Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A Jump-Diffusion Model For Option Pricing: S. G. Kou
A Jump-Diffusion Model For Option Pricing: S. G. Kou
rownian motion and normal distribution have been widely used in the BlackScholes
option-pricing framework to model the return of assets. However, two puzzles emerge
from many empirical investigations: the leptokurtic feature that the return distribution of
assets may have a higher peak and two (asymmetric) heavier tails than those of the normal
distribution, and an empirical phenomenon called volatility smile in option markets. To
incorporate both of them and to strike a balance between reality and tractability, this paper
proposes, for the purpose of option pricing, a double exponential jump-diffusion model.
In particular, the model is simple enough to produce analytical solutions for a variety of
option-pricing problems, including call and put options, interest rate derivatives, and pathdependent options. Equilibrium analysis and a psychological interpretation of the model are
also presented.
(Contingent Claims; High Peak; Heavy Tails; Interest Rate Models; Rational Expectations; Overreaction and Underreaction)
1.
Introduction
KOU
A Jump-Diffusion Model for Option Pricing
2.
The Model
3
Ramezani and Zeng (1999) independently propose the same jumpdiffusion model from an econometric viewpoint as a way of
improving the empirical t of Mertons normal jump-diffusion
model to stock price data.
1087
KOU
A Jump-Diffusion Model for Option Pricing
p
1
(3)
EV = EeY
2
1
=q
+p
2 + 1
1 1
1 > 1
2 > 0 (4)
have arbitrage opportunities, and thus are not selfconsistent (to give an example, it is shown by Rogers
1997 that models using fractal Brownian motion may
lead to arbitrage opportunities). The double exponential jump-diffusion model can be embedded in a rational expectations equilibrium setting; see 4.
2. A model should be able to capture some important empirical phenomena. The double exponential
jump-diffusion model is able to reproduce the leptokurtic feature of the return distribution (see 3)
and the volatility smile observed in option prices
(see 5.3). In addition, the empirical tests performed
in Ramezani and Zeng (1999) suggest that the double
exponential jump-diffusion model ts stock data better than the normal jump-diffusion model. Andersen
et al. (1999) demonstrate empirically that, for the S&P
500 data from 19801996, the normal jump-diffusion
model has a much higher p-value (0.0152) than those
of the stochastic volatility model (0.0008) and the
BlackScholes model <105 . Therefore, the combination of results in the two papers gives some empirical support of the double exponential jump-diffusion
model.4
3. A model must be simple enough to be amenable
to computation. Like the BlackScholes model, the
double exponential jump-diffusion model not only
yields closed-form solutions for standard call and
put options (see 5), but also leads to a variety
of closed-form solutions for path-dependent options,
such as barrier options, lookback options, and perpetual American options (see 2.3 and Kou and Wang
2000, 2001), as well as interest rate derivatives (see
5.3 and Glasserman and Kou 1999).
4. A model must have some (economical, physical,
psychological, etc.) interpretation. One motivation for
the double exponential jump-diffusion model comes
from behavioral nance. It has been suggested from
extensive empirical studies that markets tend to have
4
However, we should emphasize that empirical tests should not be
used as the only criterion to judge a model good or bad. Empirical
tests tend to favor models with more parameters. However, models
with many parameters tend to make calibration more difcult (the
calibration may involve high-dimensional numerical optimization
with many local optima), and tend to have less tractability. This is
a part of the reason why practitioners still like the simplicity of the
BlackScholes model.
KOU
A Jump-Diffusion Model for Option Pricing
KOU
A Jump-Diffusion Model for Option Pricing
and lookback options for general jump-diffusion processes, it is crucial to study the rst passage time of
a jump-diffusion process to a at boundary. When a
jump-diffusion process crosses a boundary sometimes
it hits the boundary exactly and sometimes it incurs
an overshoot over the boundary.
