4
$\begingroup$

I'm attempting to prove a lemma from a paper, in the context of optimal contracts.

$r,\rho,\gamma,\alpha,\sigma$ are all known constants.

$dR_t = (\alpha + r)dt + \sigma dZ_t$ where $Z_t$ is a standard Brownian motion.

Lemma 1

Given an incentive compatible contract, the agent's consumption must satisfy $$\frac{dc_t}{c_t} = \left( \frac{r - \rho}{\gamma} + \frac{1+\gamma}{2} (\sigma^c_t)^2 \right) dt + \sigma^c_t \frac{1}{\sigma} \left( dR_t - (\alpha + r) dt \right) + dL_t$$ for some stochastic process $\sigma^c$ and a weakly increasing stochastic process $L$.

Proof

The authors provide the following steps:

  1. $e^{-(\rho - r)t}c_t^{\gamma}$ is a supermartingale, thus we can express it as $$ e^{-(\rho - r)t}c_t^{\gamma} = M_t - A_t$$ where $M_t$ is a martingale and $A_t$ is a weakly increasing process.

  2. Applying the martingale representation theorem to $M_t$, there exists a stochastic process $\sigma^M_t$ such that $$M_t = \int_0^{t} \sigma^M_t dZ_t$$ where $Z_t$ is a standard Brownian motion.

  3. They then apply Ito's Lemma to get the first equation by setting $\sigma^M_t = -\gamma \sigma^c_t e^{-(\rho - r)t}c_t^{\gamma}$.

I'm struggling at step 3, as I am not sure how the Ito differential looks like for $M_t$.

This is what I've done: $$- (\rho - r) e^{-(\rho - r) t}c_t^{-\gamma} dt - \gamma e^{-(\rho - r)t} c_t^{\gamma - 1} dc_t = dM_t - dA_t $$ Substituting in $dM_t$ and dividing by $K = e^{-(\rho - r) t} c_t^{-\gamma}$,

$$(r - \rho) dt - \gamma \frac{dc_t}{c_t} = K^{-1} \sigma^M_t dZ_t - K^{-1} dA_t$$ Define $\sigma^c_t = (-\gamma K)^{-1} \sigma^M_t$ and $dL_t = (\gamma K)^{-1} dA_t $, and thus $$ \frac{dc_t}{c_t} = \frac{r - \rho}{\gamma} dt + \sigma^c_t dZ_t + dL_t $$ Plug in $dZ_t = \frac{1}{\sigma} \left( dR_t - (r + \alpha) dt \right)$ (a previous result) and the result follows.

Where does the $\frac{1+\gamma}{2} (\sigma^c_t)^2$ term come from?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Which paper and which result? $\endgroup$ – Sanjay Mar 12 at 8:17
  • $\begingroup$ @Sanjay Di Tella and Sannikov, Optimal Asset Management Contracts with Hidden Savings, Lemma 2 $\endgroup$ – Walrasian Auctioneer Mar 12 at 16:32
2
$\begingroup$

You missed the quadratic term, specifically, rather than \begin{align*} - (\rho - r) e^{-(\rho - r) t}c_t^{-\gamma} dt - \gamma e^{-(\rho - r)t} c_t^{-\gamma - 1} dc_t &= dM_t - dA_t, \end{align*} we have \begin{align*} & - (\rho - r) e^{-(\rho - r) t}c_t^{-\gamma} dt - \gamma e^{-(\rho - r)t} c_t^{-\gamma - 1} dc_t + \frac{1}{2} \gamma (\gamma+1)e^{-(\rho - r)t} c_t^{-\gamma - 2} d\langle c, c\rangle_t \\ &=\ dM_t - dA_t. \end{align*} That is, \begin{align*} \frac{dc_t}{c_t} = \frac{r - \rho}{\gamma} dt +\frac{1}{2}(\gamma+1)c_t^{-2}d\langle c, c\rangle_t + \sigma^c_t dZ_t + dL_t. \end{align*} Moreover, \begin{align*} c_t^{-2}d\langle c, c\rangle_t = \big(\sigma_t^c\big)^2 dt. \end{align*} Therefore, \begin{align*} \frac{dc_t}{c_t} = \frac{r - \rho}{\gamma} dt +\frac{1}{2}(\gamma+1)\big(\sigma_t^c\big)^2 dt + \sigma^c_t dZ_t + dL_t. \end{align*}

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you very much! In the case where $c$ is a scalar, $d<c,c>_t$ is just $(dc)^2$? $\endgroup$ – Walrasian Auctioneer Mar 12 at 18:24
  • $\begingroup$ Generally, yes; it is a notation that is used in most rigor math books. $\endgroup$ – Gordon Mar 12 at 18:26

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.