دانلود مقاله پوشش ریسک، حسابداری پوششی و پیش بینی سود
چکیده
مقدمه
نظریه و فرضیه ها
مجموعه، داده ها و طراحی تحقیق
نتایج اصلی
نتیجه گیری
منابع
Abstract
Introduction
Theory and hypotheses
Setting, data, and research design
Main results
Conclusion
References
چکیده
مطالعات نشان می‌دهد که بر اساس اجرای SFAS 133، حتی استفاده‌کنندگان ماهر صورت‌های مالی نیز درک پیامدهای سود ناشی از مشتقات پوشش‌دهنده را دشوار می‌دانند. علاوه بر این، به دلیل الزامات سختگیرانه حسابداری پوشش ریسک تحت این استانداردها، بسیاری از پوشش های اقتصادی واجد شرایط حسابداری پوششی نیستند و برای اهداف گزارشگری مالی «ناکارآمد» تلقی می شوند. با انگیزه این ملاحظات، ما با تجزیه و تحلیل داده‌های پوشش‌دهی جمع‌آوری‌شده دستی از دو صنعت که به‌طور گسترده از مشتقات برای مدیریت ریسک‌های قیمتی استفاده می‌کنند، تأثیر پوشش ریسک بر پیش‌بینی‌پذیری سود را بررسی می‌کنیم: صنعت اکتشاف و تولید نفت و گاز و صنعت هواپیمایی. برخلاف شواهد موجود، متوجه می‌شویم که مشتقات پوشش ریسک کلی، پیش‌بینی‌پذیری درآمد را بهبود می‌بخشد و دقت پیش‌بینی تحلیلگران (پراکندگی) را افزایش (کاهش) می‌دهد. همچنین نشان می‌دهیم که پوشش‌هایی که برای حسابداری پوششی بی‌اثر تلقی می‌شوند، می‌توانند نوسان سود را افزایش داده و به طور قابل‌توجهی قابلیت پیش‌بینی سود را مختل کنند. این یافته از نگرانی های بیان شده توسط برخی از مدیران شرکت ها و کارشناسان صنعت در برابر الزامات حسابداری پوشش ریسک حمایت می کند.
توجه! این متن ترجمه ماشینی بوده و توسط مترجمین ای ترجمه، ترجمه نشده است.
Abstract
Studies suggest that, pursuant to the implementation of SFAS 133, even sophisticated users of financial statements find it difficult to comprehend earnings implications of hedging derivatives. Moreover, due to stringent hedge accounting requirements under these standards, many economic hedges do not qualify for hedge accounting and are deemed “ineffective” for financial reporting purposes. Motivated by these considerations, we investigate the impact of hedging on earnings predictability by analyzing hand-collected hedging data from two industries that extensively use derivatives to manage price risks: the oil-and-gas exploration and production industry and the airline industry. In contrast to extant evidence, we find that overall hedging derivatives improve income predictability and increase (decrease) analysts’ forecast accuracy (dispersion). We also show hedges deemed ineffective for hedge accounting can increase earnings volatility and significantly impair earnings predictability. This finding lends support to concerns expressed by some corporate managers and industry experts against stringent hedge accounting requirements.
Introduction
We use a sample of oil-and-gas exploration and production (henceforth “oil-andgas companies”) and airline firms to investigate the impact of derivative hedging on earnings predictability under prevailing accounting standards.1 Under SFAS 133, when derivatives are used effectively for hedging purposes, cash flow and earnings volatility should decrease, making earnings easier to predict, all else equal. Yet evidence indicates otherwise. Campbell et al. (2015) show that financial analysts fail to understand profitability implications of unrealized hedging gains and losses from cash flow hedges once they expire, and therefore their longer term two-year and three-year-ahead earnings forecasts are adversely affected. Chang et al. (2016) find that analysts’ earnings forecasts become less accurate and more dispersed following initiations of derivatives by firms for hedging purposes and attribute this result to analysts’ limited ability to understand complex derivative financial instruments and their financial statement effects from the detailed disclosures provided under SFAS 133.
Conclusion
Derivatives are inherently complex. Financial accounting standards require detailed and elaborate reporting with respect to derivatives to help financial statement users understand their earnings and valuation implications. When derivatives are used for hedging, it would seem that earnings and cash flow volatilities should decrease, improving their predictability by investors and financial analysts. Yet the impact of hedging on earnings volatility is unclear, due to the stringent hedge accounting rules imposed by SFAS 133. Moreover, some research suggests that even sophisticated financial statement users are unable to understand earnings implications of derivative hedging (Campbell 2015; Campbell et al. 2015; Chang et al. 2016). Therefore, whether hedging improves or impairs analysts’ earnings forecasting efficacy is an empirical question.
H1: Analyst forecast accuracy and dispersion are not associated with the extent of derivative usage
H2: Ineffective hedges have an incrementally negative (positive) effect on the association between analyst forecast accuracy (dispersion) and the extent of derivative usage
Accuracy
Dispersion
Derivatives
Analysts
Size
Intangible
Volatility
MB
Issue
Turnover
Return
ROA
Foreign
M&A
Num_firm
Num_ind
Brokerage_size
Forecast_exp
Forecast_freq
Horizon
Ineffective
AllIneffective