The overshoot presents several problems for option
pricing. First, one needs to get the exact distribution
of the overshoot. It is well known from stochastic
renewal theory that this is only possible if the jump
size Y has an exponential-type distribution, thanks to
the special memoryless property of the exponential
distribution. Secondly, one needs to know the dependent structure between the overshoot and the rst
passage time. The two random variables are conditionally independent, given that the overshoot is bigger than 0, if the jump size Y has an exponential-type
distribution, thanks to the memoryless property. This
conditionally independent structure seems to be very
special to the exponential-type distribution and does
not hold for other distributions, such as the normal
distribution.
Consequently, analytical solutions for the perpetual American, lookback, and barrier options can be
derived for the double exponential jump-diffusion
model. However, it seems impossible to get similar
results for other jump-diffusion processes, including
the normal jump-diffusion model.
(3) Models
Based
on
t-Distribution.
The
t-distribution is widely used in empirical studies
of asset pricing. One problem with t-distribution
(or other distributions with power-type tails) as a
return distribution is that it cannot be used in models
with continuous compounding. More precisely, suppose that at time 0 the daily return distribution X has
a power-type right tail. Then in models with continuous compounding, the asset price tomorrow At is
given by At = A0eX . Since X has a power-type
right tail, it is clear that EeX = . Consequently,
EAt = EA0eX = A0EeX =
In other words, the asset price tomorrow has an innite expectation. This paradox holds for t-distribution
with any degrees of freedom, as long as one considers
models with continuous compounding. Furthermore,
1090
Another interesting point worth mentioning is that, for a sample size of 5,000 (20-years-daily data), it may be very difcult to
distinguish empirically the double exponential distribution from
the power-type distributions, such as t-distribution (although it is
quite easy to detect the differences between them and the normal
density).
KOU
A Jump-Diffusion Model for Option Pricing
3.
Leptokurtic Feature
N t+t
+
Yi 1
i=N t+1
St
(5)
t + Z t + B Y
St
where Z and B are standard normal and Bernoulli
random variables, respectively, with PB = 1 =
t
and PB = 0 = 1
t, and Y is given by (2).
The density7 g of the right-hand side of (5), being
an approximation for the return St/St, is plotted
7
The density
1
t
x t
gx =
$
t
t
x t 2 1 t
2 2 t/2 xt1
+
t p1 e 1
e
%
t
2 2
t
4.
p
q
t
1 2
2
1
1
p
q
Varg G = 2 t + pq
t
+
+
+
1 2
12 22
2
q
p
t1
t
+
1 2
Eg G = t +
1091
KOU
A Jump-Diffusion Model for Option Pricing
Figure 1
30
30
25
28
20
26
15
24
10
22
5
0.1
0.05
0.05
0.1
0.01
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.005
0.02
0.005
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.01
0.1
Notes. The rst panel compares the overall shapes of the density g and the normal density with the same mean and variance, the second one details the
shapes around the peak area, and the last two show the left and right tails. The dotted line is used for the normal density, and the solid line is used for the
model.
T 't T0 )
(6)
KOU
A Jump-Diffusion Model for Option Pricing
(8)
Proposition 1. Suppose /1
< . (1) Letting
Bt T be the price of a zero coupon bond with maturity
T , the yield r 1= 1/T tlogBt T is a constant
independent of T ,
1
r = - + 1 .1 12 1 .2 .
2
.1
/1
> 0
i=1
(11)
rT t
E 3S T t
t '0 T )
.+51
(12)
.1
/1
= r + 1 41 .
/1
1
= - + 1 . 1 12 2 . + 1 4
2
.+51
(10)
.1
< and /1
< . The
Theorem 1. Suppose /1
model (13) satises the equilibrium requirement (11) if and
only if
/1
(9)
dZt
.1
=
/1
dt + 1 . 1 dW1 t
Zt
N t
.1
1
+d
V
dSt
= dt + 4 dW1 t + 1 42 dW2 t
St
N t
5
+d
Vi 1 Vi = V
(13)
i
i=1
a 1).
where the notation /1 means /1 1= E'V
a
(14)
1
+ dW t + d
V
i=1
(15)
1
.1
/1
+1
x.1 fV x
(16)
1093
KOU
A Jump-Diffusion Model for Option Pricing
(17)
a1
+ 11
where the normalizing constant, const, is /1
a1
(provided that /1
< ). Then the jump sizes for the
asset price St under P and the jump sizes for St under
the rational expectations risk-neutral measure P all belong
to the same family .
