You are on page 1of 4

Approximate derivative price

T 1

t 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1


St 10 9.764 9.794 9.633 9.748 9.918
s 10% 10.20% 10.40% 10.60% 10.80% 11.00%
r 2% 2.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00%

Vt 103.05 97.68 99.48 95.10 96.21 98.37 (S1)2 98.37

The Greeks
Delta 20.60909 20.0089238 20.3154344 19.74367 19.73884
Gamma 2.060909 2.04924284 2.07432703 2.049594 2.024818
Rho 103.0455 78.1473082 59.6892679 38.03802 19.2423
Vega 20.60909 15.9420509 12.4153677 8.06406 4.156337
Theta -3.091364 -2.9699884 -6.0501042 -5.82324 -5.932786

Contributions to the change in contract value


Delta -4.862572 0.59406846 -3.2663285 2.280027 3.348801
Gamma 0.057365 0.00090321 0.02681111 0.013667 0.02914
Rho 0 2.34441924 0 0 0
Vega 0.041218 0.0318841 0.02483074 0.016128 0.008313
Theta -0.618273 -0.5939977 -1.2100208 -1.164648 -1.186557

dVt -5.382262 2.37727732 -4.4247075 1.145174 2.199697


Vt 103.05 97.66 100.04 95.62 96.76 98.96
Approximate derivative price
(ii) These quantities are equal:
V1 98.37
(S1)2 98.37

(v) The approximate value of 98.96 is close to the actual value of 98.37.

(vi) The method of approximating future values is only accurate for small changes in the parameter values.
Changing r from 2% to 5% is too great in one time step.
Accuracy might be improved by including the second-order partial derivative with respect to rho.
However, the sharp discontinuity in r is likely to prove too steep to model effectively in this way.
parameter values.

pect to rho.

You might also like