The present article examines the potential economic gains from ''bette
r'' minimum-variance hedge (MVH) estimates, focusing on the assumption
s that yield MVHs consistent with expected-utility maximization. It is
found that the economic value of ''better'' MVH estimates is negligib
le, and that optimal hedges are substantially different from MVHs when
the usual MVH restrictions are relaxed. Among other things, findings
suggest that the hedging research's recent emphasis on ''better'' MVHs
has been a waste of resources. Investigating the consequences of rela
xing the standard MVH assumptions seems to be much more important than
recent literature contributions.