Skip to main content
12 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Sep 17, 2016 at 0:45 history bounty awarded user2521987
Sep 17, 2016 at 0:45 vote accept user2521987
Sep 16, 2016 at 15:17 comment added LocalVolatility You are right - my mistake. But at least now I finally spotted what went wrong in the first place. You have the correct formula for $\beta$ but forget to apply discounting when computing the value - i.e. you don't take into account the $e^{-r h}$ term.
Sep 16, 2016 at 15:09 comment added user2521987 Using the two equations, I derived the formula for $\beta$ myself and arrived at exactly what the author has. The original post has been updated with my derivation.
Sep 16, 2016 at 7:58 comment added LocalVolatility So now that you have two equations in two unkown, why don't YOU solve for $\beta$ yourself? If you do that you'll find that the formula that the textbook gives is wrong.
Sep 16, 2016 at 7:38 history edited LocalVolatility CC BY-SA 3.0
There was a bracket missing in the formula for beta. Added the dividend yield.
Sep 16, 2016 at 0:56 comment added user2521987 I'm certain it applies here because it follows the same "chain of reasoning" as your solution. This is just an explicit formula for $\beta$ that's NOT in terms of $\Delta$, as your formula is.
Sep 16, 2016 at 0:47 comment added user2521987 The value of the replicating formula at time $h$, with stock price $S_h$, is $\Delta S_h + e^{rh}\beta$. At the prices $S_h = S_d$ and $S_h = S_u$, a replicating portfolio must satisfy: $\Delta \cdot S_d \cdot e^{\delta h} + (\beta \cdot e^{rh}) = P_d$ and $\Delta \cdot S_u \cdot e^{\delta h} + (\beta \cdot e^{rh}) = P_u$. The two unknowns $\Delta$ and $\beta$ allow us to solve for $$\beta = e^{-rh} \cdot \frac{u P_d - d P_u}{u - d}.$$
Sep 15, 2016 at 16:38 comment added LocalVolatility Do you understand how the textbook derived it? Is it in a different context / sure it applies here? Don't just take "formulas from the textbook" for granted.
Sep 15, 2016 at 15:00 comment added LocalVolatility I showed you how to obtain the correct expression for $\beta$ and your formula for it looks different. So the question is not really why your formula doesn't apply but rather how you obtained it since it seems wrong.
Sep 15, 2016 at 14:58 comment added user2521987 I understand your solution and why it provides the correct $\beta$. One thing that I still don't understand is why my formula, $$\beta = \frac{uP_d - dP_u}{u - d}e^{-rh}$$ does not apply here and give the same $\beta$ that you calculated. That formula is what the textbook provided.
Sep 13, 2016 at 22:56 history answered LocalVolatility CC BY-SA 3.0