Proof. Immediately follows from (7), (13), and
(16).
Condition (17) essentially requires that the jump
size distribution belongs to the exponential family.
It is satised if logV has a normal distribution or
a double exponential distribution. However, the log
power-type distributions, such as log t-distribution,
do not satisfy (17).
5.
Option Pricing
2
Hh1 x = ex /2 = 28$x Hh0 x = 28%x9
1094
2
Hhn x = 2n/2 8ex /2
1
1 1 1 2
1
3 1 2
1 F1 2 n+ 2 2 2 x
1 F1 2 n+1 2 2 x
; 21 + 12 n
2; 1+ 12 n
where 1 F1 is the conuent hypergeometric function.
A three-term recursion is also available for the Hh
function (see pp. 299300 and p. 691 of Abramowitz
and Stegun 1972):
nHhn x = Hhn2 x xHhn1 x
n 1
(19)
a maxima at x + x2 + 4n/2; therefore, to numerically compute the integral, one should split the integral more around the
maxima.
KOU
A Jump-Diffusion Model for Option Pricing
Figure 2
The Hh Function for n = 1 3 5 with the Steepest Curve for n = 5 and the Flattest Curve for n = 1
80
60
40
20
1
p
1 + / 1 1
1 = 1 1
p1
q2
2 = 2 + 1
=
/ + 1 / =
+
1
1 1 2 + 1
The price of the corresponding put option, 3p 0, can be
obtained by the put-call parity:
3p 0 3c 0 = erT E K ST + ST K+
= erT E K ST = KerT S0
9
The result (20) resembles the Black-Scholes formula for a call option under the geometric Brownian motion model, with < taking the place of %. The
proof of Theorem 2 is similar to that of Theorem 3 in
Kou and Wang (2001), hence is omitted.
Now I consider the problem of pricing options on
futures contracts. Assume, for now, that the term
structure of interest rate is at, and r is a constant.
Then the futures price, F t T , with delivery date T ,
F 0 T
2
K
p 1 2 9 log
T
F 0 T
where D = erT . The put option can be priced according to
the put-call parity:
3p F D F 0 T T 3c F D F 0 T T
= erT K F 0 T
1095
KOU
A Jump-Diffusion Model for Option Pricing
KerT T + , we have
T
ST
Figure 3
E'erT F T T K+ )
1
rT T
p
1 2 9
=e
S0< r + 2
/
2
logKerT T /S0 T
1
e < r 2
/
p
Ke
2
1 2 9 logKerT T /S0 T
rT T rT
=e
rT
1
p
1 2 9
F 0 T < r + 2
/
2
logK/F 0 T + rT T
1
K< r 2
/
p 1 2 9
2
logK/F 0 T + rT T
from which the conclusion follows by noting that
N T
Pr + T + W T + i=1 Yi a + rT = PT +
N T
W T + i=1 Yi a.
Using the fact that for every t 0, Zt converges in
distribution to t + W t as both 1 and 2
, one easily gets the following corollary.
Corollary 3. (1) As the jump size gets smaller and
smaller, the pricing formulae in Theorem 2 and Corollary
2 degenerate to the BlackScholes formula and Blacks
futures option formula. More precisely, as both 1
and 2 while all other parameters remain xed,
3c 0 S0%b+ KerT %b
3c F 0 erT F 0 T %b+
F K%b F
where
b 1=
b
F 1=
logS0/K + r 2 /2T
T
logF 0 T /K 2 T /2
T
1096
Notes. The parameters used in the tted model are: for the two-year caplet
1 = 37 2 = 18 p = 004 = 14
= 021; and for the nine-year caplet
1 = 23 2 = 18 p = 009 = 02
= 009.
