0
$\begingroup$

Say I sold a long-dated European put option and I want to analyze the costs and benefits of partial hedges in a world with stochastic price movements, rate movements, and volatility. For example, let's say I want to hedge 50% of my delta, 75% of my rho, and 25% of my vega.

How can I calculate the expected cost/benefit of my hedge? If all risks were 100% hedged, I'd pay the option premium up front (cost) and nothing more at maturity (benefit). If all risks were 50% hedged, I'd pay 50% of the option premium up front (cost) and only 50% of the payout at maturity (benefit). But if my risks are hedged in varying degrees, what analytical solutions are available for me to estimate these costs and benefits without explicit derivation of Greeks at each rebalancing point in the simulation?

EDIT (Given @Arshdeep's responses):

Maybe it will be better if I express myself and my interpretation of Arshdeep's response formulaically. Suppose my stock doesn't have dividends and follows the Heston model described in Hull Options, Futures, and Other Derivatives, so that in my discrete simulation I have:

$\frac{dS}{S} = r \Delta t + \sqrt {V} dz_s$

$\Delta V_t = a(V_L - V_{t-1}) \Delta t + \xi V^{\alpha} dz_v$

$V_t = V_{t-1} + \Delta V_t$

Where $dz_s$ and $dz_v$ are my correlated standard normal random draws. Then my simulation follows the form:

$S_t = S_{t-1} * e^{(r - V_t / 2) \Delta t + \sqrt{V_t} dz_s}$

According to @Arshdeep, I can independently test the impact of my delta and vega hedges. My interpretation of his response is that I apply the following hedge coverage amounts to my simulation, where X is (1 - % Delta Hedged) and Y is (1 - % Vega Hedged):

$S_t = S_{t-1} * e^{X[(r - V_{t-1} / 2) \Delta t + \sqrt{V_{t-1}} dz_s] + Y [(\sqrt{V_t} - \sqrt{V_{t-1}})dz_s - (dV_t)/2]}$

I don't know what to make of this term that represents your unhedged change in volatility when Y<1 but X=1: $(\sqrt{V_t} - \sqrt{V_{t-1}})dz_s$. If you 100% hedge delta, your equity volatility is 0%, but your change in volatility can be less than 0, resulting in negative volatility. Can your net volatility position be negative? In practice, it just flips the sign of your $dz_s$ term, but I don't know what that intuitively means.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ I don't think there is a closed-form or semi-analytical formula. Also I am not sure what you mean with cost/benefit. How do you define cost/benefit? What you could try is simulate under the real-world measure what your P/L distribution looks like if you carry out a minimimum-variance delta hedge in a stochastic vol environment. So basically you're leaving vega open but you're adjusting your delta hedge so that your P/L variance (under real world) is minimized. The difficulty with this is finding acceptable real world estimates for the parameters of your model. $\endgroup$
    – Frido
    Commented May 31 at 15:11
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you for your comment. Maybe I can clarify. "Benefit" here is probably not fully accurate. I'm mainly talking about the upfront costs vs. the final payout costs of partial hedging. The only reason to not be fully hedged would be if you thought it was too expensive (i.e. the market will move in your favor). So the only reason to partially hedge is if you expected a "benefit" at payoff. That's why I phrased it that way. $\endgroup$ Commented May 31 at 15:43
  • $\begingroup$ Also, just to add, I can show that modeling a (1-% hedged) * dS process for my stock under reasonable assumptions for volatility gets roughly back to the linear relationship between % hedged, upfront cost, and final payout that KermittFrog describes below for the binomial case. That only works when risks are equally hedged though. It seems naturally to follow that there is a solution when the vol process is stochastic alongside the stock process, or the rate process and hedged unevenly. However, since I’m asking the question, of course I can’t say for certain. $\endgroup$ Commented May 31 at 17:16
  • $\begingroup$ Ok, thx, let me think about it more. If I'll have anything useful to say I'll post an answer. $\endgroup$
    – Frido
    Commented May 31 at 18:34

2 Answers 2

2
+100
$\begingroup$

One approach I would take is to plot %hedging v/s PnL variance.

A perfect hedge should leak no PnL, and a naked position would have variance of the spot. So you have a downward, convex curve that converges to x-axis as hedge% goes to 100%. Parametrize the curve and run a simulation once for 50% hedge to find the parameter. This should give you an idea of how variance moves as a function of a risk factor being partially hedged.

Edit1: The expected PnL of any strategy in the risk neutral set is 0. So maybe to model the expected PnL in the real world, you have to look at the covariance of RND with the strategy.

Edit2: Here is another thing I would do.

$dS^2=2SdS+dt$ So I know the integral of $SdS$ in closed form.

I approximate delta as $delta(t,S(t))= 2aS+b+c*S^2$ so that I know the PnL in closed form. Then the integral calculation is easier. Now you can look at your PnL in closed form. This will work well where $vol*sqrt(t)$ is low. a b and c can match the current delta and delta at extreme percentiles.

Edit 3:

The difference in C(t,S(t)) of 2 different approaches does not have anything to do with actual PnL of the naked call. Sorry for confusion.

