Quantitative Finance Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for finance professionals and academics. It's 100% free, no registration required.

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

"If at least 10% of an option's value is time value (ie. time value >= 0.1*call price), it has a delta less than 90".

In practice and after doing many tests with an option pricing calculator, this statement seems to hold true. Can anyone mathematically prove or disprove this?

share|improve this question
How could the proof (if it is true) work. The first lines: $$C - (S-K)^+ \ge 0.1 C$$ where C is the call price and the left hand side is the time value. If we substract the rhs we get $$0.9C \ge (S-K)^+$$ and on more step gives $$0.9 \ge (S-K)^+/C$$. But at the moment I can not conclude for the Delta ... – Richard Aug 17 '12 at 20:46

This claim is false. A deep in-the-money option with very high volatility can have both large time value and high delta. As a counterexample, consider a call option with:

  • K = 100 (strike price)
  • S = 300 (spot price)
  • r = 0
  • T = 1
  • vol = 150%

This gives a Black-Scholes value of approximately \$230, so the time value is \$30, but the delta is 93.1%.

share|improve this answer
That's why the maths in my comment did not work out ... I didn't try myself but what about more realistic parameters such as vol around $30\%$ and not that deep in the money? – Richard Aug 18 '12 at 19:42
As far as I could tell in my tests, with more realistic parameters the claim is usually true (presumably why the OP inferred that it might be true in general). – user2825 Aug 18 '12 at 19:46

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.