# Tag Info

17

Life Without a Risk-Neutral Measure How would we price assets without the measure $\mathbb Q$? Well, we would start with some version of the Euler equation $P_t=\mathbb{E}_t[M_{t+1}P_{t+1}]$, where $M$ is the stochastic discount factor (SDF). This equation holds under very weak assumptions (law of one price) and uses real-world probabilities. So, we take the ...

14

In the integral $$\int_0^t S_u dW^{*}_u \, ,$$ $dW^{*}_u \equiv W^{*}_{u+du} - W^{*}_u$ is independent from the integrand $S_u$. So, $\mathbb{E}\left[ \int_0^t S_u dW^{*}_u\middle\vert \mathcal{F}_0\right] = \int_0^t \mathbb{E}\left[S_u \middle\vert \mathcal{F}_0\right]\mathbb{E}\left[dW^{*}_u\middle\vert \mathcal{F}_0\right] = 0$, since $\mathbb{E}\... 12 I think to understand the martingale/local martingale distinction, it helps to bring in a third class of processes, the uniformly integrable martingale. I would argue that the local martingale and the non-uniformly integrable (true) martingale are actually fairly similar. The key property that a uniformly integrable martingale has is the so-called closure ... 11 We assume that, under the probability measure$Q, \begin{align*} dS_t &= S_t\big(r_t dt + \sigma dW_s(t)\big),\\ dr_t &= -k\, r_t dt + \alpha dW_r(t),\tag{1} \end{align*} whered\langle W_s(t), W_r(t)\rangle_t = \rho dt$. From$(1)$, for$s\ge t, \begin{align*} r_s = e^{-k(s-t)}r_t + \alpha\int_t^s e^{-k(s-u)} dW_r(u). \end{align*} Then, forT\ge ...

10

Whether it's called volatility pumping, rebalancing premium, or Shannon's Demon it would just be a form of replicating a short gamma option strategy (eg. selling straddles). Intuitively, you are systematically selling at higher levels and buying at lower levels. The payoff for continuously rebalancing an equity/cash portfolio without friction when the ...

9

Roughly speaking, we can express the difference between a Markov process and a martingale as follows: A Markov process is one for which conditioning its future value on its history is the same as conditioning its future value on its present value, so that $E(h(X_t)\,|\,X_u,\,u\leq s)=E(h(X_t)\,|\,X_s)$, for any appropriate function $h$; A martingale is a ...

7

Let $(W_t)$ be a standard Brownian motion and $a>0$. We define $X_t=e^{aW_t-\frac{1}{2}a^2t}$. Then, the process $(X_t)$ is adapted and integrable which are the first two conditions of being a martingale. Finally, for any $s<t$, \begin{align*} \mathbb{E}\left[ X_t\mid\mathcal{F}_s\right] &= \mathbb{E}\left[ e^{aW_t-\frac{1}{2}a^2t}\mid\mathcal{F}...

6

I aim to give a careful mathematical treatment to this answer, whilst following the fantastic book "Basic Stochastic Processes" by Brzezniak and Zastawniak. The reason I am putting this answer on is twofold: first, to compliment @ William S. Wong's answer by adding greater mathematical intricacy for other users of the website, and secondly to confirm that ...

6

Under a Black-Scholes framework, the dynamics of the stock price under the risk-neutral measure $\mathbb{Q}$ are given by ... $$S_t = r S_tdt +\sigma S_tdW^{\mathbb{Q}}_t$$ ... and those of the risk-free bond by: \begin{align} dB_t = rB_tdt \end{align} Let us define the derivative value as $V(t,S_t)$, which only depends on the time $t$ and the ...

6

Measure theory helps us overcome some of the drawbacks of constructing measures (measure of probability when ranged at $[0,1]$). Classic probability theory is effective for probability models whose sample space $\Omega$ is a finite or countable set ($P: 2^{\Omega} \to [0,1]$). But for uncountable sets, such as $\mathbb{R}$ (which is uncountable) the ...

