Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 9

Producing Derivative Assets with Forward Contracts Author(s): Avi Bick Source: The Journal of Financial and Quantitative

Analysis, Vol. 23, No. 2 (Jun., 1988), pp. 153-160 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the University of Washington School of Business Administration Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2330878 . Accessed: 17/12/2013 10:04
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge University Press and University of Washington School of Business Administration are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 86.55.176.96 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:04:58 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL ANDQUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS

VOL.23,NO.2, JUNE 1988

Producing Avi Bick*

Derivative

Assets

with

Forward

Contracts

Abstract This paper shows how a derivativesecuritycan be duplicatedby a forwardstrategy, and, in termsofthe forward hence, pricedby arbitrage price. I. Introduction

In the derivation of the celebrated Black-Scholes model (1973), it is as? sumed that the instantaneous interest rate is constant and the underlying stock does not pay dividends. Merton (1973), (1977) generalizes the model to the case of stochastic interest rates and stochastic dividends. His results depend on par? ticular stochastic process assumptions. (For example, the dividend rate is as? sumed to be a deterministic function of time and the stock price). Another direc? tion is taken by Black (1976), who prices a call option in terms of the forward price of the underlying asset. He assumes a constant interest rate but allows gen? eral stochastic dividends. This paper continues Black's work as follows. (i) We will provide a general procedure for the valuation of derivative securities based only on the assumption that the forward price of the underlying asset is a diffu? sion. No information is required regarding the stochastic processes of interest rates or dividends. The valuation is based on the construction of a duplicating ' forward strategy rather than on an 'infinitesimal time interval" arbitrage. (ii) We will show how known results (e.g., the Merton proportional dividend model) follow from our main proposition by a simple substitution. More specifically, we will solve the following problem: consider a continu? ous-time market in which one can make forward contracts with delivery date T

on a given underlying stock (which may pay stochastic dividends). The forward price follows a given diffusion process. Specify a forward strategy such that at time T it will produce a given derivative security of the stock (say a European call option). One may start with a certain amount of pure discount bonds (paying one dollar at time T), and then may continuously make forward contracts (at continu* Graduate New York,NY 10006. New YorkUniversity, School of BusinessAdministration, his working This paperwas motivated withMarkGarman concerning papertitled by discussions of California, "ForwardPrices,OptionPricesand DividendCorrections," Berkeley, University com? is grateful. Withtheusualcaveat,theauthor 1983,to whomtheauthor acknowledges helpful in workshops at New YorkUniversity, ments MarkLatham,and participants by MichaelBrennan, Association Finance Valuablesugges? Tel AvivUniversity, 1985Western and at theJune Meetings. thepaper. tions havehelped JFQAreferee byan anonymous improve 153

This content downloaded from 86.55.176.96 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:04:58 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

154

Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis

ously changing forward prices) such that the value of the corresponding portfolio at time T will be h(ST), where h is a given continuous function, and ST is the value ofthe stock at that time. Note that the above strategy does not involve any interim borrowing or lend? ing, or any trading in the stock. This explains why no assumptions are needed regarding the stochastic behavior of the interest rates or the stochastic pattern of the dividends. Of course, in a general equilibrium model in which the forward price is determined endogenously, this price must be related to investors' beliefs regarding future dividends and the evolution of interest rates. However, in this arbitrage-based model in which the forward price process is given exogenously, the other processes need not be specified explicitly. In the case of a constant instantaneous interest rate and no dividends (or even proportional dividends), the above problem can be solved by a simple trans? formation of known results. However, the duplicating forward strategy has never been specified for the general case of stochastic interest rates and dividends. It is a matter of taste whether making an assumption on the forward price process (as in Black (1976) and Garman (1983)) is more appropriate than making separate assumptions on the stock price, the dividend stream, and the interest rates. The assumption that the forward price follows a diffusion process is not less realistic than the assumption that the dividend process is a diffusion. Furthermore, it is reasonable to assume that the forward price is a diffusion even in the presence of interim discrete dividends, provided that uncertainty regarding their magnitudes is resolved "gradually." As Garman (1983) notes, the assumption that the for? ward price follows a geometric Brownian motion (in his case) *'seems no more strained than the more usual notion that the stock prices constitute geometric diffusion in the face of exotic dividend policies.'' The paper is organized as follows. A special forward strategy is introduced in Section II and its value in future times is calculated as a stochastic integral. This strategy is applied in Section III to solve the duplicating problem and to find a valuation formula for derivative assets in terms of the bond and forward prices. Several applications, such as a generalized Black-Scholes formula, are also pre? sented. Section IV summarizes the paper.

