A fund holds the right to hand over one share of one company in a year and receive one share of another, with no cash changing hands. What is that right worth, and what does its price depend on beyond the two volatilities? This lesson builds the joint model of the two prices, finds the volatility of their ratio, prices the right exactly by measuring values in units of the delivered asset, and explains why a call on a basket of the same assets has only approximate formulas of this kind.
Key terms
Correlated diffusions
Definition Two positive asset prices follow correlated geometric Brownian motions under a pricing measure with money-market account when
for , with a constant rate , constant continuous dividend yields , constant volatilities , and -Brownian motions with for a constant . One construction takes with a -Brownian motion independent of . The covariation of the prices is
and for the pair is bivariate normal with correlation . With assets the matrix of driver correlations must be symmetric with unit diagonal and positive semidefinite, and pairwise values between and do not guarantee this. The law of each price on its own does not depend on , but the joint law does, and so does the price of a payoff such as .
In plain words Each asset on its own follows the Black-Scholes model, and the new input is how their random shocks line up. Correlation one means the two drivers are the same Brownian motion, correlation zero means here that they are independent, and a set of correlations for several assets has to be consistent as a whole.
Example For three assets the correlations and each lie in , yet the matrix has eigenvalues , and . The combination would have variance , so no model has these correlations. For two constructed assets with , zero dividends, , and one year, the exchange option priced in a later card is worth about , , and for , , and , while the law of each price is the same in every case.
Effective volatility
Definition In the correlated model the ratio satisfies
To derive it, Itô’s lemma gives , where the second-order term contributes , and the product rule for adds the covariation . The Brownian part has quadratic variation , where the effective volatility is given by
so . With , it is zero exactly when and , and it equals only when . The effective volatility is the same under every equivalent measure, since a change of measure alters drifts and not quadratic variation.
In plain words The ratio of two prices moves with the difference of their shocks, and the variance of a difference is the sum of the variances minus twice the covariance. Positive correlation lowers the risk of the ratio, but perfectly correlated drivers with different volatilities still leave a ratio that moves.
Example With the constructed values , and , the effective variance is , so . At it is and , not zero. At it is about , and at it is .
Change of numeraire
Definition Let be the value of one unit of asset 2 bought at time with its dividends reinvested in the asset, a strictly positive traded price. In the correlated model, is a positive -martingale, and the measure on is defined by
The exponent is a constant times a Brownian motion, so Novikov’s condition holds, and Girsanov’s theorem with this positive sign gives the -Brownian motions
for , still with correlation . For a claim paid at with , Bayes’ formula with the density process gives
Substituting and into the ratio dynamics adds to the drift, so
under , with the same effective volatility. The general change-of-numeraire theorem is developed later, in Numeraires and forward measures, and this card uses only the explicit Gaussian density above.
In plain words Measuring every value in units of the second asset, with its dividends reinvested, reduces the exchange problem to a problem about the ratio alone. The new measure gives more weight to paths on which asset 2 does well, exactly enough that traded values expressed in these units become martingales. This shifts the drifts of the Brownian motions and leaves volatilities and correlation unchanged.
Example With the constructed values , , and zero dividends, the shifts are and . The ratio drift is under and under . With and , the probability that is about under and about under . Both are pricing weights for different numeraires, and neither is a forecast under .
Exchange option
Definition An exchange option gives its holder the right at to receive one unit of asset 1 by delivering one unit of asset 2, so it pays , with no cash strike. In the correlated model with and , its value at is
with the carry term . This is Margrabe’s formula. To derive it, note that , so the payoff in units of the numeraire is . Writing for the conditional expectation under given , the pricing identity gives
Given , the variable is normal under with mean and variance , and the lognormal call computation with unit strike gives the formula. The rate does not appear, because both legs are traded assets and no cash is paid. Here . If , the ratio is deterministic and , and at the value is the payoff. Since , the option to receive asset 1 for asset 2 and the option to receive asset 2 for asset 1 differ in value by .
