducing default risk.     

Does idiosyncratic risk matter in IPO long-run performance?

Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting - This paper studies how firm-level idiosyncratic risk varies over time and affects both initial public offering (IPO) and matched non-IPO firms’...     

Does uncertainty matter for loan charge-offs?

Using a stylized real options model, we show that discretion over the timing of charging off a non-performing loan could be economically justified when collateral values are uncertain and there is a chance of loan recovery. The implied hypothesis of an “uncertainty dependence” aspect in loan charge-offs is empirically tested and validated using a panel of European banks. A welfare-maximizing regulator might want to let banks pursue such discretionary loan charge-off behavior, with the problem of distinguishing it from alternative capital management and income smoothing objectives, while transparency-seeking accounting standards setters would presumably not.     

Does the strength of the legal systems matter for trade in insurance and financial services?

This paper investigates if the strength of the legal system impacts on the trade in insurance and financial services in the high-income OECD and developing countries. Our findings reveal a statistically significant positive correlation of rule of law and regulatory quality with the exports and imports of insurance and financial services. Our empirical findings also reveal a negative and statistically significant correlation of contract enforcement with the exports and imports of insurance and financial services. We conclude that strengthening the rule of law and contract enforcement mechanisms can facilitate higher levels of trade in insurance and financial services.     

Does the choice of estimator matter when forecasting returns?

While the literature concerned with the predictability of stock returns is huge, surprisingly little is known when it comes to role of the choice of estimator of the predictive regression. Ideally, the choice of estimator should be rooted in the salient features of the data. In case of predictive regressions of returns there are at least three such features; (i) returns are heteroskedastic, (ii) predictors are persistent, and (iii) regression errors are correlated with predictor innovations. In this paper we examine if the accounting of these features in the estimation process has any bearing on our ability to forecast future returns. The results suggest that it does.