One of collateral damage effects of the oil price crash of recent weeks has been that airlines who have aggressively hedged their jet fuel requirements face a loss on the hedge. Normally this is not a problem, as the point of hedging is to match anticipated revenues with anticipated costs, but here it may backfire if unsold inventory becomes uncompetitive (at the hedged price) compared to competitors who have not hedged (or hedged less).
This brings the question, how much should ideally an airline hedge its fuel costs?
Hedgie or airline operator?
The first thing is that the airline should resist the temptation to branch out as a macro hedge fund and hedge based on predictions of future oil prices, beyond its current need, e.g. for future flights it hasn’t irreversibly committed to fly yet.
Making macro predictions and running an airline are two very different problems and it is unlikely a single management would be equally good at both. If they’re good at macro prediction, they should close the distracting airline and become an oil trader on a much larger scale, and conversely. Arguably an airline operator will have some idea on the general dynamic of the airline sector, and its fuel requirements, in their geography, but that’s unlikely to be enough to justify making active bets on the broader markets.
Asset liabilities match
So a reasonable fuel is to match the hedge as close as possible to committed fuel liabilities.
The maximum hedge is thus all the fuel required for all the scheduled flights the airlines has to fly, that would be something like all flights with at least 1 passenger booked.
But, in an era of dynamic pricing, the price of seats unsold can be varied in response to supply and demand, and costs. So why hedge unsold tickets at all? This gives the minimum hedge: only hedge the fuel share corresponding to tickets already sold.
This inconveniently would be an exact match only if demand and supply don’t react to fuel costs being pushed to ticket prices, and are not variable for non-fuel factors. So the ideal match is somewhere between those 2 possibilities, without an exact answer being easily attainable.
The simplest for a shrewd airline may be safety in numbers: to hedge as much as (and no more than) their competitors (on comparable routes, etc). Then success remains a result of operational excellence or lack thereof.
Economic intelligence test
For investors in airline shares, there may be more to read in how management justifies their hedging policy — do they get the economics? — rather than how much. And run away from closet hedgies.