In plain words The holder gets asset 1 and gives up asset 2, so the formula looks like Black-Scholes with the second asset in the place of the discounted strike and in the place of . The interest rate drops out because nothing is paid in cash, while the dividend yields stay, because the holder of the option receives neither asset’s dividends before .
Example For the constructed data , zero dividends, , , and , the effective volatility is . Equal prices and yields give and , so
Taking asset 2 to be a zero-coupon bond that pays at , with , and , gives and returns the Black-Scholes call formula, with entering through the bond price. For instance , , , , and give about in both formulas.
Basket option
Definition For assets in the correlated model with correlation matrix and fixed quantities , the basket is , and a basket call with strike pays at . When , the value shares are and the instantaneous proportional variance of the basket is
so that , with every covariance term included. This number is exact at the current composition, but the shares change as prices move, so is random and is in general not a geometric Brownian motion. A sum of lognormal prices is in general not lognormal, so has no lognormal law to integrate against. Dividing by one asset does not help either, since for two assets still depends on .
In plain words A basket adds prices instead of dividing them, so there is no single ratio whose law settles the price. Its current volatility combines all variances and covariances with today’s value shares, and that number drifts as the mix of the basket changes.
Example Take two constructed assets at with , , , zero dividends and . Both shares are , so
and , below because the assets are not perfectly correlated. Conditioning on the driver of the first asset and integrating numerically gives the one-year call with strike as about . The Black-Scholes formula with gives about , close but not equal.
Lognormal moment matching
Definition Lognormal moment matching approximates by a lognormal variable with that has the same first two -moments. With forward prices these moments are exact,
The matching needs and , and then and . The approximate call price is
This is an approximation, not a statement about the law of . Two moments do not fix the third moment or the tails, the method carries no general error bound, and its accuracy has to be checked numerically, for example against Monte Carlo with its standard error. With negative weights, as in a spread, the basket can be zero or negative with positive probability, which no lognormal variable can match, and the mean can be zero or negative.
In plain words Replace the awkward sum by the lognormal variable with the same mean and variance, and price that variable with a Black-Scholes-type formula. The two agree on the first two moments and in general on nothing more, so the method can be very accurate when the basket is close to lognormal and poor when its components behave very differently.
Example For the basket of the previous card, and , so and . The approximate call is about , against from numerical integration. The third moments already differ, about for against for the matched lognormal. For a constructed basket with , and and the same other data, , and the approximation gives about at strike and at strike , while numerical integration gives and . The approximation overprices the first call by about and underprices the second by about .
Check yourself
- Two assets have volatilities and . Find the effective volatility of their ratio for the correlations , and . A colleague says that at correlation the ratio carries no risk. Is that right?
Show the answer
The effective variance is
At it is , so . At it is , so , and at it is , so . The colleague is wrong. At correlation both prices respond to the same shock, but with different sizes, so the ratio still moves with volatility . The ratio is riskless only when the correlation is and the volatilities are also equal.
- With , , , , and , price the option to receive asset 1 for asset 2. Then find the price of the option to receive asset 2 for asset 1 without a second use of the formula. Does either answer depend on ?
Show the answer
The carry term gives , so
With and , the value is
The two payoffs differ by , so the reverse option is worth . The formula with the roles of the assets swapped gives the same number. Neither price depends on , because both legs are traded assets and no cash changes hands.
- A desk wants a call on the spread with strike , using the data of the constructed exchange example, and plans to approximate the spread by a lognormal variable with matched moments. Why does this plan fail, and which spread contract does have an exact price in this model?
Show the answer
The spread is a basket with weights and . With zero rates and dividends its mean is , so is undefined. More basically, the spread is negative with positive probability. Under , with and , the variable is normal with mean and variance . Since ,
while a lognormal variable is always positive. The contract with strike is the exchange option, which the ratio and the asset-2 numeraire price exactly at about . With strike the payoff divided by is , which still depends on , so the law of the ratio alone does not price it, and it needs a numerical method or an approximation whose error is checked.