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: Continuous Time Finance Notes, Spring 2004 Section 9, March 31, 2004 Notes by Robert V. Kohn, Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences. For use in connec- tion with the NYU course Continuous Time Finance. This section begins the third segment of the course: a discussion of the volatility skew/smile its sources and consequences. We start with a general discussion of the phenomenon, and its relation to fat tails, following Hulls Chapter 15. There are three main approaches to modeling the volatility skew/smile quantitatively: (a) local vol models, (b) jump-diffusion models, and (c) stochastic vol models. We have time for just a very brief introduction to each; youll learn much more in the course Case Studies. Today we focus on local vol models, explaining why it is in principle easy but in practice quite difficult to extract a local volatility function from market data on calls. The heart of the matter is Dupires equation. ***************** The implied volatility skew/smile. Consider call options on an underlying which earns no dividends. We assume the interest rate r is constant. We write C ( S , K, T ) = market price of a call option with strike K and maturity T where S is the spot price and the current time is t = 0. Now define C BS ( S , K, , T ) = Black-Scholes value of the call, using constant volatility . Then the implied volatility I ( S , K, T ) is defined by the equation C ( S , K, T ) = C BS ( S , K, I ( S , K, T ) , T ) . Since the Black-Scholes value of a call is a monotone function of , the implied volatility is well-defined. If the constant-vol Black-Scholes model were correct, i.e. if it gave the actual market values of call options, then I would be constant, independent of S , K , and T . In fact however I is not constant. The volatility skew/smile refers to its dependence on K . Typically, for equities, I decreases as K increases. For foreign exchange the typical behavior is different: I is smallest when K S so its graph looks like a smile. The definition of implied vol depends on the choice of payoff. But if we used puts rather than calls we would get the same implied vols, by put-call parity. (We use here the fact that put-call parity is model-independent!). Hull discusses at length how the skew/smile reflects fat tails in the risk-neutral probability distribution. No need to repeat his discussion here. But note what underlies it. Since prices are linear, the value of any option with maturity T is a linear function of its payoff at time T . We recognize from the relation option value = e- rT E RN [payoff] 1 that (for a complete market model) this linear relation is expressed by integration against the risk-neutral probability density times e- rT . In other words, if the payoff is f ( S T ) and the risk-neutral probability density of S T at time T (given price S at time 0) is p ( , T ; S ) then option value = e- rT Z - f ( ) p ( , T...
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 01/02/2012 for the course FINANCE 347 taught by Professor Bayou during the Fall '11 term at NYU.
- Fall '11