Comparing alternative hedge accounting standards: Shareholders' perspective
Review of Accounting Studies, ISSN: 1380-6653, Vol: 4, Issue: 3-4, Page: 265-292
1999
- 42Citations
- 17Usage
- 65Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations42
- Citation Indexes42
- 42
- CrossRef25
- Usage17
- Abstract Views17
- Captures65
- Readers65
- 65
Article Description
We study the economic consequences of alternative hedge accounting rules in terms of managerial hedging decisions and wealth effects for shareholders. The rules we consider include the "fair-value" and "cash-flow" hedge accounting methods prescribed by the recent SFAS No. 133. We illustrate that the accounting method used influences the manager's hedge decision. We show that under no-hedge accounting, the hedge choice is different from the optimal economic hedge the firm would make under symmetric and public information. However, under a certain definition of fair-value hedge accounting, the hedging decision preserves the optimal economic hedge. We then demonstrate that long-term and future shareholders prefer a certain definition of fair-value hedge accounting to no-hedge accounting, while short-term shareholders prefer either approach depending on risk preferences and the level of uncertainty. We speculate about circumstances in which a manager would choose not to adopt fair-value hedge accounting when he has the option not to do so. © 1999 Kluwer Academic Publishers,.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=0013449629&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/a:1009638302403; http://link.springer.com/10.1023/A:1009638302403; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soa_research/1243; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2242&context=soa_research; http://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soa_research/1243; http://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2242&context=soa_research; http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/a%3A1009638302403; https://dx.doi.org/10.1023/a%3A1009638302403; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1009638302403
Springer Nature
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know