Search results

This study explores hedging strategies that use the KTB futures to hedge the price risk of the KTB spot portfolio. The study establishes the price sensitivity, risk-minimization, bivariate GARCH (1,1) models as hedging models, and analyzes their hedging performances. The sample period covers from September 29, 1999 to September 18, 2001. Time-matched prices at 11:00 (11:30) of the KTB futures and spot were used in the analysis. The most important findings may be summarized as follows. First, while the average hedge ration of the price sensitivity model is close to one, both the risk-minimization and GARCH model exhibit hedge ratios that are substantially lower than one. Hedge ratios tend to be greater for daily data than for weekly data. Second, for the daily in-sample data, hedging effectiveness is the highest for the GARCH model with time-varying hedge ratios, but the risk-minimization model with constant hedge ratios is not far behind the GARCH model in its hedging performance. In the case of out-of-sample hedging effectiveness, the GARCH model is the best for the KTB spot portfolio, and the risk-minimization model is the best for the corporate bond portfolio. Third, for daily data, the in-sample hedge shows a better performance than the out-of-sample hedge, except for the risk-minimization hedge against the corporate bond portfolio. Fourth, for the weekly in-sample hedges, the price sensitivity model is the worst and the risk-minimization model is the best in hedging the KTB spot portfolio. While the GARCH model is the best against the KTB +corporate bond portfolio, the risk-minimization model is generally as good as the GARCH model. The risk-minimization model performs the best for the weekly out-of-sample data, and the out-of-sample hedges are better than the in-sample hedges. Fifth, while the hedging performance of the risk-minimization model with daily moving window seems somewhat superior to the traditional risk-minimization model when the trading volume increased one year after the inception of the KTB futures, on the average the traditional model is better than the moving-window model. For weekly data, the traditional model exhibits a better performance. Overall, in the Korean bond markets, investors are encouraged to use the simple risk-minimization model to hedge the price risk of the KTB spot and corporate bond portfolios.

This paper performs the empirical analysis on the factors affection the hedge effectiveness of Korea Treasury Bond (KTB) Futures by different hedge models. Before analyzing the factors, firstly, we compare the hedge effectiveness for benchmark bond portfolio among different hedge models. We find that KTB Futures' hedge effectiveness do not produce significant difference depending on the different models.

Secondly, we test hedge effectiveness for the corporate bond. The results vary depending on the credit ranks. Below BBB rating, hedge effectiveness deteriorated significantly. This seems to be caused by the fact that BBB rated bond is more prone to be affected by credit risk rather than interest rate risk.

Thirdly, hedge effectiveness analysis for the maturity term mismatch, KTB Futures has performed poorly as underlying bond maturity mismatching with Futures. Finally, different yield curve shape, Futures price undervaluation or time to maturity of Futures do not produce significant effect for the hedge effectiveness.

In summary hedge effectiveness of KTB Futures (3 Year, 10 Year) seems to be dominantly affected by the 1) underlying hedging bond credit rating and 2) hedge term mismatch. Other factors such as yield curve shape, undervaluation of Futures and time to maturity of Futures has limited contribution under our research.

The purpose of this study is to investigate hedging effectiveness of KOSPI200 index futures and options using three measures proposed by Fishburn (1977), Ederington (1979), and Howard and D’Antonio (1987). The comparison of hedging effectiveness is conducted based on the market prices of KOSPI200 index futures and options traded in Korea Exchange (KRX) between January of 2001 and January of 2011, during which bootstrapping method is utilized to make a dataset of 100,000 random samples with holding period of 1, 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. We examine the hedging performance of hedge portfolios made of short futures, protective puts and covered calls respectively based on three hedging effectiveness measures.

One of our finding is that short futures hedging is better than options in minimizing total volatility risk as well as down-side risk, which is consistent to the previous researches. Also futures hedging is more effective in reducing the VaR than the others. Secondly, the optimal hedge ratios of futures in minimizing total risk and down-side risk are turned out to be 0.97~0.98 and 0.94~0.95 respectively. Third, OTM short call hedge is the best hedging instrument when hedgers would like to maximize the Sharpe ratio. Finally, protective put hedging strategy is in general inferior to the short futures and covered call hedge based on three hedging effectiveness measures.

The growth of the use of hedge funds in both the USA and in Europe has led to greater attempts to regulate the market. The authors provide a guide to the way regulations are likely to be imposed and the differences which may occur in the USA and European markets as a result.

Accounting for foreign currency hedges has become a fiercely complicated procedure. At a time when financial institutions are having to alter disclosure methods, the authors provide a practical guide to dealing with each type of hedging procedure.

