I am currently considering the price $C_0$ of a call option on a stock $S$ with $$ S_0 = 1 \\ K = 1.1 \\ r = 1\% \\ T = 1 $$

Based on the Black-Scholes formula, I have deduced that $C_0 = 0.356$.

However, I am currently trying to replicate this result in R. To do this, I have:

  1. Simulated 1000 Wiener processes (each with 1001 time steps between $t=0$ and $t=1$)
  2. Based on these processes, I have created 1000 models for the evolution of the stock price $S_t$, based on the formula $$ S_t = \exp(-W_t + t) $$
  3. Based on the 1000 obtained values for $S_1$ I have calculated the payoff of the call option $C$ in each case
  4. Discounting each of these values, by multiplying each by $e$, I have found 1000 possible values for $C_0$, which I have then taken the mean of

However, this method gives a result (of approx. 4) which varies significantly from the theoretical result obtained using the Black-Scholes formula. I am presuming that this is due to an error in my method used in R.

Can anyone help me to understand where I might be going wrong?

EDIT: The following image shows the exact question that I am attempting to answer.


  • $\begingroup$ what is your volatility? $\endgroup$
    – Gordon
    Mar 22, 2018 at 14:36
  • $\begingroup$ I'm basing it off of a question which doesn't specify the volatility. I have therefore (somewhat arbitrarily) set it to be 1. $\endgroup$
    – M Smith
    Mar 22, 2018 at 14:39
  • $\begingroup$ It appears that you switched $r$ and $T$. $\endgroup$
    – Gordon
    Mar 22, 2018 at 15:07
  • $\begingroup$ Tag "homework" missing? $\endgroup$ Mar 22, 2018 at 15:55
  • $\begingroup$ I have added the tag $\endgroup$
    – M Smith
    Mar 22, 2018 at 16:14

2 Answers 2


A curious piece of homework, but let’s just consider the information at hand.

You are given a somewhat odd process $S_t = S_0e^{-W_t+t}$ and the rest of the question pointing you to the “implied probability measure” looks like an indication that the stated process is under the physical measure $P$.

The SDE followed by $S$ under $P$ must be:

$\frac{dS_t}{S_t} = \frac{3}{2}dt - dW_t$ for any of this to make sense.

Under the risk-neutral measure $Q$ (and I’ll make the assumption this is what is meant by implied measure), we’ll have (reversing the sign of $dW_t$ for sanity)

$\frac{dS_t}{S_t} = dt + dW_t$

Since $r\equiv{1}$

And the solution to this is $S_T = S_0e^{\frac{1}{2}T+W_T}$

This is what you need to simulate $N$ times (you don’t need the full path) to compute the call payoff in one year, and from that its discounted expected value.

Note: the expected value (under $Q$) of $S_T$ here is $e^{1} = 2.71...$ and so intuitively your call of strike 1.1 is going to be very much in the money, with an undiscounted expected value of the order of 1.6 + some time value since the volatility is still pretty high ($\sigma=1$). Your discount factor is $e^{-1}=0.36...$ so your call should be worth something around 0.60. If you plug $S_0, T, r,\sigma, K$ into a BS pricer, that’s what you should find.


If $r=1$ and $\sigma=\sigma^2=1$, then: $$ S_t=\exp\left(\color{red}{\frac{t}{2}}-W_t\right)$$

I am a bit puzzled because you should be obtaining lower values than $C_0=0.356$ instead of higher. Also, do you mean $\sigma=1=100\%$ or $\sigma=1\%=0.01?$ $r=1=100\%$ or $r=1\%=0.01?$

Also, to avoid confusion, although $W_t$ and $-W_t$ have same distribution I would write: $$ S_t=\exp\left(\color{red}{\frac{t}{2}} \color{red}{+} W_t\right)$$

Finally, given this a European option, you can directly simulate the terminal state $S_1$ instead of the whole path between $S_0$ and $S_1$.

Let me know if this helps.

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for your response. I have amended my post to show the exact question that I am attempting to answer. I have set volatility to $100\%$. $\endgroup$
    – M Smith
    Mar 22, 2018 at 15:24
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Maybe I am missing something but with $r=\sigma=1$ I don't see how your question reaches $S_t=S_0\exp(t-W_t)$. We have, under the implied probability measure: $S_t=S_0\exp((r-\sigma^2/2)t+\sigma W_t)=\exp((1-1/2)t+W_t)=\exp(t/2+W_t)$ $=\exp(t/2-W_t)$. $\endgroup$ Mar 22, 2018 at 15:36
  • $\begingroup$ $T$ should equal $1$ not $1\%$ in your question. $\endgroup$ Mar 22, 2018 at 15:40
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, that should have been the value of $r$ instead - a typo. $\endgroup$
    – M Smith
    Mar 22, 2018 at 15:42
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ And r = 100%, not 1% (according to the pic saying use exp(-1)). I agree with Daneel that seems wrong (should have t/2). This is either a trick question (r=100%?), or a wrong question. $\endgroup$
    – Yian Pap
    Mar 22, 2018 at 16:13

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.