0
$\begingroup$

When I am reading papers (ie here and here) on bootstrapping discount curves they refer to obtaining discount factors from rates for swaps maturing less than a year with:

$$D(t, T_i) = \frac{1}{1+s_i(T_i-t)}$$

(where $s_i$ is the swap rate, $T_i-t$ is the time to maturity in years and $D$ is the discount factor)

In short my question is why not this?:

$$D(t, T_i) = \frac{1}{(1+s_i)^{(T_i-t)}}$$

Is the difference because we are assuming there is no compounding? Is this a correct assumption? It's quite a key question because the denominator in the bootstrapping formula for tenors > 1 year (because the ois swaps pay annually) depends on this:

$$ D(0,T_i) = \frac{1-s_i\sum_{j=1}^{i-1}(T_j-T_{j-1})D(0,T_j)}{1+s_i(T_i-T_{i-1})} $$

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, this is the convention. For less than 1 year, use simple interest. That is how everyone quotes and calculates rates. Unless otherwise specified. $\endgroup$ – noob2 Oct 11 '17 at 15:49
  • $\begingroup$ @noob2 So if we are converting these discount factors back into rates, do we use simple interest for all tenors? Even those greater than a year? ie. r = (1/s - 1)/T $\endgroup$ – JSharm Oct 18 '17 at 16:43
0
$\begingroup$

An OIS interest rate swap rate with annual-annual freq is determined under one year by: $$1 + d_i s_i = \prod_{j=1}^{n(i)}(1+ d_j r_j) \; , \quad \text{where} \quad d_i = \sum_{j=0}^{n(i)} d_j \;.$$ Each $r_j$ is a forecast overnight OIS rate which as you can see are compounded in the floating side. Therefore a discount factor in the future, for maturity $m_i<1Y$, which would be represented by: $$ \text{discount factor at }m_i = \frac{1}{\prod_{j=1}^{n(i)}(1+d_jr_j)}=\frac{1}{1+d_is_i}\;.$$

$\endgroup$

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.