A double call option allows the holder to either exercise at time $T_{1}$ or time $T_{2}$, where $T_{2}$>$T_{1}$. With corresponding strike prices $K_{1}$ and $K_{2}$, it can be shown that it is never optimal to exercise at $T_{1}$ if $K_{1}e^{-rT_{1}}>K_{2}e^{-rT_{2}}$. This is shown by the idea that, at $T_{1}$ you have two options (if $S_{T_{1}}>K_{1}$):

  1. Exercise and put $S_{T_{1}}>K_{1}$ in the bank
  2. Sell the stock short, put $S_{T_{1}}$ in the bank and wait until $T_{2}$ to exercise the call

I understand how this proves the required inequality, but I don't understand why these are the two options - why are the options not just to either exercise at $T_{1}$ or exercise at $T_{2}$?


1st option: Your payoff in $T_2$ is $$(S_{T_1} - K_1)e^{r (T_2 - T_1)}.$$ 2nd option: Your payoff in $T_2$ is $$S_{T_1}e^{r (T_2 - T_1)} + \max (S_{T_2} - K_2,0) - S_{T_2} \geq S_{T_1}e^{r (T_2 - T_1)} + S_{T_2} - K_2 - S_{T_2}$$ and the RHS is equal to $$S_{T_1}e^{r (T_2 - T_1)} - K_2.$$ The term $S_{T_1}e^{r (T_2 - T_1)}$ is in the payoff of the 1st option and in the payoff which is dominated by the payoff of the 2nd option. As $$K_1 e^{-r T_1} > K_2 e^{-r T_2}$$ implies $$K_2 < K_1 e^{r (T_2 - T_1)},$$ the 2nd option, i.e. not executing in $T_1$, is always better.

Your suggestion for the 2nd option is to just exercise in $T_2$. Your payoff in $T_2$ would then be $$\max (S_{T_2} - K_2,0).$$ Compare this to the payoff in $T_2$ of the 1st option. As $S_{T_1}$ and $S_{T_2}$ are random and therefore unknown, you can't tell which of the two options is better. The short selling in the 2nd option is a construction to introduce $S_{T_1}$ in the payoff of that option and get rid of $S_{T_2}$ in the dominated payoff.


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.