Observational Equivalence of Discrete String Models and Market Models

In this paper we show that, contrary to the claim made in Longsta, Santa-Clara, and Schwartz (2001a) and Longsta, Santa-Clara, and Schwartz (2001b), discrete string models are not more parsimonious than market models.In fact, they are found to be observationally equivalent.We derive that, for the estimation of both a K-factor discrete string model and a K-factor Libor market model for N forward rates the number of parameters that needs to be estimated equals NK .K (K .1) /2 and not K (K +1)/2 and NK, respectively.string model;market model

Libor and Swap Market Models for the Pricing of Interest Rate Derivatives: An Empirical Analysis

In this paper we empirically analyze and compare the Libor and Swap Market Models, developed by Brace, Gatarek, and Musiela (1997) and Jamshidian (1997), using paneldata on prices of US caplets and swaptions.A Libor Market Model can directly be calibrated to observed prices of caplets, whereas a Swap Market Model is calibrated to a certain set of swaption prices.For both one-factor and two-factor models we analyze how well they price caplets and swaptions that were not used for calibration.We show that the Libor Market Models in general lead to better prediction of derivative prices that were not used for calibration than the Swap Market Models.A one-factor Libor Market Model that exhibits mean-reversion gives a good fit of the derivative prices, and adding a second factor only decreases pricing errors to a small extent.We also find that models that are chosen to exactly match certain derivative prices are overfitted. Finally, a regression analysis reveals that the pricing errors are correlated with the shape of the term structure of interest rates.Term Structure Models;Interest Rate Derivatives;Lognormal Pricing Models;Black Formula

Observational Equivalence of Discrete String Models and Market Models

In this paper we show that, contrary to the claim made in Longsta, Santa-Clara, and Schwartz (2001a) and Longsta, Santa-Clara, and Schwartz (2001b), discrete string models are not more parsimonious than market models.In fact, they are found to be observationally equivalent.We derive that, for the estimation of both a K-factor discrete string model and a K-factor Libor market model for N forward rates the number of parameters that needs to be estimated equals NK .K (K .1) /2 and not K (K +1)/2 and NK, respectively.

Generic pricing of FX, inflation and stock options under stochastic interest rates and stochastic volatility

We consider the pricing of FX, inflation and stock options under stochastic interest rates and stochastic volatility, for which we use a generic multi-currency framework. We allow for a general correlation structure between the drivers of the volatility, the inflation index, the domestic (nominal) and the foreign (real) rates. Having the flexibility to correlate the underlying FX/Inflation/Stock index with both stochastic volatility and stochastic interest rates yields a realistic model, which is of practical importance for the pricing and hedging of options with a long-term exposure. We derive explicit valuation formulas for various securities, such as vanilla call/put options, forward starting options, inflation-indexed swaps and inflation caps/floors. These vanilla derivatives can be valued in closed-form under Schobel and Zhu (1999) stochastic volatility, whereas we devise an (Monte Carlo) approximation in the form of a very effective control variate for the general Heston (1993) model. Finally, we numerical investigate the quality of this approximation and consider a calibration example to FX market data

Efficient, almost exact simulation of the Heston stochastic volatility model

We deal with several efficient discretization methods for the simulation of the Heston stochastic volatility model. The resulting schemes can be used to calculate all kind of options and corresponding sensitivities, in particular the exotic options that cannot be valued with closed-form solutions. We focus on to the (computational) efficiency of the simulation schemes: though the Broadie and Kaya (2006) paper provided an exact simulation method for the Heston dynamics, we argue why its practical use might be limited. Instead we consider efficient approximations of the exact scheme, which try to exploit certain distributional features of the underlying variance process. The resulting methods are fast, highly accurate and easy to implement. We conclude by numerically comparing our new schemes to the exact scheme of Broadie and Kaya, the almost exact scheme of Smith, the Kahl-Jackel scheme, the Full Truncation scheme of Lord et al. and the Quadratic Exponential scheme of Andersen

Evaluating the UK and Dutch Defined Benefit Policies Using the Holistic Balance Sheet Framework

This paper compares the UK and Dutch occupational defined-benefit pension policies using the holistic balance sheet (HBS) framework. The UK DB pension system differs from the Dutch one in terms of the steering tools and adjustment mechanisms. In addition to the sponsor guarantee, the UK system has the protection from the Pension Protection Fund (PPF) that guarantees DB pension schemes’ funding shortfalls if the sponsors of the schemes are insolvent. The paper first introduces a multi-period model called value-based ALM to value the embedded options implied by both UK and Dutch pension policies and build the HBS. The HBS framework allows us to have a holistic view on the real and contingent assets and liabilities of a pension scheme and evaluate the impact of introducing a new policy for the stakeholders of the pension scheme. Then, we compare the results of a typical UK policy with a typical Dutch one. The comparison suggests the UK policy is better for participants but worse for the sponsor compared to the Dutch policy. The UK policy is more generous in indexation and participants do not have the burden to contribute to the funding recovery of the pension scheme. The PPF provides protection of the benefits up to a certain level if the sponsor is insolvent, thus, participants in a scheme with a UK pension policy are exposed to limited downside risk. On the other hand, the sponsor of the pension scheme with the UK policy shoulders a heavier burden to contribute to the recovery of the pension funding shortfalls than that of the pension scheme with the Dutch policy

Pricing long-maturity equity and FX derivatives with stochastic interest rates and stochastic equity

In this paper we extend the stochastic volatility model of Schoebel and Zhu (1999) by including stochastic interest rates. Furthermore we allow all driving model factors to be instantaneously correlated with each other, i.e. we allow for a correlation between the instantaneous interest rates, the volatilities and the underlying stock returns. By deriving the characteristic function of the log-asset price distribution, we are able to price European stock options in closed-form by Fourier inversion. Furthermore we present a Foreign Exchange generalization and show how the pricing of Forward-starting options like cliquets can be performed. Additionally we discuss the practical implementation of these new models

Time-consistent actuarial valuations

Time-consistent valuations (i.e. pricing operators) can be created by backward iteration of one-period valuations. In this paper we investigate the continuous-time limits of well-known actuarial premium principles when such backward iteration procedures are applied. This method is applied to an insurance risk process in the form of a diffusion process and a jump process in order to capture the heavy tailed nature of insurance liabilities. We show that in the case of the diffusion process, the one-period time-consistent Variance premium principle converges to the non-linear exponential indifference price. Furthermore, we show that the Standard-Deviation and the Cost-of-Capital principle converge to the same price limit. Adding the jump risk gives a more realistic picture of the price. Furthermore, we no longer observe that the different premium principles converge to the same limit since each principle reflects the effect of the jump differently. In the Cost-of-Capital principle, in particular the VaRVaR operator fails to capture the jump risk for small jump probabilities, and the time-consistent price depends on the distribution of the premium jump