6.
KOU
A Jump-Diffusion Model for Option Pricing
Appendix A:
Expectations
Proof of Proposition 1.
(1) Since BT T = 1, Equation (8) yields
Bt T = e-T t
E*T .1 t
*t.1
*T
*t
.1
1
= exp . 1 1 12 T t
2
+ 1 . 1W1 T W1 t
E
N T
i=N t+1
.1
V
i
Acknowledgments
N T
i=N t+1
e T t
j=0
.1
= exp /1
.1
V
i
(A2)
1
.1
= *0.1 exp 12 . 12
/1
t
2
N t
.1
+ 1 . 1W1 t
V
i=1
(A1)
EUc *T T 3S T t
ZT
3S T t
= erT E
Uc *t t
Zt
= erT E 3S T t
1097
KOU
A Jump-Diffusion Model for Option Pricing
.1
N t
5
dSt
2
Vi 1
= dt + 4 dW1 t + 1 4 dW2 t +
St
i=1
= + 1 4. 1 dt + 4 dW1 t + 1 42 dW2 t
N t
5
1
V
+
5 =
E V
i
Qn k
x5
1
.1
/1
+1
x.1 fV
x dx
.+51
+1
.+51 = /1
= .1
EV
.1
/1
+1
/1
+1
1 =
/
we have
E V
1
i
.+51
.1
/1
. Therefore,
k
n
i+ with probability Pnk k = 1 2 n
d
Yi =
(B2)
i=1
ki=1 i with probability Qnk k = 1 2 n
i=1
j=1
j
k
i
i=1
nk
m n k + m 1
1
2
1 +2
1 +2
m1
k = 1 n
with prob.
i with prob.
i=1
n
ml n l + m 1
1
2
1 +2
1 +2
n1
l = 1 m
m
An m 1 2 /1 + 2
d
=
An 1 m 1 /1 + 2
(B3)
n
i=1
i
An m =
B.1.
1098
i+
dSt
5 1 dt + 4 dW t + 1 42 dW2 t
= r dt
E V
i
1
St
N t
5
+
V 1
from which (15) follows.
Qn n = q n
and 00 is dened to be one. Here i+ and i are i.i.d. exponential random
variables with rates 1 and 2 , respectively.
i=1
Appendix B:
1 k n 1
ni
ik
nk1 n
1
2
=
pni q i
ik
i
1 + 2
1 + 2
i=k
n1
1 k n 1 Pn n = pn
dSt
= + 1 4. 1 +
/.+51 /.1 dt
St
5 1 dt + 4 dW t + 1 42 dW2 t
E V
i
1
N t
5
1
+
V
i=1
ik
ni
nk1 n
1
2
pi q ni
ik
i
1 + 2
1 + 2
i=k
n1
i=1
Because
Pnk =
via (B1). Now imagine a plane with the horizontal axis representing the number of i+ and the vertical axis representing the
number of j . Suppose we have a random walk on the integer
lattice points of the plane. Starting from any point n m, n m 1,
the random walk goes either one step to the left with probability
1 /1 + 2 or one step down with probability 2 /1 + 2 , and
10
KOU
A Jump-Diffusion Model for Option Pricing
the random walk stops once it reaches either the horizontal or vertical axis. For any path from n m to k 0 1 k n, it must reach
k 1 rst before it makes a nal move to k 0. Furthermore, all the
paths going from n m to k 1 must have exactly n k lefts and
m 1 downs, whence the total number of such paths is nk+m1
.
m1
Similarly, the total number of paths from n m to 0 l, 1 l m,
is nl+m1
. Thus,
n1
k
i=1
with prob.
nk
m n k + m 1
1
2
1 + 2
1 + 2
m1
k = 1 n
d
An m =
l
i with prob.
i=1
n
ml n l + m 1
1
2
1 + 2
1 + 2
n1
l = 1 m
and the lemma is proven.
