IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jacrfn/v15y2003i4p95-103.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring Hedge Effectiveness For Fas 133 Compliance

Author

Listed:
  • John M. Charnes
  • Paul Koch
  • Henk Berkman

Abstract

Financial Accounting Standard (FAS) 133 requires business entities to document their anticipation of hedge effectiveness in order to qualify for hedge accounting treatment of gains and losses from financial derivatives. In the absence of specific guidelines, the accounting industry has espoused the “80–125” rule for determining hedge effectiveness. But the authors observe that meaningful assessment of anticipated hedge effectiveness must consider two distinct aspects of a firm's hedging strategy: (1) the strength of the hedging relationship, which is determined by the choice of the hedging instrument; and (2) the position taken in the hedging instrument relative to the holdings of the hedged item. They take both aspects of hedging into consideration in developing alternative measures of hedge effectiveness and distinguishing between the potential and attained effectiveness of a particular hedge. This approach enables the user to evaluate the relative merits of alternative hedging strategies to support risk management decisions, and also to document a selected hedging strategy's anticipated effectiveness for purposes of compliance with FAS 133. While the authors endorse a fairly broad interpretation of hedge effectiveness, their approach can also be used in the narrower context of an “80–125” rule.

Suggested Citation

  • John M. Charnes & Paul Koch & Henk Berkman, 2003. "Measuring Hedge Effectiveness For Fas 133 Compliance," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 15(4), pages 95-103, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jacrfn:v:15:y:2003:i:4:p:95-103
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-6622.2003.tb00530.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6622.2003.tb00530.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1745-6622.2003.tb00530.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chao Jiang & Ira G. Kawaller & Paul D. Koch, 2016. "Designing A Proper Hedge: Theory Versus Practice," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 39(2), pages 123-144, June.
    2. Jędrzej Białkowski & Martin T. Bohl & Devmali Perera, 2022. "Commodity Futures Hedge Ratios: A Meta-Analysis," Working Papers in Economics 22/12, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
    3. Białkowski, Jędrzej & Bohl, Martin T. & Perera, Devmali, 2023. "Commodity futures hedge ratios: A meta-analysis," Journal of Commodity Markets, Elsevier, vol. 30(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jacrfn:v:15:y:2003:i:4:p:95-103. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1078-1196 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.