套期保值有效性测试的评价

Angelika C. Hailer, S. Rump
{"title":"套期保值有效性测试的评价","authors":"Angelika C. Hailer, S. Rump","doi":"10.1142/S021986810500029X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"According to IAS 39 or FAS 133 an a posteriori test for hedge effectiveness has to be implemented when using hedge accounting. Both standards do not regulate which numerical method has to be used. A number of hedge effectiveness tests have been published recently. Such tests are of different quality; for example, not all of them can deal with the problem of small numbers. This means a test might determine an effective hedge to be ineffective, a scenario which would increase the volatility in earnings. Therefore, it seems useful to have criteria at hand to discriminate and assess hedge effectiveness tests. In this paper, we introduce such objective criteria, which we develop according to our understanding of miminum economic requirements. They are applicable to tests based on market values of two points in time as well as tests based on time series of market values. According to our criteria we compare common tests like the dollar offset ratio, regression analysis or volatility reduction, showing strengths and weaknesses. Finally, we develop a new Adjusted Hedge Interval test based on our previous one (Hailer, AC and SM Rump (2003). Zeitschrift fur das gesamte kreditwesen, 56(11), 599–603). Our test does not show weaknesses of other effectiveness tests.","PeriodicalId":128457,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Derivatives Accounting","volume":"02 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"EVALUATION OF HEDGE EFFECTIVENESS TESTS\",\"authors\":\"Angelika C. Hailer, S. Rump\",\"doi\":\"10.1142/S021986810500029X\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"According to IAS 39 or FAS 133 an a posteriori test for hedge effectiveness has to be implemented when using hedge accounting. Both standards do not regulate which numerical method has to be used. A number of hedge effectiveness tests have been published recently. Such tests are of different quality; for example, not all of them can deal with the problem of small numbers. This means a test might determine an effective hedge to be ineffective, a scenario which would increase the volatility in earnings. Therefore, it seems useful to have criteria at hand to discriminate and assess hedge effectiveness tests. In this paper, we introduce such objective criteria, which we develop according to our understanding of miminum economic requirements. They are applicable to tests based on market values of two points in time as well as tests based on time series of market values. According to our criteria we compare common tests like the dollar offset ratio, regression analysis or volatility reduction, showing strengths and weaknesses. Finally, we develop a new Adjusted Hedge Interval test based on our previous one (Hailer, AC and SM Rump (2003). Zeitschrift fur das gesamte kreditwesen, 56(11), 599–603). Our test does not show weaknesses of other effectiveness tests.\",\"PeriodicalId\":128457,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Derivatives Accounting\",\"volume\":\"02 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2005-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Derivatives Accounting\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1142/S021986810500029X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Derivatives Accounting","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1142/S021986810500029X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

根据IAS 39或FAS 133,在使用套期会计时必须实施套期有效性的后验检验。这两个标准都没有规定必须使用哪种数值方法。最近发表了许多对冲有效性测试。这些测试的质量各不相同;例如,不是所有的人都能处理小数字的问题。这意味着测试可能会确定有效的对冲无效,这种情况将增加收益的波动性。因此,手头有标准来区分和评估套期有效性测试似乎是有用的。在本文中,我们介绍了这些客观标准,这些标准是我们根据对最低经济要求的理解制定的。它们既适用于基于两个时间点的市场价值的测试,也适用于基于市场价值时间序列的测试。根据我们的标准,我们比较常见的测试,如美元抵消率,回归分析或波动性减少,显示优势和劣势。最后,我们在之前的测试(Hailer, AC和SM Rump(2003))的基础上开发了一个新的调整对冲区间测试。科学通报,26(1),393 - 393。我们的测试没有显示出其他有效性测试的弱点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
EVALUATION OF HEDGE EFFECTIVENESS TESTS
According to IAS 39 or FAS 133 an a posteriori test for hedge effectiveness has to be implemented when using hedge accounting. Both standards do not regulate which numerical method has to be used. A number of hedge effectiveness tests have been published recently. Such tests are of different quality; for example, not all of them can deal with the problem of small numbers. This means a test might determine an effective hedge to be ineffective, a scenario which would increase the volatility in earnings. Therefore, it seems useful to have criteria at hand to discriminate and assess hedge effectiveness tests. In this paper, we introduce such objective criteria, which we develop according to our understanding of miminum economic requirements. They are applicable to tests based on market values of two points in time as well as tests based on time series of market values. According to our criteria we compare common tests like the dollar offset ratio, regression analysis or volatility reduction, showing strengths and weaknesses. Finally, we develop a new Adjusted Hedge Interval test based on our previous one (Hailer, AC and SM Rump (2003). Zeitschrift fur das gesamte kreditwesen, 56(11), 599–603). Our test does not show weaknesses of other effectiveness tests.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
HEDGE ACCOUNTING AND DERIVATIVES STUDY FOR CORPORATES DISCLOSURE, HEDGE ACCOUNTING, AND RESTATEMENT RISK Executive Stock Option Exercises and the Predictive Ability of Transaction Value HOW TAXES AFFECT MARKET PRICE: THE "LONGS AND SHORTS" OF DISCOUNTING AND INFORMATION ACCOUNTING FOR EMPLOYEE STOCK OPTIONS AND MANDATORY EXPENSING: AN ECONOMICS PERSPECTIVE EXECUTIVE STOCK OPTIONS: A FIRM VALUE APPROACH
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1