II.

The

Main

Result

We consider a frictionless (perfect) financial market that is open for trade in the time interval [0,7]. The following securities are assumed to be traded. (i) A given "underlying" asset that may or may not pay "dividends" before time T. For the sake of convenience, it will be regarded as a share of stock, but it may be another asset like a precious metal or foreign exchange. Its price at time t will be denoted St. (ii) A pure discount bond that pays one dollar with certainty at time T. Its price at time t will be denoted Bt. (iii) Forward contracts on the underlying stock. In a forward contract initiated at time ?, one party (the "long side") is committed to buy from the other party (the "short side," who is committed to sell) one share of stock at time T at a prespecified price ?r, termed the forward ? price. Thus, the payoff at time T is ST? ?r for the long side and lt ST for the

This content downloaded from 86.55.176.96 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:04:58 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Bick

155

short side.l The prespecified price ?r is chosen such that the value of the contract at the time of its initiation is zero, and thus the contract involves no transactions ' before time T. To save verbiage, a 'forward contract" will always mean a long position and a negative amount of such contracts will mean a short position. It is noteworthy that the description of a forward contract as a bet that pays ST? it does not require that ST is the price of a traded asset. It can be any random variable that is observable at time T (e.g., an economic index) and our main proposition in the sequel still will be valid. The fact that {St} is the price process of a traded asset is only needed in some of the applications. It is useful to introduce another derivative security that pays ST at time T and zero at any other time. Following Garman (1983), we will call it ZEPO (Zero Exercise Price Option). This payoff can be produced by purchasing ?, bonds and = making one forward contract at any arbitrarytime t, at a cost of Zt l^fit. Conversely, a ZEPO and ?, bonds purchased at time t replicate a forward contract, where ?, is chosen such that the cost of this portfolio is zero. Assumption (iii) is thus equivalent to the assumption that the ZEPO is traded, and this follows from the assumption that European call and put options with some exercise price K and with expiration at time T are traded. This is because the ZEPO's payoff is identi? cal to the payoff of a portfolio of K bonds, one call, and a short position in one put. (This entails the well-known put-call parity, except that the ZEPO replaces the stock in the case of a dividend-paying stock.) The relation between forward prices and option prices is discussed in Cox and Rubinstein ((1985), Appendix 2A) and Grabbe (1983). The goal of the paper is to show how derivative assets can be produced by employing a certain forward strategy, which will be described now. It is assumed that the forward price {? J (also denoted {?(*)} when typographically more convenient) follows a positive diffusion process given by (1) a\t = v(tX)ltdt + <j(tX^ltdwt,

lent at any time. Let <(>(*>?)be a real continuous function defined for ts[0,T], ? > 0. The <f>= 0 with <|)(0,?(0)) forward forward strategy is defined as follows: start at t such contracts. Continue to make forward contracts that, at time t, the cumula? = short t 0 tive number of contracts made from (counting positions with negative made are at different times with contracts the fact that signs and disregarding 1 Thispaperdoes notdiscussfutures where thesamepayoffs areobtained in installcontracts, andOldfield andRoss (1981) orJarrow ments See Cox, Ingersoll, thelifeofthecontract. throughout contracts. andfutures thedistinction between forward (1981) for

where {w} is a standard Wiener process defined on some underlying probability space, and jjl and a are suitably well-behaved functions (see Friedman (1975), Ch. 5). In what follows, we will say that two portfolios held at time t are equiva? lent if, provided that they are not altered until time T, they will almost surely have the same payoff at that time and the same interim cash flow at any time TG(t,T). It is assumed that the price system allows no arbitrage opportunities, and thus equivalent portfolios must command the same market price. Two dynamic strategies will be said to be equivalent if the corresponding portfolios are equiva?

This content downloaded from 86.55.176.96 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:04:58 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