6

As a general principle, I would be wary of economic or financial interpretations of change of measure techniques. Changing numéraires is merely a mathematical tool to ease pricing, see for example the last part of this answer. Nevertheless, here’s my take on your question. Think of a numéraire as the basic financial asset of your economy, namely a store of ...

6

Note merely that $B_t=B_s+(B_t-B_s)$ which is the sum of independent normally distributed random variables. In particular, $B_s$ is $\mathbb{F}_s$-measurable and $B_{t-s}$ is independent of $\mathbb{F}_s$. Thus, \begin{align*} \mathbb{E}_s[Z_t] &= \mathbb{E}_s\left[\exp\left(-\frac{1}{2}\theta^2t+\theta B_t\right)\right] \\ &= \mathbb{E}_s\left[\exp\...

6

Recall that any traded asset divided by a numéraire is a martingale under the measure associated to that numéraire. For the 3 interest rates you mention, the natural measure (namely the one that makes those processes martingales) is deduced from the structure of the rate. Always keep in mind that the value at $t_0$ of a cash flow $C$ paid at $T$ is equal to ...

6

As @ilovevolatility explains, the seminal reference for this matter is Geman, El Karoui & Rochet (1995). We assume none of the assets are dividend paying, and they are strictly positive. There are two potential options. You are considering a market with only assets $X$ and $N$. Then Assumption 1 of their paper would apply, which is related to the two ...

5

The martingale representation theorem says that for any martingale $M$, there exists a unique stochastic process $\nu_t$ such that \begin{align*} M_t = \mathbb{E}(M_0) + \int_0^t\nu_sdW_s. \end{align*} See, for example, this book. Since \begin{align*} C_t &= \Bbb{E} \left( \int_t^T f(r_s, \theta_s, W_s) ds \mid \mathcal{F}_t \right)\\ &= -\int_0^t ...

5

We decree that $D_t$ has a certain process which makes it a martingale. In particular, we let $$D_t = \mathbb{E} ( D_T \, | \, \mathcal{F}_t)$$ This is trivially a martingale by the tower law. Since the discounted stock price and discounted bond price are martingales, we have made everything a martingale and that ensures that there is no arbitrage in the ...

5

The Snell envelope is the smallest super-martingale that is greater than $X$. Since $\tau \le N$, it is obvious that $A_N^{\tau} = A_{N\wedge \tau} = A_{\tau}$. For part (b), note that, from the Doob decomposition, $M$ is a martingale, $A$ is increasing, $M_0=Z_0$, and $A_0=0$. If $Z^{\tau}= \{Z_n^{\tau}\}_{n=1}^N$ is also a martingale, then \begin{align*}...

5

Set $Z_t := f(W_t,t)$ where $f(x,t) = e^{ax -\frac{1}{2}a^2t}.$ Then applying Ito's lemma we get $$dZ_t = aZ_tdW_t.$$ This means that $Z_t$ is a local martingale. For $Z_t$ to be a martingale you have to prove that $E \int_0^t|a e^{aW_t -\frac{1}{2}a^2u}|^2 du <\infty.$ For that you can use Fubini's theorem. \begin{align*} E \int_0^t|a e^{a W_u - \frac{1}{...

4

Most of the time, when you have a simple SDE without a drift, it's a martingale because the Wiener process itself is a martingale. In your example, you have a constant with the Wiener process, therefore the whole process must also be a martingale because the expectation is clearly X(t). However, we can't conclude a driftless SDE is always a martingale. ...

4

Let's consider a random process $X$. If $X$ is an adapted process, then we know, without any uncertainty, what its value is at the present time. This idea is formalized with measure theory. For $X$ to be a martingale, it needs to have the following property: at any given time, our best estimate of the value at some point in the future (i.e. forecast), is ...