$\endgroup$
7
  • $\begingroup$ This isn't quite what I was looking for. I was more asking if there was a clear analytical/formulaic relationship. For instance, in a constant rate/vol environment, Hull shows that dynamic delta hedging will "cost" you your option value. How do those costs break down in a stochastic rate/vol environment, and is there a way to connect those costs with your initial option value and final payout you're hedging? $\endgroup$ Commented May 22 at 14:23
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you for the clarity. In the case you are mentioning, the adjustment of the price should be the price under a stochastic rate+vol model minus the price under a deterministic model. $\endgroup$
    – Arshdeep
    Commented May 22 at 15:05
  • $\begingroup$ Intuitively, this makes sense. A rho hedge reduces your portfolio's rate vol to 0, so the price difference is your hedge cost. A vol hedge reduces your portfolio's vol of vol to 0, so the price difference is your hedge cost. But what about a delta hedge? A delta hedge should reduce your portfolio's equity vol to 0. If your spot is equal to your discounted strike, you'd still have the delta hedge cost of (F-K)e^(-rT). That is, dynamic delta hedging isn't just the difference between a constant and stochastic model. Is that wrong? It makes me question the intuition of the other risks as well. $\endgroup$ Commented May 22 at 20:05
  • $\begingroup$ The difference in price given by the models is the correct difference in cost of hedging in the two models. The difference represents additional cost over and above what would be if the dynamics were deterministic. You can start with a one step binomial model and change the volatility and see how the cost of hedge moves. $\endgroup$
    – Arshdeep
    Commented May 22 at 20:43
  • $\begingroup$ Ok, I’m convinced. With all vol equal to zero, remainder is just theta, or the cost of carry, since my option has effectively turned into a forward when there’s no vol. So hedge costs are estimated by removing associated vol of the risk. But then this gets me to pt2 of my question: how do I determine that hedge’s benefit in any scenario at maturity? I paid X dollars up front (depending on my % hedged), and need to fund Y% of my payout at maturity. $\endgroup$ Commented May 23 at 13:03
1
$\begingroup$

Let try a very simple approximation using a binomial tree where the stock moves from $S$ or to $S\times U$ or $S\times D$ with state factors $U\equiv e^{\sigma\sqrt{\Delta t}}$ and $D$. For simplicity, we assume a one-step model and $\Delta t=1$, furthermore $D=1/U$, the risk free rate is zero, i.e. $R=1$, and the initial asset price is $S_0=1$ for convenience. The option will pay $C^U$ and $C^D$ in the states $S^U=U$ and $S^D=D$.

Under this model, the initial delta (i.e. hedge fraction) and option prices are calculated as:

$$ \Delta = \frac{C^U-C^D}{U-D}\quad\mathrm{and}\quad C_0=\underbrace{\Delta}_{\mathrm{hedge}}+\underbrace{\frac{UC^D-DC^U}{U-D}}_{\mathrm{borrow}} $$

Let's assume that we choose to hedge only partially, i.e. to buy only $\alpha\Delta$ in stock, but we will borrow $\frac{UC^D-DC^U}{U-D}$ in either case to simplify the calculation. This way, when shorting the option, we gain $(1-\alpha)\Delta$.

Incorporating the gain in period 0 into the final payoff states:

$$ \begin{align} \pi^U=(1-\alpha)\Delta-C^U+\alpha U\Delta + \frac{UC^D-DC^U}{U-D}\\ \pi^D=(1-\alpha)\Delta-C^D+\alpha D\Delta + \frac{UC^D-DC^U}{U-D} \end{align} $$

and after some algebra this simplifies to

$$ \begin{align} \pi^U&=(1-\alpha)\Delta(1-U)\\ \pi^D&=(1-\alpha)\Delta(1-D) \end{align} $$

Note that for $0<\alpha<1$ the total payoffs are not hedged. As $pU+(1-p)D=1$ by construction, the expected payoff is:

$$ \mathrm{E}(\pi)=0 $$

Then, remembering that $D=1/U$, we can approximate the variance as:

$$ \mathrm{E}\left(\pi^2\right)=\left(1-\alpha\right)^2\Delta^2\frac{(U-1)^2}{U}\approx \sigma^2 \left(1-\alpha\right)^2\Delta^2 $$

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you for your response. I agree with this math, but it matches what I said, "I'd pay 50% of the option value (OV) up front (cost) and only 50% of the payout at maturity (benefit)." If your hedge is .5, your vol is .2, and you sell a put, then you receive the OV up front and immediately hedge 50% (which costs you 50% of the OV). In the U scenario, your final payout is 0. This matches your pi_u formula. In the down scenario, you pay 50% of the final payoff, which with vol of 0.2 is ~-.18. Again, this matches your pi_d. My question is about the simulation of the portfolio and added risks. $\endgroup$ Commented May 31 at 15:38
  • $\begingroup$ Understood. Then let's wait for Arshdeep's reply :) $\endgroup$ Commented May 31 at 20:56

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.