Say you have two identical payer swaptions, exception for their terms and tenors. In other words, suppose you have two payer swaptions: $1y10y$ and $10y1y$.

All other things being equal, according to the Black model, am I right in thinking $10y1y$ is more expensive, and if so, by approximately how much? Is it approximately X$\sqrt{10}$ more expensive?

It's well know that with all other beings equal, larger $T$ (tenor) implies a higher price, for the intuitive reason that there's a high probability of landing in-the-money. But how does $t$ (the swap term/length) impact the price too?

I know you discount the Black model by an annuity factor (the only term where t is found in the formula).

  • $\begingroup$ Given the same yield volatility a bond that matures in 10 years has a higher price volatility than a bond that matures in 1 year due to higher duration. The same applies to swaps. $\endgroup$
    – RRL
    Jul 1, 2018 at 9:15

2 Answers 2


Currently the USD 10Y swaprate is $2.93 \%$ and the ATMF 1Yx10Y implied volatility (relative) is $22.5 \%$ which corresponds to the Black model (absolute) volatility of about $4.15$ bp/day. The 1Y swaprate is $2.60 \%$ and the ATMF 10Yx1Y implied volatility is $25.0 \%$ which corresponds to the Black model volatility of about $4.10$ bp/day.

With the current flat term structure (both for rates and volatility) the 10Y swaption price would be greater than the price of a 1Y swaption with the same tail by the $\sqrt{10}$ factor. However, the annuity factor is roughly equivalent to duration which is about $9$ times larger for a 10Y tail.

Hence, the 1Yx10Y ATMF swaption price should be about 3 times larger than the 10Yx1Y ATMF swaption price.


This is an old but nice question and already has a good answer. A quick way to think about it is using the old "trader's formula" for a (ATMF) swaption: $$c\equiv 0.4 \sigma\sqrt{t}\cdot dv01$$ where $t=$ swaption maturity, $\sigma=$ atm normal vol, $dv01 = $ duration of the underlying swap. Assume both swaptions have the same vols and the durations of the 1Y and 10Y swaps are 1 and 10, respectively. Then $c_{1Y10Y}=\sqrt{10}\cdot c_{10Y1Y}$. Or, more generally, if the 10Y1Y and 1Y10Y vols are $\sigma_{10Y1Y}$ and $\sigma_{1Y10Y}$, respectively, then $$ c_{1Y10Y}=\sqrt{10}\frac{\sigma_{1Y10Y}}{\sigma_{10Y1Y}}\cdot c_{10Y1Y}.$$


Request in comment for derivation of "trader's formula". We use a vanilla caplet under Bachelier model to illustrate this. A strike $K$ caplet with expiry $t$, accrual factor $\delta$, vol $\sigma$, forward $F$, discount factor $df$ and nominal $N$ is: $$c=\left[N(d)(F-K) +n(d)\sigma\sqrt{t}\right]\cdot \delta\cdot df\cdot N \tag{1}$$ with $$d=\frac{F-K}{\sigma\sqrt{t}}$$ where $$n(x)=\frac{e^\frac{-x^2}{2}}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\tag{2}$$ is the pdf of a standard normal distribution and $N(x)$ the corresponding cdf. See this paper as a reference for (1). With $F=K$, $d=0$ so by (2) $n(0)=1/\sqrt{2\pi} \approx 0.4$ and (1) simplifies to $$c=0.4\sigma\sqrt{t}\cdot A\cdot N $$ where $A=\delta \cdot df$ is the annuity factor of the caplet. For swaptions $A=\sum_i \delta_i\cdot df_i$ for the duration of the underlying swap.

  • $\begingroup$ Minor comment, I think it would be more correct to speak about $\text{PV}01$ rather than $\text{DV}01$ in this case, see this answer. The former corresponds to an annuity in the case of a swap. $\endgroup$ Sep 19, 2023 at 17:51
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you. Is there a source for this "trader's formula"? Thanks $\endgroup$ Oct 27, 2023 at 11:21
  • $\begingroup$ sure, updated my answer to add a derivation for this $\endgroup$
    – user35980
    Oct 28, 2023 at 6:04

Your Answer

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

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