Quantitative Finance Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for finance professionals and academics. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

in their paper "European Real Options: An intuitive algorithm for the Black and Scholes Formula" Datar and Mathews provide a proof in the appendix on page 50, which is not really clear to me. It's meant to show the equivalence of their formula $E_{o}(max(s_{T}e^{-\mu T}-xe^{-rT},0))$ and Black and Scholes.

They refer to Hull(2000), define $y=s_{T}e^{-\mu T}$, and then do the following transformation:

$E_{o}(max(s_{T}e^{-\mu T}-xe^{-rT},0))$ $=\intop_{-xe^{-rT}}^{\infty}(s_{T}*e^{-\mu T})g(y)dy$ $=E(s_{T}e^{-\mu T})N_{d_{1}}-xe^{-rT}N_{d_{2}}$

An addition: Actually, in the paper it says $E_{o}(max(s_{T}e^{-\mu T}-xe^{-rT}),0)$, so the 0 is outside the brackets. However, I am not sure, if that is a typo and should rather be $E_{o}(max(s_{T}e^{-\mu T}-xe^{-rT},0))$. I am not familiar with a function E(max(x),0)

$\mu$ and $r$ are two different discount rates, one being the WACC and the other one the riskless rate.

Could I substitute $V=s_{0}e^{-\mu T},K=xe^{-rT}$, go through the BS steps and re-substitute? In other words, under what constrains is $E\left[max(V-K,0)\right]=E(V)N(d_{1})-KN(d_{2})$ valid?

The research related to it is a comparison of different real option pricing method.

Could anybody help me out?

Thanks in advance.


share|improve this question

I don't know what $\mu$ stands for in the model so let me just recall the standard Black-Scholes formalism. It's likely that everything can be extended with minor modifications to the model you're interested in.

The price of the vanilla call option with a strike $K$ is equal to the expectation of the discounted pay-off $$C_K=\mathbb E(e^{-rT}(S_T-K)_+),$$ where $(S_T-K)_+:=\max(S_T-K,0)$ and $\mathbb E$ is taken with respect to the risk-neutral measure $\mathbb P$. Assuming that $\mathbb P$ admits a continuous density $p(y)$, we have that $$\mathbb E(e^{-rT}(S_T-K)_+)=\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}e^{-rT}(S_T-K)_+p(S_T)dS_T.$$ Now, in the risk-neutral Black-Scholes world $$S_T=S_0\exp\left(rT-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2T+\sigma\sqrt{T}N(0,1)\right).$$ Recalling that the density of $N(0,1)$ is $\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}e^{-s^2/2}$, we get that $$C_K=\frac{e^{-rT}}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}e^{-s^2/2}\left(S_0\exp\left(rT-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2T+\sigma\sqrt{T}s\right)-K\right)_+ds.$$ The integrand is non-zero if and only if $$S_0\exp\left(rT-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2T+\sigma\sqrt{T}s\right)>K,$$ i.e. when $$s> a=\frac{\ln(K/S_0)+\sigma^2T/2-rT}{\sigma\sqrt{T}}.$$ Therefore $$C_K=\frac{e^{-rT}}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int_{a}^{\infty}e^{-s^2/2}S_0\exp\left(rT-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2T+\sigma\sqrt{T}s\right)ds-\frac{e^{-rT}}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int_{a}^{\infty}e^{-s^2/2}Kds,$$ which implies after some straightforward manipulations the standard Black-Scholes formula $$C_K=S_0N(d_1)-Ke^{-rT}N(d_2).$$ Note that $S_0=\mathbb E(e^{-rT}S_T)$ since the discounted stock price is a martingale under the risk-neutral measure.

share|improve this answer
The $\mu$ is a different discount factor, set to the WACC. I still have some problems with the integral transformation from dSt to ds with the use of N(). Could you elaborate a bit, or provide a reference for reading? Cheers – Corn May 13 '11 at 12:44

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.