Purpose -Based on basic financial models and reports in the business press, exchange rate movements are generally believed to affect the value of nonfinancial firms. In contrast, the empirical research on nonfinancial firms typically produces fewer significant exposures estimates than researchers expect, independent of the sample studied and the methodology used, giving rise to a situation known as “the exposure puzzle”. To this end, this paper aims to systematically analyze the existing empirical evidence of the exposure phenomenon and to attempt to understand the possible source of the exposure puzzle. Design/methodology/approach -The paper provides a survey of the existing research on the exposure phenomenon for nonfinancial firms. A simple model of exposure elasticity is also used to demonstrate the substantial impact of operational hedging on exposure elasticities. Furthermore, the evidence on the nature of firms’ financial derivative usage is considered. Findings - It is suggested that the exposure puzzle may not be a problem of empirical methodology or sample selection as previous research has suggested, but is simply the result of the endogeneity of operative and financial hedging at the firm level. Given that empirical tests estimate exchange exposures net of corporate hedging, both firms with low gross exposures that do not need to hedge and firms with large gross exposures that employ one or several forms of hedging, may exhibit only weak exchange rate exposures net of hedging. Consequently, empirical tests yield only small percentages of firms with significant stock price exposures in almost any sample. Originality/value -If firms react rationally to their exposures, most firms will either have no exposure to start with, or reduce their exposure to levels that may be too small to detect empirically. Consequently, the exposure puzzle may not be a problem with methodology or theory, but mainly the result of endogeneity of operative and financial hedging at the firm level.
