0
$\begingroup$

So, I've just started looking into financial mathematics and the following question keeps bugging me. From what I understood, if the market is arbitrage-free and a given contingent claim of value $h$ is attainable, then there is a measure $Q$ such that the discounted asset prices $(\tilde{S}_t)$ form a martingale. Consequently, the discounted values of the portfolio $(\tilde{V}_t)$ also form a martingale. As such, it makes sense to write:

\begin{align} V_t = e^{-r(T-t)} E^Q[V_T|\mathcal{F}_t] = e^{-r(T-t)} E^Q[h|\mathcal{F}_t] \end{align}

And then we consider the fair value of the option at time $t$ to be $V_t$.

Now, I was reading another author and he writes: "The time-$t$ price of a European call on a non-dividend paying stock with spot price $S_t$, when the strike is $K$ and the time to maturity is $\tau = T − t$, is the discounted expected value of the payoff under the risk-neutral measure $Q$." Hence,

\begin{align} C_t = e^{-r\tau}E^Q[h] = e^{-r(T-t)}E^Q[\max(S_T-K,0)] \end{align}

My question is: Why can we take the "usual" expectation when computing $C_t$, instead of using the conditional expectation to $\mathcal{F}_t$? Are they the same? If so, I'm not seeing why... Any help is appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
6
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ People sometimes omit the conditioning $\mathcal{F}_t$ out from the formula but still mean the same thing. Importantly when calculating the time $t$ price of the option one conditions on the stock price being at some $S_t$. $\endgroup$
    – fes
    Jul 3 at 21:55
  • $\begingroup$ Hmm... But he continues that derivation and ends up with an expression of the form $C_t = S_t P_1 - Ke^{-r(T-t)} P_2$, where $P_1$ and $P_2$ are probabilities. The author writes that $P_2 = E^Q(1_{S_T>K})$, for instance. This makes sense if we're talking about the "usual" expectation, since $E^Q(1_{S_T>K}) = Q(\{S_T>K\})$. But it doesn't make sense for conditional expectation, right? At least, I see $E^Q[1_{S_T>K}|\mathcal{F}_t]$ as a random variable... $\endgroup$
    – Oscar
    Jul 4 at 13:54
  • $\begingroup$ That formula is standard; the expectations are conditional. From time $t$ perspective the conditional expectation is not a random variable. $\endgroup$
    – fes
    Jul 4 at 14:08
  • $\begingroup$ I'm sorry @fes, but I'm not understanding what you mean by "From time 𝑡 perspective the conditional expectation is not a random variable." Why is $E^Q[1_{S_T > K}| \mathcal{F}_t]$ a probability? Let's assume that $\mathcal{F}_t = \sigma(S_t,v_t)$, where $v_t$ is the volatility random variable. (I'm studying this in the context of stochastic volatility models btw) $\endgroup$
    – Oscar
    Jul 4 at 14:14
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Oh my bad, I simply didn't realise that, generally speaking, we have that $E[1_A | \mathcal{F}] = P(A|\mathcal{F})$. Thank you! $\endgroup$
    – Oscar
    Jul 4 at 14:46

0

Reset to default

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.