Reevaluating hedging performance

John Cotter and Jim Hanly ()

Journal of Futures Markets, 2006, vol. 26, issue 7, 677-702

Abstract: Mixed results have been documented for the performance of hedging strategies with the use of futures. This article reinvestigates this issue with the use of an extensive set of performance‐evaluation metrics across seven international markets. The hedging performances of short and long hedgers are compared with the use of traditional variance‐based approaches together with modern risk‐management techniques, including value at risk, conditional value at risk, and approaches based on downside risk. The findings indicate that use of these metrics to evaluate hedging performance yields differences in terms of best hedging strategy as compared with the traditional variance measure. Also, significant differences in performance between short and long hedgers are found. These results are observed both in sample and out of sample. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Jrl Fut Mark 26:677–702, 2006

Date: 2006
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (23)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/

Related works:
Working Paper: Re-evaluating Hedging Performance (2011)
Working Paper: Re-evaluating Hedging Performance (2005)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:jfutmk:v:26:y:2006:i:7:p:677-702

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0270-7314

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Futures Markets is currently edited by Robert I. Webb

More articles in Journal of Futures Markets from John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().