0
$\begingroup$

I need to write the Black-Scholes formula for option $V = (S_1, S_2, t)$, where: $$d S_1 = \mu_1 S_1 dt + \sigma_1 S_1 d W_1,$$ $$ d S_2 = \mu_2 S_2 dt + \sigma_2 S_2 d W_2.$$

We know that $W_1$ and $W_2$ are Brownian motions. Generally, I tried to use a multidimensional version of Ito's lemma. I used this formula:

$$dV = \Bigg(\frac{\partial V}{\partial t} + \frac12 \sum_{i=1}^d \sum_{j=1}^d \sigma_i \sigma_j \rho_{ij} S_i S_j \frac{\partial^2 V}{\partial S_i \partial S_j}\Bigg)dt + \sum_{i=1}^d \frac{\partial V}{\partial S_i} d S_i.$$

I got:

$$dV = \Bigg( \frac{\partial V}{\partial t} + \frac{1}{2} \sigma_1^2 S_1^2 \frac{\partial^2 V}{\partial S_1^2} + \sigma_1 \sigma_2 S_1 S_2 \frac{\partial^2 V}{\partial S_1 \partial S_2} + \frac12 \sigma_2^2 S_2^2 \frac{\partial^2 V}{\partial S_2^2} \Bigg)dt + \frac{\partial V}{\partial S_1} dS_1 + \frac{\partial V}{\partial S_2} dS_2.$$

Is it a proper way to determine the Black-Scholes formula for this option? What should I do next?

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ Hello Dracks and welcome to StackExchange. Could you specify more what you are trying to achieve? Are you trying to derive the Black Scholes PDE for two underlyings $S_1, S_2$? or price an option on both underlyings $S_1, S_2$, if that's the case then what type of option (spread? basket? etc.) $\endgroup$
    – byouness
    Commented May 14, 2021 at 8:26
  • $\begingroup$ I'm sorry, it could have been a bit unclear. I'm interested in deriving Black-Scholes PDE. $\endgroup$
    – Dracks
    Commented May 14, 2021 at 9:31
  • $\begingroup$ @Dracks Does this answer help? Granted, the explanation there is short, but the PDE can be directly derived from no-arbitrage pricing (or using standard hedging arguments - that's a bit lengthy though). If you look at the last example for elliptic PDEs, you find the pricing PDE for you problem, you only have to include a time derivative, $\frac{\partial V}{\partial t}$ (and replace $K_t$ by $S_2$). In general, you probably want to look at Margrabe's Formula. Does that make sense? $\endgroup$
    – Kevin
    Commented May 14, 2021 at 11:08
  • $\begingroup$ You should try to remove the $dS_1$ and $dS_2$ terms by forming a basket of the option and the two underlying assets (i.e. compute $w_1$ and $w_2$ so that $dV + w_1 dS_1 + w_2 dS_2 = (\dots) dt + 0 dW_1 + 0 dW_2$) like you would do in the single asset case. Then, you know that $(\dots) = r$ by absence of arbitrage and this would give you the PDE. $\endgroup$
    – byouness
    Commented May 14, 2021 at 11:17

0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.