I am reading Options, Futures, and other derivatives by John C. Hull. In the chapter on Binomial trees, he remarks:

A risk-neutral world has two features that simplify the pricing of derivatives:

  1. The expected return on a stock (or any other investment) is the risk-free rate.
  2. The discount rate used for the expected payoff on an option (or any other instrument) is the risk-free rate.

I understood the first point. The second point seems easier and almost obvious, though when I tried to come up with a written justification for it, I was at a lack of words. I am hoping someone could justify the second point for me. Thank you!

Edit: On further thought, it seems that in a world with only two possible investments - a risky stock and a riskless bond - it is the riskless bond that will represent the time value of money, hence we should use that as the discount rate.

But this raises another question: Based on the above argument, the fact that we use the risk-free rate for discounting is not a consequence of the risk neutral world, but this is not what Hull suggests.


1 Answer 1


The first statement is kind of clear. If all investors are risk-neutral, they simply do not care about risk and do not pay more or less regardless how risky an asset is. As a consequence, the return of all assets is the risk-free rate.

Regarding the second statement. What does risk-neutral pricing really do? We change the probabilities from the real world, $\mathbb{P}$, to risk-adjusted ones, $\mathbb{Q}$ which capture all this risk. In a way, we take the risk out of the equation. However, as we only need ``real'' discount factors for stochastic, risky cashflows, we can simply discount with the risk-free rate since the risk-adjustment are done in $\mathbb{Q}$. So whilst there is a risk premium in the real worl and hence the need to use an appriopriate discount factor, there is no risk premium in the risk-neutral world - since no one cares about risk in this world. Thus, we may simply discount with the risk-free rate.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Nice! That makes quite a lot of sense. I tend to ask the silliest questions, just to be 100% sure I am on the right track. You have answered several of my questions in a revealing and insightful way. Many thanks for that! $\endgroup$ Jul 23, 2019 at 13:24

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.