shreve-solution-manual

# shreve-solution-manual - Stochastic Calculus for Finance...

This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Stochastic Calculus for Finance, Volume I and II by Yan Zeng Last updated: August 20, 2007 This is a solution manual for the two-volume textbook Stochastic calculus for finance , by Steven Shreve. If you have any comments or find any typos/errors, please email me at [email protected] The current version omits the following problems. Volume I: 1.5, 3.3, 3.4, 5.7; Volume II: 3.9, 7.1, 7.2, 7.5–7.9, 10.8, 10.9, 10.10. Acknowledgment I thank Hua Li (a graduate student at Brown University) for reading through this solution manual and communicating to me several mistakes/typos. 1 Stochastic Calculus for Finance I: The Binomial Asset Pricing Model 1. The Binomial No-Arbitrage Pricing Model 1.1. Proof. If we get the up sate, then X 1 = X 1 ( H ) = Δ uS + (1 + r )( X- Δ S ); if we get the down state, then X 1 = X 1 ( T ) = Δ dS + (1 + r )( X- Δ S ). If X 1 has a positive probability of being strictly positive, then we must either have X 1 ( H ) > 0 or X 1 ( T ) > 0. (i) If X 1 ( H ) > 0, then Δ uS + (1 + r )( X- Δ S ) > 0. Plug in X = 0, we get u Δ > (1 + r )Δ . By condition d < 1 + r < u , we conclude Δ > 0. In this case, X 1 ( T ) = Δ dS + (1 + r )( X- Δ S ) = Δ S [ d- (1 + r )] < 0. (ii) If X 1 ( T ) > 0, then we can similarly deduce Δ < 0 and hence X 1 ( H ) < 0. So we cannot have X 1 strictly positive with positive probability unless X 1 is strictly negative with positive probability as well, regardless the choice of the number Δ . Remark: Here the condition X = 0 is not essential, as far as a property definition of arbitrage for arbitrary X can be given. Indeed, for the one-period binomial model, we can define arbitrage as a trading strategy such that P ( X 1 ≥ X (1 + r )) = 1 and P ( X 1 > X (1 + r )) > 0. First, this is a generalization of the case X = 0; second, it is “proper” because it is comparing the result of an arbitrary investment involving money and stock markets with that of a safe investment involving only money market. This can also be seen by regarding X as borrowed from money market account. Then at time 1, we have to pay back X (1 + r ) to the money market account. In summary, arbitrage is a trading strategy that beats “safe” investment. Accordingly, we revise the proof of Exercise 1.1. as follows. If X 1 has a positive probability of being strictly larger than X (1 + r ), the either X 1 ( H ) > X (1 + r ) or X 1 ( T ) > X (1 + r ). The first case yields Δ S ( u- 1- r ) > 0, i.e. Δ > 0. So X 1 ( T ) = (1+ r ) X +Δ S ( d- 1- r ) < (1+ r ) X . The second case can be similarly analyzed. Hence we cannot have X 1 strictly greater than X (1 + r ) with positive probability unless X 1 is strictly smaller than X (1 + r ) with positive probability as well....
View Full Document

## This document was uploaded on 02/18/2011.

### Page1 / 84

shreve-solution-manual - Stochastic Calculus for Finance...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document
Ask a homework question - tutors are online