Proof of Proposition B.1. By the same analogy used in
Lemma B.1 to compute probability Pn k , 1 k n, the probability
weight assigned to ki=1 i+ when we decompose ni=1 Yi , it is equivalent to consider the probability of the random walk ever reach
k 0 starting from the point i n i 0 i n, with probability
of starting from i n i being ni pi q ni . Note that the point k 0
can only be reached from points i n i such that k i n 1,
because the random walk can only go left or down, and stops
once it reaches the horizontal axis. Therefore, for 1 k n 1
(B3) leads to
Pn k =
n1
i=k
n1
1
1 + 2
Qnk =
n1
i=k
n1
1
1 +2
n
k=1
Pnk +
(B5)
1
2
t xn et /2 dt
n! x
2n n t2 /2
2n n t2 /2
t e
dt +
x e
dt = Oxn
n!
n!
c
(B6)
In c9 . 5 * =
(B7)
e 5 252 % 5c *
.
5
5
In c9 . 5 * =
(B8)
ni
Hhn x = Oxn
Hhn x =
ik
2
ni+i k1
n
pni q i
ni1
ni
1 +2
i=k
ni
ik
n1
nk1 n
1
2
=
pni q i
1 +2
1 +2
i k
i
i=k
=
(B4)
ik
1
2
lim Hhn x/ n+1 ex /2 = 1
x
x
and as x ,
ni
2
i + n i k 1
n i ni
pq
n i 1
i
1 + 2
i=k
ik
ni
n1
nk1 n
1
2
=
pi q ni
ni1
i
1 + 2
1 + 2
i=k
ik
ni
n1
nk1 n
1
2
=
pi q ni
ik
i
1 + 2
1 + 2
i=k
=
1
Hhn 5x * de.x
. c
1
5 .x
e Hhn1 5x * dx
Hhn 5c *e.c +
.
. c
11
1099
KOU
A Jump-Diffusion Model for Option Pricing
for
n 0 In =
.*
.
28
.
exp
+ 2 % 5c + * +
5
5
25
5
fZ+n
i=1 i
.
.*
.
28
=
exp
+ 2 % 5c *
5
5
25
5
t/ y n1 1 y2 /2
dy
e
n 1!
28
2
1
n e /2
In1 x9
28
n
by (B6). We can compute PZ i=1 i x similarly.
=
2
n
e1 T /2
8n Pnk T 1 k
1
Ik1 a T 9 1 1 T
T
2
n
e2 T /2
8n Qnk T 2 k
1
Ik1 a T 9 2 2 T
T
a T
+ 80 %
T
PZT a =
8n P T + T Z + Yj a
n=0
j=1
= 80 PT + T Z a
n
k
+ 8n Pnk P T + T Z + j+ a
n=1
k=1
n=1
k=1
j=1
k
+ 8n Qnk P T + T Z j a
j=1
The result now follows via (B11) and (B12) for 1 > 1 and
2 > 0.
i=1
1
ex t xn1
2
2
ex /2 dx
n 1! 28
t t xn1
1
2
2 2
2
= et n e /2
ex /2 dx
n 1!
28
= et n
1100
t/
e
=
n1 n et Hhn1 t/ +
28
a
2
because 1/n 1! a yn1 ey /2 dy = Hhn1 a. The derivation of fZn i t is similar.
i=1
Case 2. PZ + ni=1 i x and PZ ni=1 i x. From (B9), it is
clear that
2
n
t
n e /2 t
e Hhn1 + dt
P Z + i x =
x
28
i=1
n1 n
2 /2
B.3.
i=1
2 /2
References
KOU
A Jump-Diffusion Model for Option Pricing
Accepted by Paul Glasserman; received November 29, 2001. This paper was with the authors 2 months and 3 weeks for 2 revisions.
1101