This preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.
View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: TermStructure Models: a Review Riccardo Rebonato QUARC ( QU Antitative R esearch C entre)  Royal Bank of Scotland Oxford University  OCIAM February 25, 2003 1 Introduction 1.1 Justification for Another Review of InterestRate Mod els The topic of termstructure modelling for derivatives pricing has been covered in recent years, at least in book form (see, eg, [Rebonato (1998)], [James and Webber (2000)], [Hughston (2000)], [Brigo and Mercurio (2001)]). One obvious justification for updating these works is that the modelling of interest rates is still rapidly evolv ing. There are, however, deeper reasons why a fresh examination of the current state of research in this area deserves attention. The first is that recently a qualitatively new dimension has been added to the modelling complexity, because of the appearance of pronounced and complex smiles in the implied volatility surfaces of caplets and swaptions. Sure enough, smiles of sorts were produced by some of the early modelling approaches (eg, by the [Hull and White (1993)] model), but these were at the time obtained as an afterthought, and by and large regarded as an unpleasant feature to be ignored or excused away. Currently, the modelling of smiles is possibly the most active area of research in interestrate derivatives pricing, and a sufficiently substantial body of work has accumulated to warrant a review of its achievements and of the problems still to be tackled. The second reason why a review of term structure modelling is timely is connected with two related market developments, namely the compression in profit margins for the wellestablished complex products and the simultaneous increase in complexity of many of the newgeneration interestrate derivatives. These joint market developments are putting under severe strain some of the basic underpinning theoretical concepts of the classic pricing approach, which ultimately derives from the [Black and Scholes (1973)] (BS in the following) paradigm (although, often, via the [Harrison and Pliska (1981)] route). In par ticular, given the robustness of the BS model, market completeness and exact payoff replicability (both reasonable but inaccurate descriptions of financial re ality) can constitute a valid framework when one is pricing, say, a simple cap 1 (and the profit margin is generous).However, the wisdom of adopting the same pricing approach (which implies irrelevance of attitudes towards risk) should at least be questioned if the trader is pricing a product with payoff depending on, say, the joint realizations of two currencies and of a nonparticularly liquid currency pair over a 30year period 1 . More generally, for most problems in asset pricing a mixture of the relative and absolute approaches (see, eg, [Cochrane (2000)]) tends to be more prof itable. Traditionally, derivatives pricing has been the area of asset pricing where the relative approach has been most successful, and its conceptual corollaries (such as irrelevance of attitudes towards risk) have therefore been extended to...
View
Full
Document
This note was uploaded on 12/08/2011 for the course MATH 623 taught by Professor Conlon during the Fall '08 term at University of Michigan.
 Fall '08
 CONLON

Click to edit the document details