The validating roles of hedging and leverage as value-adding corporate strategies arise from their beneficial manipulation of deadweight market impositions such as taxes and financial distress costs. These roles may even be symbiotic in their value-adding effects, but they are antithetic in their effects on company risk. This study's modelling analysis indicates that hedging and leverage do interact for net benefit to company value; for sensible base-case exogenous parameters, the optimal (value-maximising) joint hedging and leverage strategy increases company value by about 4.0% compared to the unhedged optimal leverage strategy, by about 1.3% compared to the unlevered optimal hedge strategy, and by about 4.0% compared to the company being unlevered and unhedged. Furthermore an optimal joint hedging and leverage strategy is less financially risky than an unhedged optimal leverage strategy or an unhedged and unlevered strategy, and is often less financially risky than an unlevered optimal hedge strategy. Interestingly, the optimal joint hedging and leverage strategy entails some risk-seeking hedge reversal in response to weak price outcomes for production output.

This thesis investigates the theoretical and empirical relationships between a firm’s R&D investment intensity and the systematic risk of its common stock in Sweden. This is done by examining 38 Swedish firms between 1997 and 2005. An overlapping set of 5-year window is chosen to apply to calculate the variables of the samples. In this thesis, three factors are introduced as a proxy of main constituents of systematic risk: intrinsic business risk, degree of financial leverage and degree of operating leverage. And we use these three constituents to analysis the relationship between R&D investment and systematic risk. The results from Monte Carlos simulations and correlation analysis of our sample show that, in Sweden, firms with higher R&D intensity do face higher stock price volatility in the stock market. At the same time, we attempt to test the relationship among R&D and systematic risk’s three constituents, but find that R&D intensive firms have more financial leverage which is opposite to our expect, which might due to the shortage of data and limitation of our sample selection, and R&D intensive firms do not have obvious relations directly with intrinsic business risk, degree of financial leverage or degree of operating leverage.

Previous research on the tradeoff between operating and financial leverage has come to contradicting results, thus, there is no consensus of opinion regarding van Horne’s tradeoff theory. This study investigates whether there is support for the tradeoff theory on a sample of 347 Swedish, listed firms. Unlike previous studies, we employ a method with direct measures using guidance provided by Penman (2012), rather than using the more common degree of operating and financial leverage as proxies. During the time period 2006-2011 we find a statistically significant negative relationship of 0.214 using an OLS regression with financial leverage as the dependent variable, giving support for the tradeoff theory. The adjusted explanatory power (adjusted R2) is however rather low, despite adding four control variables, reaching only 7.4%.

Not available / text

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Texas at El Paso, 2008. / Title from title screen. Vita. CD-ROM. Includes bibliographical references. Also available online.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Texas at Austin, 2004. / Supervisor: Sheridan Titman. Vita. Includes bibliographical references.

<p>This thesis investigates the theoretical and empirical relationships between a firm’s R&D investment intensity and the systematic risk of its common stock in Sweden. This is done by examining 38 Swedish firms between 1997 and 2005. An overlapping set of 5-year window is chosen to apply to calculate the variables of the samples.</p><p>In this thesis, three factors are introduced as a proxy of main constituents of systematic risk: intrinsic business risk, degree of financial leverage and degree of operating leverage. And we use these three constituents to analysis the relationship between R&D investment and systematic risk.</p><p>The results from Monte Carlos simulations and correlation analysis of our sample show that, in Sweden, firms with higher R&D intensity do face higher stock price volatility in the stock market. At the same time, we attempt to test the relationship among R&D and systematic risk’s three constituents, but find that R&D intensive firms have more financial leverage which is opposite to our expect, which might due to the shortage of data and limitation of our sample selection, and R&D intensive firms do not have obvious relations directly with intrinsic business risk, degree of financial leverage or degree of operating leverage.</p>

The thesis is focused on the assessment of the investment in the transport company by a variety of funding and its impact on capital structure. The operational objective is to evaluate the effect of financial leverage and impact of investments on the financial situation of the company. The investment is viewed from the perspective of market demand capital.

Much has been written during the past decade to explain the relationship between financial and operating leverage and stock-price volatility. However, the relationship between combined leverage and stock-price volatility has yet to be fully explored. Mandelker and Rhee's (MR) recent study uses both operating and financial leverage in a regression (equivalent to the traditional total leverage—DTL) and shows that both types of leverage are positively associated with common stock betas. Huffman recently demonstrated that there are interactions between operating leverage and financial leverage. Therefore, MR's model could be oversimplified. This study examines the relationship between firms' combined leverage and their stock-price volatility. The study also examines industry and industry growth to see if the relationship is influenced by these factors. The question is whether DOCL is a better risk measure than DTL and whether there is an interaction between operating and financial leverage. The inferences that can be drawn from the study's results are as follows: (a) Stock risk is a function of combined leverage; (b) Industry significantly influences the relationship between stock risk and DOCL; (c) High growth increases the relationship between stock risk and DOCL; (d) Combined leverage (DOCL) is a better risk measure than total leverage (DTL). Further, the problem with the traditional total leverage measure is the omission of the interaction between DOL and DFL. This is consistent with Huffman's theory and suggests Mandelker and Rhee's model is oversimplified.

The effect of a change in capital structure on the risk and return of common stockholders is investigated. Also, the information content of dividends when a firm goes for new outside financing is examined. Data used in the study are collected from the Moody's Bond Survey, the Prentice Hall's Capital Adjustments, the Wall Street Journal Index, and the Center for Research in Security Prices Tape. The study uses an event study methodology. The risk (beta) of common stock before an issuance of debt securities is compared with the risk after the issue. The stock market reaction to the issuance of new debt securities is measured using after-the-event risk. The information content of dividend announcement before a new debt issue is compared to that of after the issue. The findings show that debt issue reduces stock holders' risk if the issuer is a dividend paying company. Also, debt securities issued through an exchange offer increase stockholders' wealth. Finally, issuance of new debt does not affect the information content of dividends.