Hedge fund replication gained considerable attention during the period surrounding 2007 when it was anticipated to become for hedge fund investors what index funds are for equity investors. The hedge fund replication concept only lacked a track record. This paper aims to present an updated evaluation.

Performance is evaluated on both a raw‐return basis and a risk‐adjusted basis using Fung and Hsieh's 8‐factor model. Particular emphasis is given to analyzing the performance of these products during the financial crisis and to highlighting the specific characteristics that distinguished them from their hedge fund cousins during this period.

The results show that the hedge fund replication space is definitely proving its existence as a credible hedge fund investment alternative. Talented hedge fund managers will always be in high demand, but they may have to just prove their high compensation a bit harder.

Although this study is based on a short sample period, the results indicate that hedge fund replication products delivered returns that were at par with the returns of hedge funds. The replication products performed comparatively well during the crisis probably as a result of having less exposure to illiquid assets.

To the best of the authors' knowledge, this article uses the most extensive data set of 22 hedge fund replication products to analyze their performance.

In the past, life insurance companies were mainly exposed to mortality risk, a risk they in principle could diversify by issuing a large number of similar and statistically independent policies. However, as more exotic life insurance policies have been offered, such as unit‐linked life insurance contracts and policies with bonus mechanisms and minimum rate of return guarantees, life insurance companies have also become exposed to financial risk. The financial risk is non‐diver‐sifiable and is likely to affect many, if not most, of the companies outstanding policies in the same direction. Although it is non‐diversifiable, the financial risk is (at least to some extent) hedgeable. Since the accumulated exposure to financial risk over all the policies issued by a life insurance company can be large, it is important that this risk be hedged so that the company is able to meet its obligations to the policyholders.

This paper studies hedging strategies that use the KOSDAQ50 index futures to hedge the price risk of the KOSDAQ50 index spot portfolio. This study uses the minimum variance hedge model and bivariate ECT-GARCH (1,1) model as hedging models, and analyzes their hedging performances. The sample period covers from January 31, 2001 to December 31, 2002. The most important findings may be summarized as follows. First, both the risk-minimization and GARCH model exhibit hedge ratios that are substantially lower than one. Hedge ratios of the risk-minimization tend to be higher than those of GARCH model. Second, for the in-sample data, hedging effectiveness of GARCH model is higher than that of the risk-minimization, while for the out-of-sample data, hedging effectiveness of the risk-minimization with constant hedge ratios is not far behind the GARCH model in its hedging performance. Third, the hedging performance of KOSDAQ50 index futures is lower than that of KOSPI200 index futures, but higher than that of KTB futures. In conclusion, in the KOSDAQ50 index market, investors are encouraged to use the simple risk-minimization model to hedge the price risk of KOSDAQ50 spot portfolios.

This study empirically compares the hedging performances of the newly listed Japanese yen (JPY) and European euro (EUR) currency futures in the KRX relative to that of the us dollar (USD) currency futures. For this purpose, assuming the situation of foreign-asset investment the minimum variance hedging models based on OLS and ECM are compared with a simple 1: 1 hedge. The difference between previous studies and this one is in that the latter uses various kinds of hedging performance measures and analyzes the hedging performances by different hedging horizon. According to the empirical results, the USD currency futures outperforms the JPY and EUR currency futures when considering the risk only.

However, the results are reversed wilen incorporating the return as well as the risk. With respect to the comparative advantages among hedging types, the ECM-hedge turns out to be better than the others for evaluating the risk only, and the 1: 1 hedge proves to be superior to the others when considering both of the return and risk aspects. Based on the risk-reduction aspect. the hedging performances are gradually improving as the length of hedging period increases, while they deteriorate for considering both the return and risk aspects.

To summarize Managed Funds Association's (MFA's) 2005 Sound Practices for Hedge Fund Managers™, which is designed to enhance the ability of hedge fund managers to manage operations, comply with applicable regulations, address unexpected market events, and help hedge funds satisfy responsibilities to investors.

Highlights the development of, and some of the recommendations set forth in, MFA's 2005 Sound Practices under the following categories: management and internal trading controls, responsibilities to investors, valuation policies and procedures, risk monitoring, regulatory controls, transactional practices, and business continuity and disaster recovery.

MFA's 2005 Sound Practices builds on recommendations first published in 2000, and subsequently revised by MFA in 2003, offering sound guidance on business and operational practices. In the 2005 update, MFA has expanded on topics of importance, including internal trading controls, responsibilities to investors, valuation, and risk controls, and has addressed new issues such as compliance programs, codes of ethics, and certain transactional practices. The 2005 Sound Practices is written from a “peer to peer” perspective and focuses on practices that are relevant primarily to the single‐manager hedge fund operation.

Article summarizes an essential hands‐on manual for hedge fund managers.