156

Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis

possibly different forward prices) is 4>(r,?(0). For example, in a discrete time framework, say {t0,tl9t2,... ,*?}, this is understood as follows: at time t0, make the amount 4>(^o??(^o)) ?f forward contracts at the prevailing forward price t,(t0). At time tl9 make <K*i>?(*i)) ? <b(t0?(t0)) forward contracts at the prevailing for? ward price ?(*i)- You have thus far made <K*i>?(*i)) forward contracts (at possi? bly two differentforward prices). At time t2, make cj)(r2,?(^2))? ^(^1 ?S(^i)) f?rward contracts, etc. The continuous time case can be viewed as a limit of such discrete strategies. Note, however, that the formulation of the portfolio rule re? mains straightforward and simple: you continuously engage in making forward contracts such that their cumulative number at time t is 4>(r,?(0). This strategy does not require any funds prior to time T. The portfolio corresponding to the c|)-forward strategy will be called the $portfolio. Let us now calculate its value at time t<E[0,T]. Proposition. The c|)-portfolio is equivalent at time t to <\>(t?t) ZEPOs and J($(|)(T,?T)d?T ?,4>(r,?,) bonds (where the firstterm is an Ito integral). In particu? lar, its value at time t is Z?,\f($(|)(T,?T)d?T. Proof. Consider the discrete time case described above. The strategy is described in the following table, where ?; = ?(fy), 4>; = <K*/>?/)an(* me equivalence to a ZEPO-bond strategy follows from the above discussion. Time k= 0 U t2 Numberof Contracts <t>0 <t>i-<t>o <t>2_<t>1 AtForward Price Jo ?1 ?2 Equivalentto Purchasing + Bonds ZEPOs ?o <h-<l>o <t>2_<t>1 ~ ?o<l>o -?iW>i-<l>o) -?2(<t>2_<l>l)

<t>n-<t>n-1

in

<l>n ?4>n-l

?nW>n_<l>n-l) and

It follows that the portfolio accumulated at time tnis equivalent to $n ZEPOs the following number of bonds, (2) Co*o ?*/(*/" 7=1 V l) = " <A + E*,fe+ 7=1 1 0 <A

+ *, ^0

(where the right-hand side is obtained by simple algebra). In continuous time, we may regard {0,^,... ,tn} as a partition of [0,r], and take the limit on such parti? tions to obtain that the above portfolio is equivalent to <\>(t?t) ZEPOs and bonds.2 In particular, its value at time t is J($(|)(T,?T)d?T ?,<!>(*>?*) 1 M>K) + fi, 1

lll.

Applications

We are interested in the following problem. Let h(') be a continous function. 2 Notethat in theleft-hand in theendsofthesubintervals, sideof (2), ? is evaluated andthere? fore thesummation toobtain toa "backward (see Schuss(1980), p. 68). In order converges integral" anItointegral, we needtotakethelimit oftheright-hand side.

This content downloaded from 86.55.176.96 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:04:58 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Bick

157

Does there exist a forward strategy (possibly starting with a certain amount of bonds) such that the corresponding portfolio will almost surely be worth h(ST) (i.e., h(iT), as ?r = ST) at time Tl This is especially interesting when a deriva? tive asset that pays h(ST) at time T is already traded in the market. Then, by arbitrage considerations, its value at any time must be the same as the value of the above portfolio. Based on the previous proposition, this can be done as follows: having solved the partial differential equation (PDE) in V(t,l) (where subscripts of V denote partial differentiation) (3) \ + \u2{t,Qi2\ = 0 ,

with the boundary condition V(T,Q = h(Q, buy V(0?0) bonds at / = 0, and apply the F^-forward strategy. The portfolio corresponding to this strategy is worth BtV(t,t,t) at time t, and, in particular, its value at time T is BTV(TXT) = l'h(iT)' Indeed, the value of this portfolio at time s is s 0 = V(0,10)BS s + = HV<K)+ o + Bs

s fyfa)*, _0

M''0<?v?K))* v(?>Q] = Bsv{*>k).

^Kh+Bslv(s>Q

where, in the firstequality, we used the fact that V satisfies (3) and, in the second equality, we applied Ito's lemma.3 It is clear from the Proposition that the duplicating strategy can also be ex? ? pressed in terms of the bond and the ZEPO: at any time t hold V(tXt) t>tVr(t?d bonds and Vr(t?t) ZEPOs, and again the value of the corresponding portfolio is BtV(t?t). Of course, one need not go through forward strategies in order to ob? tain this result, which is an immediate extension of Merton's (1977) duplicating strategy. (View a derivative security of the stock as a derivative security of the ZEPO, and use the bond as a numeraire. Recall that ?, is also the normalized ZEPO price.) Here it is obtained as a by-product of the Proposition, and the strategy is self-financing (i.e., it does not generate any interim cash flows4), not because it has been shown to satisfy a certain continuous time budget constraint, but because it is equivalent to a forward strategy. In the special case where the instantaneous interest rate is a constant r (i.e.,Bt = e ~r(r_r)) and the stock does 3 Another is as follows:at any timer, hold the same payoff forward thatproduces strategy whilecontinuously contracts issuedforward liquidating your previ? V(t,lt)bondsand Vft,^) newly oftheBlack-Scholes model. ous forward Itis usedinGarman (1985) inthecontext position. 4 See Harrison a more formal definition. andPliska(1981) orBergman (1981) for

