Let $C(K,T,S_0)$ denote the price of an European call option with strike K and maturity T on underlying price $S_0$. Assume interest rate $r>0$. Then of course $C(K,T,S_0) \geq 0$ and $C(K,T,S_0) \geq S_0 - K e^{-rT}$ both to avoid arbitrage.

Consider now $C(K,T_1,S_0)$ and $C(K,T_2,S_0)$ with $T_2>T_1$ and assume

$$ C(K,T_1,S_0) > C(K,T_2,S_0) $$ Sell the expensive and buy the cheap, put money in the bank. At $T_1$ we have

$$ C(K,T_2,S_{T_1}) - \max\{S_{T_1}-K;0\} \geq 0 $$ with the money in the bank an arbitrage. We conclude the call price is increasing in maturity.

Can a similar argument be made for the put? To me the corresponding inequality is not good enough and using put call parity did not help either.

Thanks :)

  • $\begingroup$ When you say "at $T1$ we have", why is this actually true ? $\endgroup$ – baibo Oct 26 '19 at 13:04
  • $\begingroup$ @baibo Consider the payoff at $T_2$ of the call vs $S-K$. $\endgroup$ – htd Oct 27 '19 at 14:40

puts can be decreasing in time to maturity. This is why you sometimes early exercise an American put. This tends to happen deeply in the money with large r and zero dividend rate.

  • $\begingroup$ Doh. Of course, thanks. If we denote the initial price difference $\Delta P$. Then if at $T_1$ $S < K (1-e^{-r(T_2-T_1)})-\Delta P e^{rT_1}$ the short position will be worth at least $K + \Delta P e^{rT_2}$ at maturity dominating the rest of the portfolio giving a loss. $\endgroup$ – htd Jan 3 '15 at 10:32
  • $\begingroup$ Could either of you explain a bit more? So an European put option may increase and decrease in its time to maturity? Could you give some examples? $\endgroup$ – tvk Jan 10 '15 at 0:40
  • $\begingroup$ @FangJing The above example shows that we can not conlude it to be increasing, I bet copying the argument using the natural lower bound of the put would yield the other conclusion. It is great exercise to go through it yourself as I just did :) $\endgroup$ – htd Jan 10 '15 at 9:13
  • $\begingroup$ @Henrik Would you mind explaining what the sentence "Then if at $T_1$ $S<K(1−e^{−r(T2−T1)})−\Delta Pe^{rT_1}$ the short position will be worth at least $K+\Delta Pe^{rT_2}$ at maturity dominating the rest of the portfolio giving a loss" means? How is $\Delta P$ defined here? Is it the price of the later-maturity-date put minus that of the earlier-maturity-date put? $\endgroup$ – tvk Jan 10 '15 at 19:29
  • $\begingroup$ @FangJing Exactly! At time 0 when the position is initialized. $\endgroup$ – htd Jan 11 '15 at 6:17

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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