This paper points out an error and implications of the error in the model of hedging effectiveness proposed by Howard and D'Antonio (1). The error would lead to ambiguous results if the model were used in practical applications to select the best hedging instrument. This paper proposes a new measure of hedging effectiveness that eliminates the error in the original model and resolves the ambiguity.

ABSTRACT C ornell and R einganum (1981) , hereafter CR, report that price differentials for future contracts and forward contracts are statistically insignificant in foreign exchange markets. Based on this finding, CR conclude that marking‐to‐market is insignificant in the formulation of currency futures prices. This note identifies two potential concerns with the CR tests. One problem relates to the timing of delivery dates for “matched” contracts. A second problem relates to the time period for the CR study. We show that correcting for these problems does not affect the overall conclusions of the CR study; marking‐to‐market does not appear to have a significant effect on currency futures prices.

Cornell and Reinganum (1981), hereafter CR, report that price differentials for future contracts and forward contracts are statistically insignificant in foreign exchange markets. Based on this finding, CR conclude that marking-to-market is insignificant in the formulation of currency futures prices. This note identifies two potential concerns with the CR tests. One problem relates to the timing of delivery dates for “matched” contracts. A second problem relates to the time period for the CR study. We show that correcting for these problems does not affect the overall conclusions of the CR study; marking-to-market does not appear to have a significant effect on currency futures prices.

We model claim arrival and loss uncertainties jointly in a doubly-binomial framework to price an Asian-style catastrophe (CAT) option with a non-traded underlying loss index using the no-arbitrage martingale pricing methodology. We span these uncertainties by benchmarking to the shadow price of a one-claim bond and the premium of a reinsurance contract. We implement a stochastic time change from calendar time to claim time to more efficiently price the CAT option as a random sum – a binomial sum of claim time binomial Asian option prices. This choice of the operational time dimension allows us to incorporate different patterns of catastrophe arrivals by adjusting the claim arrival probability. We demonstrate this versatility by incorporating a mean-reverting Ornstein-Uhlenbeck intensity arrival process. Simulation results verify our model predictions and demonstrate how the claim arrival probability varies with the expected claim arrival intensity.