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

Here is my question: This is a question about Black-Scholes model, but it may be applicable to more complicated models. Throughout the discussion, the strike price $K$, interest rate $r$ and volatility $\sigma$ will be assumed to be constant. The thing we are interested in is the time decay of the option.

First consider a perpetual American put problem. This has an optimal exercising level which I will call $b$ and this is given by $b=\frac{K}{1+\sigma^2/2r}$

Now consider any $x>b$, this $x$ is a level, for which it would not be optimal to exercise in a perpetual option. In this case, does this necessarily mean, there exist a $T$ such that $t\in (0,T)$, the equation below holds

$\mathbb{E}_x e^{-r(t\hat{}\tau_b)}(K-X_{t\hat{}\tau_b})^+ > (K-x)^+$

here $\tau_b$ denotes the first hitting time of level $b$.

I think I have shown this is the case for some $t$. Here is my proof:

Denote $V(x)=\mathbb{E}_x e^{-r\tau_b}(K-X_{\tau_b})^+$. It is widely known that $V(x)>(K-x)^+$. Assume the statement above is false, then

$\mathbb{E}_x e^{-r(t\hat{}\tau_b)}(K-X_{t\hat{}\tau_b})^+ \leq (K-x)^+$ for all $t>0$.

Then we can take the limit as $t\uparrow\infty$ on the left-hand side and apply the dominated convergence theorem, we see that

$V(x)\leq (K-x)^+$

Contradicting the inequality $V(x)>(K-x)^+$

However, I have struggled to show $\mathbb{E}_x e^{-r(t\hat{}\tau_b)}(K-X_{t\hat{}\tau_b})^+ > (K-x)^+$ for small value of $t$. I believe this conjecture is true for all $t>0$ but struggled to prove it. Anyone has any ideas?

share|improve this question
up vote 0 down vote accepted

I had some thought about this. This assertion is false. The reason is the following.

Consider a finite horizon problem with the time to maturity $t$, then there exists an optimal stopping boundary $B(t)$, such that if the stock price is at this level, we should exercise the option. Notice, this $B(t)>b$ and it is an increasing function of $t$.

If we start our process, at $B(t)$ with amount of time $t$ left to run, then since we started at the optimal stopping boundary so $(K-x)^+ > \mathbb{E}_{B(t)} (K-X_\tau)^+$ for any stopping time $\tau<t$.

In fact, the result I asked for is totally ridiculous, because as $t$ goes to $0$, $B(t) \uparrow K$. For small times, it is a lot better to stay where you are than let the process run on.

share|improve this answer

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.