At the beginning of 2012, Helena Morales, an equity analyst, was analyzing the jet fuel-securing technique of JetBlue Airways for the next season. Air carriers mix-hedged their jet fuel cost risk using different types of contracts on other oil items, for example, WTI and Brent oil. Consequently, air travel was subjected to basis risk. This year dislocations within the oil market brought a Brent-WTI premium. Jet fuel began to maneuver with Brent rather than with WTI as it previously did. Confronted with securing deficits, several U.S. air carriers began to alter their securing methods, leaving WTI. But, others are worried that the Brent-WTI premium may well be a temporary phenomenon. For 2012, would JetBlue keep using WTI because of its fuel hedging, or would it switch to a different one like Brent?
​Matos, Pedro
Darden Business School (UVAF1697)
June 21, 2013
Case questions answered:
Case study questions answered in the first solution:
- Given the high price of jet fuel at the end of 2011, should JetBlue Airways hedge its fuel costs for 2012? And, if so, should it increase or decrease the percentage hedged for 2012?
- Focusing on the 2007 to 2011 period, which commodity (WTI crude oil, Brent crude oil, or heating oil) moved more closely to the price of jet fuel?
- Should JetBlue continue using WTI as an oil benchmark for its crude oil hedges or switch to Brent? Quantify your answer using the 2007 to 2011 historical data provided in case Exhibit 6.
- Helena Morales wants to backtest a WTI hedge versus a Brent hedge. She takes a monthly hedge position of 20 million gallons for 2012. This corresponds to a hedge totaling 240 million gallons, which is about a 45.7% hedge ratio if the annual gallons consumed stay flat at 525 million gallons. Assume (unrealistically) that JetBlue would use a simple futures hedge (note: the WTI and Brent exchange-traded futures contracts are for 1,000 barrels = 42,000 gallons). Use also the (unrealistic) assumption that futures are identical to a forward and that the current forward price is equal to the spot price of the commodity. Now use the 60 months of the 2007 to 2011 historical prices on jet fuel, WTI, and Brent to simulate what would have been the monthly jet fuel costs under three scenarios: (1) without a hedge; (2) with a WTI hedge; and (3) with a Brent hedge. Would any hedge have helped reduce fuel cost volatility?
- What risks are being hedged, and what risks are left unhedged?
- What does the time series of profit and loss (for the business) look like before and after the hedge?
Case study questions answered in the second solution:
- Given the high price of jet fuel at the end of 2011, should JetBlue hedge its fuel costs for 2012? And, if so, should it increase or decrease the percentage hedged for 2012?
- Focusing on the 2007 to 2011 period, which commodity (WTI crude oil, Brent crude oil, or heating oil) moved more closely to the price of jet fuel?
- Should JetBlue continue using WTI as an oil benchmark for its crude oil hedges or switch to Brent? Quantify your answer using the 2007 to 2011 historical data provided in case Exhibit 6.
- Helena Morales wants to backtest a WTI hedge versus a Brent hedge. She takes a monthly hedge position of 20 million gallons for 2012. This corresponds to a hedge totaling 240 million gallons, which is about a 45.7% hedge ratio if the annual gallons consumed stay at 525 million gallons. Assume (unrealistically) that JetBlue Airways would use a simple futures hedge (note: the WTI and Brent exchange-traded futures contracts are for 1,000 barrels = 42,000 gallons). Use also the (unrealistic) assumption that a future is identical to a forward and that the current forward price is equal to the spot price of the commodity. Now use the 60 months of the 2007 to 2011 historical prices on jet fuel, WTI, and Brent to simulate what would have been the monthly jet fuel costs under three scenarios: (1) without a hedge; (2) with a WTI hedge; and (3) with a Brent hedge. Would any hedge have helped reduce fuel cost volatility?
- What risks are being hedged, and what risks are left unhedged?
Not the questions you were looking for? Submit your own questions & get answers.
2012 Fuel Hedging at JetBlue Airways Case Answers
This case solution includes an Excel file with calculations.
You will receive access to two case study solutions! The second is not yet visible in the preview.
1. Introduction – 2012 Fuel Hedging at JetBlue Airways Case Study
During the lifetime of a business, many different risks could affect its overall value. Companies use insurance to protect themselves against unlikely events that could affect the value of their assets.
These losses in value are derived from damaging hazards such as catastrophes outside their ordinary course of business. Together, firms face many other dangers as part of their business operations (Berk & DeMarzo, 2011).
Corporations implement risk management skills to protect against corporate value-decreasing exposures, such as currency exchange rates, interest rates, and commodity prices; therefore, they increase their corporate market value.
For companies such as JetBlue Airways, excess volatility in the costs of the commodities they use and/or products can be the highest cause of risk to their profitability.
According to Matos (2017), JetBlue’s purchase of jet fuel represents almost 40% of the total operating expenses. To secure from these risks, the financial market provides multiple different instruments for hedging. Hedging involves contracts or transactions that provide the firm with cash flows that offset its losses from price changes (Berk & DeMarzo, 2011).
The purpose of this report is to advise JetBlue on its hedging strategy by looking at the current trend in the oil commodity-related prices and the value-adding that hedging could provide to JetBlue Airways’ market value. The remainder of the report proceeds as follows.
Section II introduces the theory of hedging and explains what futures and forwards are as hedging contracts. Section III discusses in detail if JetBlue should hedge in the following expected year of the case: 2012.
Moreover, as an analysis, the correlation of different oil commodities is shown together with a back-test on the profit and loss from different hedging scenarios.
Also, the JetBlue Airways time series before and after the hedges graphs are shown. Section IV compares the literature on corporate finance risk management with this case. Finally, section V concludes.
2. Hedging Theory
Hedging is a critical strategy to implement for listed companies for several reasons. It’s challenging to play out hedging strategies for all the possible risks deriving from reasonably significant business activity.
However, it is fundamental to protect the core business of a company by momentary speculation opportunities. For a company like that, opportunities are mainly derived from certain commodities that are physiologically necessary for the operating practice.
But risks to hedge for a company also come from foreign currency exchange rates or interest rates. Swings in prices of those mentioned commodities could indeed represent a loss in the value of the assets, which JetBlue Airways cannot ignore.
Companies should also decide to assume hedge positions towards the core risks of their business to protect their investors. Shareholders, who could also consider a hedge position on their own, could not have the necessary information about risks faced by the company or just the financial knowledge required to implement such an exceptional investment strategy.
Also, transaction costs represent quite a high barrier for the single investor to hedge their risk exposure privately. All these elements make the hypothesis of self-hedging shareholders impossible, in fact.
However, the main reason managers should hedge is that lowering the idiosyncratic risk of the company is a necessity they need to supply, providing several benefits the company should not go without in terms of risk transfer to better bearers.
In particular, categories of risk like the product or geographic risk, which an average investor could be easily protected from by an essential portfolio diversification, could represent a significant menace to a company. Finally, lowering the company’s tax liability could be a determinant factor for a manager to decide to hedge some of the core risks since insurance premiums are often tax-deductible.
Hedging aims to reduce the company’s inertia towards fluctuations in commodities prices, decreasing the risk associated with such fluctuations, and trying to fix a stable value to account for those assets. This technique is implemented in purchasing term contracts whose value is negatively correlated with commodity prices they are hedging from.
The basis is the difference between the spot price of the underlying commodity and the cost of term contracts. They do not necessarily vary by the same amount, so this difference (the basis indeed) may enhance or decrease, causing variable gains or losses depending on the hedged position.
The uncertainty regarding the value of the basis is defined as basis risk – or hedging risk – which is generally attenuated by computing the optimal variance hedge ratio. This, depending on the relationship between the variations of the two prices, allows us to adjust the hedge position and minimize the basis risk. This operation is called “tailing” and is perpetrated by multiplying the hedge ratio by the daily spot price to the futures price ratio (Hull, 2012).
Forward and Futures
Term contracts are typically divided into futures and forwards. The main difference between them is that futures are standardized and consequently more liquid and tradable on regulated markets.
Forwards contracts show more customized terms (they practically represent private agreements between two parties) and have one settlement date at the end of the contract. The benefit deriving from hedging with forwards is evident in that they are less exposed to the mentioned basis risk and don’t need any tailing operation due to their not being marked-to-market (traded and settled daily).
However, being sold over-the-counter, they include high…
Unlock Case Solution Now!
Get instant access to this case solution with a simple, one-time payment ($24.90).
After purchase:
- You'll be redirected to the full case solution.
- You will receive an access link to the solution via email.
Best decision to get my homework done faster!
Michael
MBA student, Boston