4

For Itô Processes $dX(t) = \mu(t) \mathrm{d}t + \sigma(t) \mathrm{d}W(t)$ you have the result that (under appropriate assumptions which ensure that the local martingale is a martingale, e.g. $E( (\int \sigma(t)^2 \mathrm{d}t )^{1/2} ) < \infty$, etc.): $X$ is a martingale $\Leftrightarrow$ $\mu(t) = 0$. So in order to check if a process $X$ is a ...

4

Suppose that there are multiple martingale measures $Q_1$ and $Q_2$ that attain the minimal variance. Then the convex combination $Q_* := \frac{1}{2}Q_1 + \frac{1}{2}Q_2$ is also a martingale measure. Due to the strict convexity of $f(x) = x^2$, it can be shown that E_P \left[\frac{dQ_*}{dP}^2 \right] < \frac{1}{2} E_P \left[ \frac{dQ_1}{dP}^2 \right]... 4 Based on Ito's isometry, \begin{align*} E_t (r^2_{t+1}) &= E_t \bigg(\int_t^{t+1} \sigma_s dW_s \int_t^{t+1} \sigma_s dW_s\bigg)\\ &= E_t \bigg(\int_t^{t+1} \sigma_{\tau}^2 \,d\tau\bigg) \\ &= E_t\bigg(\int_0^1 \sigma_{\tau+t}^2 \,d\tau\bigg) \\ &=\int_0^1 E_t\big(\sigma_{\tau+t}^2\big) \,d\tau. \end{align*} The identity \begin{align*} E_t (r^... 4 Generally Kurtosis measures the degree to which a distribution is more or less peaked than a normal distribution. Positive kurtosis indicates a relatively peaked distribution. Negative kurtosis indicates a relatively flat distribution. In time series we can encounter high kurtosis which is caused by "fat tails" (higher frequencies of outcomes) at the ... 4 Perhaps an answer coming from a different angle and giving you some perspective: The typical approach taken by statistics is top-down: Just looking at the data and finding patterns and stylized facts (like excess volatility, volatility clustering, fat tails, no autocorrelation in returns but significant autocorrelation in absolute returns etc.) The problem ... 4 We consider the case where the Novikov condition is satisfied, that is, \begin{align*} E\left[\exp\left(\frac{1}{2}\int_0^T \theta^2_s ds \right)\right] < \infty. \end{align*} Then \{L_t \mid t \ge 0\} is a (\mathscr{F}_t, \mathbb{P})-martingale. On \mathscr{F}_T, we define the probability measure Q by \begin{align*} \frac{dQ}{dP}\big|_{\mathscr{F}... 4 Consider a random variable X that has a probability density function (PDF) f(x). X being non-negative means that f(x) = 0 for x < 0. The expectation of X is thus $$\int_{-\infty}^\infty x f(x) \mathrm{d}x = \int_0^\infty x f(x) \mathrm{d}x.$$ Since f(x) \geq 0 for it to be a valid PDF, it follows that \begin{... 4 We assume a Black-Scholes world except the dynamics of the stock price, namely: No arbitrage opportunities. No dividend payments from the stock. Existence of a riskless asset yielding the risk free rate - which here we assume non-constant, (r_t)_{t \geq 0}. Possibility to borrow and lend infinitely at the risk-free rate. Possibility to buy and sell ... 4 You may find the following paper worthwhile. It addresses most of the above points (and many more) in a systematic way: Dubikovsky, Vladislav and Susinno, Gabriele, Demystifying Rebalancing Premium and Extending Portfolio Theory in the Process (May 20, 2015). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2927791 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2927791 ... 4 Assume that: S_0^1(1+r)\leq a,b $$Arbitrage for a portfolio V_t is defined as:$$V_0\leq0, \quad P(V_1\geq0)=1, \quad P(V_1>0)>0$$Consider borrowing at rate r to buy the risky asset such that V_0=0. Then, assuming a\not= b:$$\begin{align} \min_{\omega}V_1(\omega)=a-S_0^1(1+r)\geq 0 \\ \max_{\omega}V_1(\omega)=b-S_0^1(1+r)> 0 \end{...

Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible