Take the 2-minute tour ×
Quantitative Finance Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for finance professionals and academics. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I have two assets, $S_1$ and $S_2$, which follow geometric Brownian motion processes. This implies that both $S_1$ and $S_2$ have a lognormal distribution.

I'm trying to get the exchange option price formula through the risk neutral valuation, or, in other words $$C(t,S_1,S_2)=e^{-r(T-t)}E(\max\{S_1-S_2,0\})$$.

How do I calculate the expected value $E(\max\{S_1-S_2,0\})$??

share|improve this question

3 Answers 3

Your formula, as it stands, is incorrect, at least is if $E$ means the "expected value under real-world probabilities".

I wrote a blog post explaining the basic rationale behind risk-neutral pricing where you will see that if the Fundamental Theorem of Asset Pricing theorem holds, you can write:

Let $X_t=S_{1,t}-S_{2,t}$

$$e^{-rt} X_t = \mathbb{E}_\mathbb{Q}[e^{-rT} \max(X_T,0) | \mathcal{F}_t]$$

where $\mathbb{E}_\mathbb{Q}$ stands for "expectation under the risk-neutral probability".

From there, what you have to do is to define the risk-neutral dynamics of $S_1$ and $S_2$. When you say that the assets are following a lognormal distribution, I'll assume that they follow are independent Geometric Brownian Motion. In this case, their risk neutral dynamics are well know (see here):

$$dS_{1,t}= r S_{1,t} dt + \sigma_1 S_{1,t} dW^{\mathbb{Q}}_{1,t} $$ $$dS_{2,t}= r S_{2,t} dt + \sigma_2 S_{2,t} dW^{\mathbb{Q}}_{2,t} $$

where is the risk-free rate, and $dW^{\mathbb{Q}}_{i,t}=dW_{i,t}+\frac{\mu_i-r}{\sigma_i}dt$.

So, you have:

$$dX_t=dS_{1,t}-dS_{2,t}=r (S_{1,t} -S_{2,t})dt + + \sigma_1 S_{1,t} dW^{\mathbb{Q}}_{1,t} - dS_{2,t}= r S_{2,t} dt - \sigma_2 S_{2,t} dW^{\mathbb{Q}}_{2,t}$$

and:

$$X_t = e^{-r(T-t)} \mathbb{E}_\mathbb{Q}[\max(X_T,0) | \mathcal{F}_t]= e^{-r(T-t)} \mathbb{E}_\mathbb{Q}[\mathbb{1}_{X_T>0}X_T | \mathcal{F}_t]$$

Then you carry on manipulation the equation, I would suggest changing the numeraire...

share|improve this answer

Let's generalize to the slightly more common case of an option on a spread of correlated assets $S_{1,2}$ with correlation coefficient $\rho$. That is to say, write $s = S_1-S_2$, and you want

$$ e^{-rT}\mathbb{E}\left[ (s_T-K)^+ \right] $$

If $S_{1,2}$ follow geometric brownian motions (GBM) then the terminal distribution for $s_T$ is not in any simple form. Let me note, however, that it is common among professionals to simply assume $s$ follows an ordinary brownian motion with first two moments that match the corresponding moments of the "true" distribution, in which case the terminal distribution is a gaussian, and we can derive the option value

$$ V=e^{-rT}(S_2-S_1) N\left( \frac{e^{-rT}(S_2-S_1)-K e^{-rT}}{v} \right) + v \cdot n\left( \frac{e^{-rT}(S_2-S_1)-K e^{-rT}}{v} \right) $$

where

$$ v := e^{rT}\sqrt{ S_1^2(e^{\sigma_1^2 T}-1)-2S_1S_2(e^{\rho \sigma_1\sigma_2 T}-1) + S_2^2 (e^{\sigma_2^2 T}-1)} $$

To get an "exact" solution, you can instead observe that we write this as

$$ \frac{dS_1}{S_1} = r dt + \sigma_1 dW^{(1)} \\ \frac{dS_2}{S_2} = r dt + \sigma_2 \left( \rho dW^{(1)} + \sqrt{1-\rho^2} dW^{(2)}\right) $$

in which case the expectation integral becomes

$$ e^{-rT}\int_{z_1=-\infty}^{\infty} \int_{z_2=-\infty}^{\infty} (S_1(z_1)-S_2(z_1,z_2)-K)^+ n(z_1) n(z_2) dz_1 dz_2 $$

which we can change to

$$ e^{-rT}\int_{z_1=S_1^{-1}(K)}^{\infty} P( S_2^0, S_1(z_1)-K, r^\prime(z_1), \sigma^\prime(z_1) ) n(z_1) dz_1 $$

for adjusted drift $r^\prime(z_1)$ and adjusted vol $\sigma^\prime(z_1)$ in the Black-Scholes put option pricing formula $P(\cdot)$. Here for clarity $S_2^0$ indicates the initial value of $S_2$, while $S_{1,2}(\cdot)$ indicate the usual terminal value functions for GBMs using the customary volatilities and drifts.

This integral is one-dimensional and can be efficiently evaluated using numerical quadrature, such as a trapezoid rule scheme.

share|improve this answer

The solution can be found in, say, Bjork's book. Assume that the two Brownian motions are uncorrelated. I'm also swapping the symbols $S_{1,T}$ and $S_{2,T}$ in the payoff function.

We use the stock $S_1$ as numeraire. Note that $$ \frac{V_t}{S_{1,t}} = \mathbb{E}^{Q^1} \left[ \frac{S_{1,T} \max \left(S_{2,T}/S_{1,T} - 1 \right)}{S_{1,T}} \middle\vert \mathcal{F}_t \right] = \mathbb{E}^{Q^1} \left[ \max \left(\frac{S_{2,T}}{S_{1,T}} - 1 \right) \middle\vert \mathcal{F}_t \right] \; . $$ Let $Z_t \equiv S_{2,t}/S_{1,t} $. Since $Z_t$ is a martingale under the $Q^1$ measure by definition, $$ dZ_t = Z_t (\sigma_2 - \sigma_1) \; dW^{Q^1} \; . $$ We are essentially pricing a European call with strike $K=1$ for a stock $Z_t$ that has no drift but has volatility $\sigma = | \sigma_2 - \sigma_1 |$. The price is $$ V_t = S_{1,t} \left\{ Z_t N(d_1) - N(d_2) \right\} = S_{2,t} N(d_1) - S_{1,t} N(d_2) \; , $$ where $d_1 = \frac{\log Z_t + \frac{1}{2} \sigma^2 (T-t)} {\sigma \sqrt{T-t}}$ and $d_2 = d_1 - \sigma \sqrt{T-t}$.

See also Margrabe's formula [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margrabe's_formula ].

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

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.