0
$\begingroup$

Market participants are usually assumed to be risk-averse and striving to improve the Sharpe ratios of their portfolios. Thus, if we have an asset A, which is expected to return between \$900 and \$1100, and an asset B, which is expected to return something between \$500 - \$1500, then on the market should price A higher. For example, the A may cost \$995, while B \$975.

This reasoning predicts a potential existence of particular option-like securities that would absorb those assets' expected volatility. Such security, being sold, should probably cost around a difference between the average and assets market price, so the owner of asset A could buy it for \$5, while the other for, say, \$25. The security seller would receive the premium + all potential gains and losses from the underlying on a particular date.

What puzzles me is that I seemingly cannot construct something like this from securities accessible to a DIY investor like me, a combination of stocks, bonds, options, futures. Everything I could come up with causes the "seller" in the example above to pay the premium. For example, longing a call and shorting a put on the same strike price will be a net negative.

So, assuming a random walk with normal distribution, the questions are:

  • Does anything like this exist in the finance world?
  • Is it going to have at least a positive value for the holder? If no, why?
  • Can you reproduce it with a set of options?
Improve this question
$\endgroup$
6
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I have trouble understanding, but would it be similar to a variance swap? $\endgroup$
    – Dimitri Vulis
    Feb 9, 2021 at 2:13
  • $\begingroup$ > For example, longing a call and shorting a put on the same strike price will be a net negative... Can you explain this part? $\endgroup$
    – Sergei Rodionov
    Feb 9, 2021 at 7:12
  • $\begingroup$ @SergeiRodionov I meant a "synthetic long stock" here $\endgroup$
    – Nikolay Rys
    Feb 9, 2021 at 8:58
  • $\begingroup$ @NikolayRys. Yes, but what is "net negative"? Is it the cost of time decay compared of holding the underlying? $\endgroup$
    – Sergei Rodionov
    Feb 9, 2021 at 10:58
  • $\begingroup$ @SergeiRodionov Sorry, I wanted to say that the line on the payoff diagram of synthetic long stocks is shifted down. $\endgroup$
    – Nikolay Rys
    Feb 9, 2021 at 11:21

0

Reset to default

Your Answer

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