Now I'm reading a paper:"alternative characterizations of american put options" , the authors are Carr,Jarrow,Myneni


After theorem 1 (in page 4),the author said :

enter image description here

I don't quite understand why the "investor" should hedge the put option when the stock price is below the boundary. I think only the "writer" of the option should hedge,but not the "investor".What's the meaning of this paragraph?


That seems to be a nice paper but I haven't worked through it completely yet.

As I understand it, the goal is to replicate the holding (by an investor) of an European option using an American option, stock and bonds in a self-financing manner. As the value of the underlying changes this requires rebalancing of the option and the bond, i.e. hedging. Since the portfolio is self-financing the value has to be equal. Thus, once you have such a portfolio the value of the American option is the only unknown and it can be derived from the known prices.

Surely, an investor in the traditional sense will just buy the European or American put and not set up a dynamic hedge. Nowadays the authors might have written arbitrageur instead.

  • $\begingroup$ How well your progress with this pager?I'm confused about the equation (12).The author said $B_t$ is only in the premium term,but they didn't replace $S_0$ with $B_0$ in (12),otherwise $B_0$ will appear in the first two term. $\endgroup$
    – Lookout
    Apr 4 '15 at 13:54
  • $\begingroup$ Read, but not studied and I stand by my answer as is :) I believe your new question can best be put in a new post. It will get more attention and keeps this thread clean. $\endgroup$
    – Bob Jansen
    Apr 4 '15 at 15:19

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.