Suppose a process for a stock price of a US-based company traded in the USA is, under the USD money-market numeraire:


Using fundamental theorem of asset pricing, we must have that:


So clearly, the discounted process for $S_t$ is a martingale under $B_{USD}(t)$ as numeraire.

Suppose I am interested in the exchange rate between USD and EUR, and I denote the process that describes how many units of USD I need to pay for 1 unit of EUR as $X_t$ (i.e. analogously to the process $S_t$, which tells me how many units of USD I need to pay for 1 unit of $S_t$).

Let the process of $X_t$ be as follows:

$$dX_{EUR\rightarrow USD}(t)=(r_{USD}-r_{EUR})X_{EUR\rightarrow USD}(t)dt+\sigma_XX_{EUR\rightarrow USD}(t)dW_2(t)$$

The Forward on $X_t$ is denoted as $F(X_t)=\mathbb{E}_{USD}^Q[X_t|X_0]$.

The no-arbitrage condition on the forward is trivially: $$F(X_{EUR\rightarrow USD}(t))=\frac{e^{r_{USD}t}}{e^{r_{EUR}t}}X_{EUR\rightarrow USD}(t_0)$$

Clearly, this condition is satisfied because $$\mathbb{E}_{USD}^Q[X_t|X_0]=\mathbb{E}_{USD}^Q[X_0e^{r_{USD}t-r_{EUR}t-0.5\sigma_X^2t+\sigma_XW_2(t)}]=X_0e^{r_{USD}t-r_{EUR}t}=\frac{e^{r_{USD}t}}{e^{r_{EUR}t}}X_{EUR\rightarrow USD}(t_0)$$

But clearly, under the USD numeraire, the discounted process for $X_t$ is NOT a martingale, since:

$$\frac{X_0}{1}\stackrel{?}{=}\mathbb{E}^Q_{USD}\left[\frac{X_t}{B_{USD}(t)}\right]=\mathbb{E}^Q_{USD}\left[\frac{X_0e^{r_{USD}t-r_{EUR}t-0.5\sigma_X^2t+\sigma_XW_2(t)}}{e^{r_{USD}t}}\right]=X_0e^{-r_{EUR}t}\neq X_0$$

So the process for $X_t$ cannot be a valid process under the $B_{USD}(t)$ numeraire. It would not be a valid process under the $B_{EUR}(t)$ numeraire either, because again, if discounted by the EUR numeraire, it would not be a martingale.

Where is the catch here?


1 Answer 1


The catch is that when a stock pays dividends, say, by a continuously compounded dividend yield $q$ then $$ \frac{dS_t}{S_t}=r_{USD}\,dt\color{red}{-q\,dt}+\sigma\,dW_t\,, $$ and $S_te^{-r_{USD}t}$ is not longer a martingale either. Thank god this can be fixed because when you add to this the present value of the paid dividends then the process $$ M_t=S_t\,e^{-r_{USD}\,t}+\int_0^tq\,S_u\,e^{-r_{USD}\,u}\,du $$ is a martingale. See this answer.

Now to the FX rate. The well-known SDE $$ \frac{dX_t}{X_t}=r_{USD}\,dt\color{red}{-r_{EUR}\,dt}+\sigma\,dW_t $$ suggests that $r_{EUR}$ is the continuous compounded dividend yield that you receive when you hold one unit of $X_t$ which is the price of one EUR in USD.

This makes a lot of sense because when we have 1 EUR in cash we can say that we hold $X_t$ USD and we do receive $r_{EUR}$ per time and share in dividends from holding that cash.

To make a long story short: $X_te^{-r_{USD}t}$ is not a martingale but $$ M_t=X_t\,e^{-r_{USD}\,t}+\int_0^tr_{EUR}\,X_u\,e^{-r_{USD}\,u}\,du $$ is one.

As a sanity check to see directly that this is a martingale write $r_{USD}=r$ and $r_{EUR}=q$ for brevity and note that \begin{align} dM_t&=e^{-r\,t}\,dX_t-r\,e^{-r\,t}X_t\,dt+q\,X_t\,e^{-r\,t}\,dt\\ &=e^{-r\,t}\Big\{dX_t-r\,X_t\,dt+q\,X_t\,dt\Big\}\\ &=e^{-r\,t}\,\sigma\,X_t\,dW_t \end{align} by the SDE $dX_t=(r-q)\,X_t\,dt+\sigma\,X_t\,dW_t\,.$

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Nice answer (+1) but aren't you missing a bunch of $\text{d}$'s in your SDEs for $\text{d}t$ and $\text{d}W_t$? $\endgroup$
    – Kevin
    Commented Nov 4, 2022 at 22:18
  • $\begingroup$ Absolutely. Thanks! Corrected now. $\endgroup$
    – Kurt G.
    Commented Nov 5, 2022 at 5:53
  • $\begingroup$ The process for $X_t$ is: $$X_t=X_0+\int_{h=0}^{h=t}r_{USD}X_hdh-\int_{h=0}^{h=t}r_{EUR}X_hdh+\int_{h=0}^{h=t}\sigma X_hdW_h$$ Therefore, we should have that: $$M_t=e^{-r_{USD}t}\left\{X_0+\int_{h=0}^{h=t}r_{USD}X_hdh-\int_{h=0}^{h=t}r_{EUR}X_hdh\color{red}{+\int_{h=0}^{h=t}r_{EUR}X_hdh}+\int_{h=0}^{h=t}\sigma X_hdW_h\right\}$$ In other words: $$M_t=e^{-r_{USD}t}\left\{X_t+\int_{h=0}^{h=t}r_{EUR}X_hdh\right\}=e^{-r_{USD}t}X_t+\int_{h=0}^{h=t}r_{EUR}X_he^{-r_{USD}t}dh$$ instead of: $$M_t=e^{-r_{USD}t}X_t+\int_{h=0}^{h=t}r_{EUR}X_he^{\color{orange}{+}r_{USD}(t\color{orange}{-h})}dh$$ $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 14, 2022 at 10:55
  • $\begingroup$ @JanStuller . Thanks for reading this carefully. There were typos in my answer. I agree with your equation for $X_t$ but do not see why your $M_t$ should be a martingale. $\endgroup$
    – Kurt G.
    Commented Nov 14, 2022 at 11:17
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I doubt that $X_t$ and your $\bar{X}_t$ are related in that way. Most likely a hick-up inside the integrals (factor $X_t$ is different from factor $\bar{X}_t$). To the end of the answer I just added a very direct proof that the $M_t$ there is without doubt a martingale. $\endgroup$
    – Kurt G.
    Commented Nov 14, 2022 at 14:38

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.