Post-quote FX optimization: How travel sellers recover the margin they give away
By Dor Golan, Co-founder & CEO, Grain
TL;DR:
Travel sellers quote in one currency and settle in another, often weeks or months later.
A standard forward removes the downside, and removes every bit of the upside with it.
Participating structures keep the floor and return most of the favourable move.
Across one partner book of 25,000 hedges, the market moved in the seller's favour on roughly 47% of trades. ---------------------------------------------
Every travel seller knows the hard part is winning the booking. Acquisition is expensive, price competition is relentless, and once suppliers, platforms and intermediaries take their cut, what remains on a room is thin.
So the instinct is to chase the next booking. The trouble is there is margin sitting untouched in the bookings already won.
The leak runs the length of the booking cycle. You quote an agent today in their currency. You settle the hotel weeks or months later in yours. Between those two moments the exchange rate moves, and that movement lands directly on your margin. Most sellers treat that window purely as a risk to be eliminated. It is also an opportunity almost nobody works.
Thin margins make FX one of the biggest levers you have
Look at the economics at the very top of the market. In 2025 Booking Holdings processed $186.1 billion in gross travel bookings and recognised $26.9 billion in revenue. The largest online travel company in the world keeps roughly 14 cents of revenue for every dollar it books.
Further down the chain, at bed banks and B2B distributors, net margins on a room are frequently in low single digits. When the margin is three or four percent and the currency moves five, the currency is no longer a finance department concern. It is the difference between a profitable quarter and a flat one.
The rate you locked is not where the market lands
Currency does not sit still across a booking window. EUR/USD opened 2026 at 1.1721 and traded in a 1.14 to 1.20 range through April. By mid-September it sat around 1.148, down 2.6% across twelve months.
That is a swing of roughly five percent inside a single year, on the most liquid currency pair in the world. On a booking confirmed in March and settled in June, the rate that applied at quote and the rate that applied at settlement were meaningfully different numbers.
Here is the part most teams never examine. That movement is not one-directional. It goes against you, and it goes in your favour, in roughly equal measure. Across one partner book we analysed, covering more than 25,000 hedges, the market moved in the seller's favour on about 47% of settled trades.
Nearly half the time, the rate moved the right way. The question is what happened to that money.
Why the usual answers miss it
There are two conventional responses, and each gives something away.
Do nothing. You keep every favourable move. You also absorb every adverse one, and you cannot give an agent a firm price you can stand behind. No serious finance team can run a book this way.
Lock a forward. You remove the risk entirely, which is why most sellers do it. But a forward is symmetrical. It does not distinguish between the market moving against you and the market moving for you. It flattens both. On that 47% of trades where the rate moved in your favour, a forward hands the entire benefit to your counterparty.
That is the leakage. It does not appear on any report, because it is money you never received rather than money you lost. It is invisible, which is exactly why it persists.
Some teams try to work the middle by hedging in slices, layering forwards weekly to average into a rate. This is operationally expensive, requires constant attention, and still produces a mediocre average rather than protection plus participation.
What post-quote FX optimization actually does
A participating structure keeps working after the quote is fixed. It does two things a forward cannot do at the same time.
It sets a floor. You agree to a protected rate at the outset and you can never settle worse than it, no matter how far the market moves against you. You can quote your agent a firm number and stand behind it.
It keeps you in the upside. When the market moves in your favour before settlement, you receive most of that movement back. The provider retains a minority share in return for carrying the risk.
It pays out visibly. Each favourable settlement is calculated and returned, itemised on your settlement statement, so the recovered margin appears as a line you can see rather than an abstraction.
It costs what it says it costs. In a transparent structure the fee is explicit and the rate carries no markup, so you can compare it against what you are recovering.
The outcome at each settlement is one of three things. The market moved against you and your floor held, so nothing is paid out and nothing is lost. The market matched your rate, so the settlement is neutral. Or the market moved your way, and most of that gain comes back to you.
Note what never happens: a settlement where the structure costs you money relative to your protected rate. Protected months return zero, not a negative.
One structure across the whole booking cycle
Locking the rate at quote is half the picture. It secures the worst case. What it does not do is work the window that follows, and for most travel sellers that window is long. Agent receivables, hotel and ground payables, and the lag between confirmation and cash routinely stretch across 30, 60, 90 or 120 days.
Run a plain forward and you have fixed the risk and closed the window. Run a participating structure and the window stays open in one direction only: it can pay you, and it cannot cost you more than your agreed rate.
For a business where purchasing cost is the primary lever on profit, that asymmetry is the whole point.
Why this lands harder for a travel seller than for most
Three characteristics make travel distribution unusually well suited to this.
The flow is directional. Bed banks and B2B distributors typically buy in one currency and sell in another consistently, rather than netting exposures against each other. Directional flow is what makes participation worth having. A business that nets most of its currency internally needs a large move simply to break even.
The booking window is long enough to matter. A 90-day gap between quote and settlement gives the market real room to move. Same-day settlement businesses have no window to work with.
The volume is high and the tickets are small. Thousands of transactions a month means the favourable and adverse moves average out into a stable, predictable pattern rather than a coin flip on one large trade.
Frequently asked questions
Does this change the price my agent sees? No. You quote the agent exactly as you do today, from a protected rate you can rely on. Everything described here happens between you and your hedging provider.
Is it more expensive than a plain forward? Yes, and that is the trade. A forward is cheaper because you are paying for it with the upside you surrender. A participating structure prices that optionality explicitly instead. The relevant question is not which is cheaper, but whether giving away 100% of the favourable movement is a good price to pay for certainty.
What happens when the market moves against me? You settle at your protected rate. The structure does not pay out and it does not cost you beyond the agreed fee. Your worst case is known on day one.
Who is this not for? Businesses that net most of their currency exposure internally. If your inflows and outflows in a currency largely cancel out, you need a substantial move before participation earns its keep. It is built for directional books.
Can I choose how much upside I keep? Yes. The participation share is set at the outset, and the cost scales with it. Keeping more of the upside costs more.
Conclusion
Travel sellers spend heavily to win each booking, then hand a piece of the margin back at settlement without ever seeing it leave. A plain forward is not a neutral choice. It is a decision to give away every favourable currency move you would otherwise have kept, on roughly half of your transactions.
Post-quote FX optimization is how you stop. You keep the firm rate you need to quote with confidence, and you stay in the upside on the bookings you have already won. The margin shows up where you can see it, in the settlement report, every cycle.
Comments