While not ignoring risk, agricultural cooperatives tend to accommodate risk through the holding of internal capital reserves rather than engage in active risk management. A lack of information regarding the risk, returns, and the effect on cooperative financial performance of both traditional and innovative risk management strategies is likely a constraint to the adoption of active risk management by cooperatives. In this research, we examine the influence of alternative risk management strategies on cooperative financial performance, namely the return on assets (ROA) of grain merchandising cooperatives of various sizes. Strategies include traditional exchange traded futures and options strategies, an over-the-counter revenue swap, throughput insurance, and combinations of price and throughput strategies. Each of these strategies, for small, medium, and large size firms, are evaluated using a range of procedures including techniques which rely on mean-variance efficiency as well as evaluation procedures which help determine the ability of a strategy to mitigate downside risk. The results of the simulation exercise provide considerable support for the routine buying of at-the-money put options in setting a commodity floor price. The results also support the use, and perhaps the development, of insurance on cooperative throughput if the insurance product is used in conjunction with a price risk management strategy, in essence providing a hedge against downfalls in revenue. Over-the-counter revenue swaps, while intuitively appealing, did not perform well on average relative to more traditional exchange traded products. This result is especially important given the added counter party risk associated with such contracts. However, in some cases, the revenue swap, as well routine hedging with futures, performed better under a Value-at-Risk evaluation criteria than with a mean-variance criteria. Hence, it is important for cooperative managers to consider these results in the context of the risk management goals.