This content downloaded from 86.55.176.96 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:04:58 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

158

Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis

not pay dividends, the above ZEPO-bond strategy coincides with Merton's port? folio rule: suppose the stock price follows the process (4) dSt = vs(t,s)Stdt + <rs(t^Stdwt ,

where {vv,} is a standard Wiener process. Then, having solved the PDE in U(t,S), where subscripts of U denote partial differentiation, (5) Ut + ?<r2s(t,S)S2Uss = r(U-SUs),

= h(S), hold at with the boundary condition U(T,S) any time ter(-T~^ shares of stock. The bonds and portfolio corre? Us(t,St) [U(t,St) SJUs(t,S,)] = sponding to this strategy is worth U(t,St) at time t and, in particular, U(T,ST) h(ST) at time T. Indeed, this is the previously described ZEPO-bond strategy reformulated for this case, where the stock is the ZEPO. To see this, use the fact that ?, = e r(-T~^St and Ito's lemma to write the forward price process as in (1), where now M.(a) lLs(t,e-rCr-?l) - r, a(;,0 a5(f,*-r(r-?t) .

= h(Q, let U(t,S) = Let V(t,Q be the solution of (3) with V(T,Q the ZEPO-bond strategy in is is to that left e -r(T-ty(t,er(T-?S), and all express not elaborate of We will of instead and terms U and S V ?. upon the straightfor? ward calculations. Another interesting special case arises when we allow arbitrary dividends, but we assume that {?,} is as in (1), and <r(t,iQ = a is a constant. Equation (3) then becomes the Black-Scholes (1973) PDE (with r = 0). If we solve it with the = max (0,1,-K) for some K > 0, we obtain V(t&) = boundary condition h(tj) where lN(dx(tXJ,K))-KN(d2(t&T,K)), y N(y) = (2tt)"1/2 fexp(-?2/2) du

and dM&JJC) *i dMXJ,K) '"^ ^*'b'1 = = ? /na//O+ia2(r-0 d. "T -<y(T-t)m. a(r-o .1/2

The value of the duplicating strategy at time t is thus (6) c(at,T,K) = Bt[ltN{dx(t?t,T,K)) KN(d2(t,lt,T,K))] .

Since V^ = N(dx(t?JT,K)),5 it follows that the duplicating forward strategy is as bonds at t = 0, and apply follows: buy ^(d^O^oJ^-KN^iOXo^JO) the 4>-forward strategy, where 4>(f,?) = N(dx(tXJ,K)). Alternatively, at any ZEPOs. bonds mdNid^t^TJC)) time t, hold -KN(d2(tXtJ,K)) 5 To see this,use the fact (whichis readilyverified fromthe definitions) that?N'(di) = KN'(d2).

This content downloaded from 86.55.176.96 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:04:58 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Bick

159

Equation (6) is a generalized form of the Black-Scholes formula that does not make any assumptions on interest rates or dividends.6 With the aid of a sim? ple transformation, it entails the Merton ((1973), p. 171)7 proportional dividend model (and its special case, the Black-Scholes model): suppose the instantaneous interest rate is a constant r and {St} is as in (4), where now vs(t,S) = a is a constant. Suppose that the stock pays dividends at a rate pSt (i.e., pStdt in a "small" time interval [t,t+ dt]), where p > 0 is a constant. Then the value of time t of a European call option paying max(0,?Sr ? K) at time T is (?) c(t,St,T,K) = e-^-^S^d^-^-^S^K)) e-r<r-f>KN(d2(t,Sr-MT-'%T,K))

