The Impact of Company Characteristics on Derivatives Usage: Survey Study of Large Croatian Companies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of derivatives for risk management purposes has been a worldwide phenomenon for several decades. Researches show that use of derivatives as a tool of corporate risk management can contribute to the creation of company’s market value and shareholder wealth. Studies on companies’ motives for derivatives usage and non-usage were conducted in USA, Canada, Australia, United Kingdom, Belgium, Sweden, Taiwan and Pakistan. In the recent years, the subject of derivatives markets has been abundantly covered in Croatian literature as well. At the moment, there is no derivatives market in Croatia, and only viable exchange trading is spot trading of securities on the Zagreb Stock Exchange. However, those interested can trade at major European and world exchanges through mediation of domestic and foreign brokers. For this reason, the attitude of Croatian companies towards derivatives trading imposed as insufficiently studied area of research. For the purpose of this paper a primary research was conducted among large Croatian companies. The purpose of the research was to determine the extent to which large Croatian companies are familiar with the concept and strategies of derivatives trading, how many companies use derivatives, the type of most commonly used derivatives and motives for use and non-use of derivatives among Croatian companies. The analysis of survey results was conducted through cross-tabulation in order to assess the impact of company characteristics on derivatives usage. DOI: 10.5901/mjss.2013.v4n10p59
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".