What do we really know about corporate hedging? A multimethod meta-analytical study

Stefan Stöckl, J. Geyer-Klingeberg, Markus Hang, A. Rathgeber and M. Walter
Additional contact information
Stefan Stöckl: ICN Business School, CEREFIGE - Centre Européen de Recherche en Economie Financière et Gestion des Entreprises - UL - Université de Lorraine
J. Geyer-Klingeberg: UNIA - Universität Augsburg [Deutschland] = University of Augsburg [Germany] = Université d'Augsburg [Allemagne]
A. Rathgeber: UNIA - Universität Augsburg [Deutschland] = University of Augsburg [Germany] = Université d'Augsburg [Allemagne]
M. Walter: UNIA - Universität Augsburg [Deutschland] = University of Augsburg [Germany] = Université d'Augsburg [Allemagne]

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: This paper employs meta-analysis to aggregate and systematically analyze the mixed empirical evidence on the determinants of corporate hedging reported in 132 previously published studies covering data from more than 73,000 firms. Among the fourteen proxy variables analyzed by multivariate meta-analysis, three variables emerge as reliable explanatory factors for corporate hedging decisions supporting the bankruptcy and financial distress hypothesis: dividend yield (positive sign), liquidity (negative sign), and firm size (positive sign). Moreover, for tax-loss carry forwards (positive sign) and research and development (positive sign), our findings indicate a weak impact on corporate hedging behavior reflecting tax reasons, the coordination between financing and investment, and agency conflicts between shareholders and debtholders. Regarding the asymmetric information and agency conflicts of equity hypothesis, we find no explanatory power. The further analysis of heterogeneity via meta-regression reveals several factors that determine the mixed empirical evidence reported in previous studies. First, the results indicate that studies analyzing firms from North America report, on average, a lower impact of leverage on the corporate hedging decision. Moreover, studies examining more recent data samples tend to find a weaker relation between tangible assets and hedging, R&D and hedging, respectively. Overall, our results encourage scientific research to put more emphasis on finer-grained examinations of hedging variations and to discover rationales of corporate hedging extending classical financial theories.

Keywords: Corporate hedging; Corporate risk management; Derivatives; Meta-analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (11)

Published in Business Research, 2018, 11 (1), pp.1-31. ⟨10.1007/s40685-017-0052-0⟩

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
Working Paper: What do we really know about corporate hedging? A multimethod meta-analytical study (2015)
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:hal:journl:hal-01809957

DOI: 10.1007/s40685-017-0052-0

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().