and the duplicating strategy is as follows: continuously reinvest the divi? dends and rebalance the portfolio such that, at time t, you hold bonds and e-^T-^N(dx(t,e^-^T-^St,T,K)) -KN(d2(t,e^-^T~^St,T,K)) shares of stock. To see this, note that, if dividends are continuously reinvested in the stock that (so pdt new shares are purchased in [t,t+ dt] per each share held), then one share of stock at time t will become e^T~^ shares at time T, having the same value at time T as e p(r_') ZEPOs. So by arbitrage considerations, St = e ^T~^Zt or ?, = e^r~^T~^Sr By Ito's lemma, {?t} is ofthe form (1) where v(t?) is now the above constant o\ It is left to the reader to conclude the argument. Use the fact that we can replace the ZEPO by a self-financing strategy with the same time-r payoff, namely the strategy of "hold e -p(r_') shares of stock at time t and continuously reinvest the dividends in new shares.'' If St is the price of a foreign currency, then the ZEPO is a foreign pure discount bond. Its price at time t is Zt in the domestic currency, and B* = ZtISt in the foreign currency, and the relation ?, = ZtIBt can now be written as ?, = StB*IBt, which is the well-known interest rate parity. The assumptions in the Merton proportional dividend model translate here to constant domestic and for? = e -r(T-09 b* = e ~^(T-t)^ an(j fam Equation (7) eign interest rates, i.e., Bt becomes a valuation formula for a call option on foreign exchange under constant interest rates in both countries, as in Eldor (1984), Garman and Kohlhagen (1983), and Grabbe (1983). We also note that a nice feature of the foreign ex? change case (not only under constant interest rates) is that the duplicating strate? gies are symmetric under a change of currency. This will not be elaborated upon here.8 IV.

Summary

This paper shows that a European-type derivative security can be priced by arbitrage in terms of the forward price of the same underlying asset. To this end, 6 It appears inthisform offoreign in Grabbe(1983) in thecontext but,inthat exchange, paper, somespecified of thedomestic and foreign on thestochastic processes pure-discount assumptions bonds areusedintheproof. 7 See also Smith ((1980), p. 26). 8 Itis elaborated ofthis which is available from theauthor. version paper, uponina previous

This content downloaded from 86.55.176.96 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:04:58 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

160

Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis

all that one needs are the current price of a pure discount bond, the current for? ward price, and the diffusion coefficients of the forward price process. The sto? chastic processes of the asset price, the dividends, and the interest rates need not be specified. Known results, such as the Merton proportional dividend model, are shown to be special cases of the main proposition of this paper. References Y. Z. "A Characterization of Self-Financing Portfolio Bergman, Strategies." Working PaperNo. Univ.ofCalifornia, inFinance, 113,Research (1981). Berkeley Program ofCommodity Journal 3 (Sept. 1976), Contracts." Black,F. "The Pricing ofFinancialEconomics, 167-179. ofOptions andCorporate Liabilities."Journal Black,F., andM. Scholes. "The Pricing ofPolitical 81 (May/June 1973),637-659. Economy, and S. A. Ross. "The Relationbetween Forward Pricesand Futures Cox, J. C; J. E. Ingersoll; Prices."Journal 9 (Dec. 1981),321-346. ofFinancialEconomics, New Jersey: Markets. Prentice Hall (1985). Cox, J.C, andM. Rubinstein. Options of Currency Eco? Rate Insurance Eldor,R. "On theValuation Optionsand Exchange Programs." nomic 16 (Jan.1984), 129-136. Letters, Vol. 1. New York: Academic A. Stochastic Friedman, Differential Equationsand Applications, Press(1975). M. B. "Forward Pa? Prices,OptionPricesand DividendCorrections." Garman, Unpubl.Working (1983). per,Univ.ofCalifornia, Berkeley Journal Duration of OptionPortfolios." _"The ofFinancialEconomics,14 (June 1985),309-315. andOption Values." Journal M. B., andS. W. Kohlhagen. Garman, ofInterna? Currency "Foreign tional andFinance,2 (Dec. 1983),231-237. Money on Foreign J.O. "The Pricing ofCall andPutOptions Grabbe, ofInternational Exchange."Journal andFinance,2 (Dec. 1983),239-253. Money intheTheory andStochastic ofContinuous J.M., andS. R. Pliska."Martingales Harrison, Integrals Processesand Their 11 (Aug. 1981),215-260. Trading."Stochastic Application, "Forward andFutures Contracts." Journal R. A., andG. S. Oldfield. Contracts Jarrow, ofFinancial 9 (Dec. 1981),373-382. Economics, 4 (Spring1973), R. C. "Theoryof Rational Merton, ofEconomics, OptionPricing."Bell Journal 141-183. Theorem." _"On thePricing ofContingent ClaimsandtheModigliani-Miller Journal 5 (Nov. 1977),241-249. ofFinancialEconomics, Z. Theory andApplications Schuss, ofStochastic Differential Equations.NewYork:Wiley(1980). 3 (Jan./March C. W. "OptionPricing: A Review." Journal 1976), Smith, ofFinancialEconomics, 3-52.

This content downloaded from 86.55.176.96 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:04:58 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions