arxiv: v1 [q-fin.pr] 1 Jun 2009

Transcription

1 Asymptotic Formulas with Error Estimates for Call Pricing Functions and the Implied Volatility at Etreme Strikes Archil Gulisashvili arxiv: v [q-fin.pr] Jun 009 Abstract In this paper, we obtain asymptotic formulas with error estimates for the implied volatility associated with a European call pricing function. We show that these formulas imply Lee s moment formulas for the implied volatility and the tail-wing formulas due to Benaim and Friz. In addition, we analyze Pareto-type tails of stock price distributions in uncorrelated Hull-White, Stein-Stein, and Heston models and find asymptotic formulas with error estimates for call pricing functions in these models. eywords Call and put pricing functions Implied volatility Asymptotic formulas Pareto-type distributions Regularly varying functions Introduction In this paper, we study the asymptotic behavior of the implied volatility I( associated with a European type call pricing function. Here the symbol stands for the strike price, and it is assumed that the epiry is fied. One of the main results obtained in the present paper is the following asymptotic formula, which is true for any call pricing function C: ] I( = [ + as. A similar formula holds for near zero: I( = [ P( P( ] +O( ( +O( ( P( P( as 0, where P( is the put pricing function corresponding to C. In Sections 4 and 5, we will compare formulas ( and ( with known asymptotic formulas for the implied volatility. For instance, it will be shown that Lee s moment formulas (see [8] and the tail-wing formulas due to Benaim and Friz (see [] can be derived using ( and (. Let X be a positive adapted stochastic process defined on a filtered probability space (Ω,F,F t,p. he process X models the random behavior of the stock price. It is assumed that for every t > 0, X t is an unbounded random variable and that the process X satisfies the following conditions: X 0 = 0 P -a.s. for some 0 > 0 and E [X t ] < for every t 0. In addition, we suppose that P is a risk-free measure. his means that the discounted stock price process {e rt X t } t 0 is a (F t,p -martingale. Here r 0 denotes the interest rate. It follows that 0 = e rt E [X t ], t 0. (3 Under these conditions, the pricing function for a European call option at time t = 0 is defined by ( ( 0 A. Gulisashvili Department of Mathematics, Ohio University, Athens, OH 4570, USA guli@math.ohiou.edu C(, = e r E [ (X +] (4

2 where 0 is the strike price, 0 is the epiry, and for every real number u, u + = ma{u,0}. If C is a call pricing function, then the corresponding put pricing function P is defined by P(, = e r E [ ( X +]. (5 he functions C and P satisfy the put-call parity condition C(, = P(,+ 0 e r. his formula can be easily derived from (4 and (5. When is a positive function of two variables a call pricing function at time t = 0 with interest rate r and initial condition 0? he answer to this question formulated below is a combination of several known statements. However, we found only less general results in the literature. For instance, Carmona and Nadtochiy (see [7] describe conditions which are imposed on call pricing functions by the absence of arbitrage without giving details. he description in [7] essentially coincides with the necessity part of the assertion formulated below. We also refer the reader to Section 3 of the paper [6] of Buehler where similar results are obtained. We will prove the characterization theorem in the appendi. he proof is included for the sake of completeness. ellerer s theorem that appears in the proof concerns marginal distributions of Markov martingales (see [6], see also [, 9]. his theorem is often used in the papers devoted to the eistence of option pricing models reproducing observed option prices (see [6, 9, ] and the references therein, see also[], where the Sherman-Stein-Blackwell theorem is employed instead of ellerer s theorem. he net assertion characterizes general call pricing functions. Let C be a strictly positive function on [0,. hen C is a call pricing function if and only if the following conditions hold:. For every 0, the function C(, is conve.. For every 0, the second distributional derivative µ of the function e r C(, is a Borel probability measure such that 3. For every 0, the function C(,e r is non-decreasing. 4. For every 0, C(0, = ( For every 0, lim C(, = 0. 0 dµ ( = 0 e r. (6 A popular eample of a call pricing function is the function C BS arising in the Black-Scholes model. In this model, the stock price process is a geometric Brownian motion, satisfying the stochastic differential equation dx t = rx t dt+σx t dwt, where r 0 is the interest rate, σ > 0 is the volatility of the stock, and W is a standard Brownian motion under the risk-free measure P. he process X is given by } X t = 0 ep {(r σ t+σwt (7 where 0 > 0 is the initial condition. Black and Scholes found an eplicit formula for the pricing function C BS. his formula is as follows: where and C BS (,,σ = 0 N (d (,σ e r N (d (,σ, (8 d (,σ = 0 + ( r+ σ σ N(z = π z ep, d (,σ = d (,σ σ, } { y dy. We refer the reader to [7] for more information on this celebrated result. Let C be a general call pricing function. he implied volatility I = I(,, (, [0,, associated with the pricing function C, is a function of two variables satisfying the following condition: C BS (,,I(, = C(,.

3 It is well-known that for every pair (, [0,, the number I(, for which the previous equality holds, eists and is unique. We refer the reader to [3, 4, 6, 3] for additional information on the implied volatility. he asymptotic behavior of the implied volatility for etreme strikes was studied in [, 3, 4, 9,, 8] (see also Sections 0.5 and 0.6 of [3]. In the present paper, various asymptotic relations between functions are eploited. Definition. Let ϕ and ϕ be positive functions on (a,. We define several asymptotic relations by the following:. If there eist α > 0, α > 0, and y 0 > 0 such that α ϕ (y ϕ (y α ϕ (y for all y > y 0, then we use the notation ϕ (y ϕ (y as y.. If lim y [ϕ (y] ϕ (y =, then we write ϕ (y ϕ (y as y. 3. Let ρ be a positive function on (0,. We use the notation ϕ (y = ϕ (y + O(ρ(y as y, if there eist α > 0 and y 0 > 0 such that ϕ (y ϕ (y αρ(y for all y > y 0. Similar definitions will be used in the case where y 0. We will net give a quick overview of the results obtained in the present paper. In Sections and 3, we find various asymptotic formulas for the implied volatility associated with a general call pricing function. In Section 4, we give a new proof of Lee s moment formulas for the implied volatility, while in Section 5 we compare our asymptotic formulas with the tail-wing formulas due to Benaim and Friz. We also obtain tail-wing formulas with error estimates under additional restrictions. In Section 6, we talk about Paretotype tails of stock price distributions in uncorrelated Hull-White, Stein-Stein, and Heston models. For these distributions, we compute the Pareto-type inde and find eplicit epressions for the corresponding slowly varying functions. In Section 7, we obtain sharp asymptotic formulas for pricing functions in uncorrelated Hull-White, Stein-Stein, and Heston models. Finally, in the appendi we prove the characterization theorem for call pricing functions formulated in the introduction. Asymptotic behavior of the implied volatility as In this section, we find sharp asymptotic formulas for the implied volatility I( associated with a general pricing function C. Recall that the following conditions hold for any call pricing function: 0 as and > 0 for all > 0. heorem. Suppose that C is a call pricing function, and let ψ be a positive function with lim hen as. I( = [ + +O( ( ψ( heorem. and the mean value theorem imply the following assertion: ] ψ( =. (9 Corollary. For any call pricing function C, I( = [ + ] ( +O( (0 as. Proof of heorem.. he following lemma was established in [9, ] under certain restrictions on the pricing function. he proof in the general case is similar. 3

4 Lemma.3 Let C be a call pricing function and fi a positive continuous increasing function ψ with lim ψ( =. Suppose that φ is a positive Borel function such that lim φ( = and { φ( ψ( φ( ep hen the following asymptotic formula holds: I( = ( 0 e r +φ( φ( as. }. +O ( ψ( φ( With no loss of generality, we can assume that the function ψ( tends to infinity slower than the function. Put hen we have φ( φ( = [ ] +ψ(. as and it follows that } ψ( ep { φ( φ(,. herefore, Lemma.3 gives I( = ( ( 0 e r +φ( φ( +O( ψ( ( as. Now, it is not hard to see that ( and the mean value theorem imply (9. his completes the proof of heorem.. Our net goal is to replace the function C in formula (9 by another function C. Corollary.4 Let C be a call pricing function and let ψ be a positive function with lim ψ( =. Suppose that C is a positive function for which as. hen I( = [ + ( +O as. In addition, as. I( = [ + ψ( ( ] ( +O ] (3 Formula ( can be established eactly as (9. Formula (3 follows from ( and the mean value theorem. 4

5 We can also replace a call pricing function C in (9 by a function C under more general conditions. However, this may lead to a weaker error estimate. Put τ( =. (4 hen the following theorem holds: heorem.5 Let C be a call pricing function and ψ be a positive function with lim ψ( =. Suppose C is a positive function satisfying the following condition: here eist > 0 and c with 0 < c < such that τ( < c for all >, (5 where τ is defined by (4. hen as. I( = [ + ( +O ] [ψ(+τ(] (6 Proof. It is not hard to check that (5 implies the formula using (9, (4, and the mean value theorem, we obtain (6. he net statement follows from the special case of heorem.5 where ψ( = the mean value theorem. as. Now and from Corollary.6 Let C be a call pricing function, and suppose C is a positive function satisfying the following condition: here eist ν > 0 and 0 > 0 such that ν, > 0. (7 hen I( = [ + ] ( +O (8 as. It is not hard to see that if as, then previous formula also follows from (7. as. he Corollary.7 Let C be a pricing function, and suppose C is a positive function satisfying the condition (9 as. hen as. I( [ + ] (0 5

6 where where Proof. It follows from (0 that I( [ + + e + e Λ( =. + + Our net goal is to prove that Λ( as. We have Λ (+Λ (+ Λ ( Λ( = Λ (++ Λ ( = and Λ ( = ] Λ( ( e It is not hard to show that for all positive numbers a and b, a+b a+ b. herefore, Λ (+Λ ( Λ (+ + Λ ( Λ( = Λ (++ Λ ( ( for > 0. It follows from (9 and ( that Λ( as. Net using ( we see that (0 holds. his completes the proof of Corollary.7. 3 Asymptotic behavior of the implied volatility as 0 In this section, we turn out attention to the behaviorof the implied volatility as the strike price tends to zero. We will first discuss a certain symmetry condition satisfied by the implied volatility. A similar condition can be found in Section 4 of [8] (see also formula.9 in [4]. Let C be a pricing function, and let X be a corresponding stock price process. his process is defined on a filtered probability space (Ω,F,F t,p, where P is a risk-free probability measure. As before, we assume that the interest rate r, the initial condition 0, and the epiry are fied, and denote by µ the distribution of the random variable X. he Black-Scholes pricing function C BS satisfies the following condition: ( C BS (,,σ = 0 e r + e r C BS, ( 0 e r,σ. (3 0 A similar formula holds for the pricing function C. Indeed, it is not hard to prove using the put/call parity condition that ( C(, = 0 e r + e r G, ( 0 e r, (4 0 where the function G is given by It follows from (4 that G(, = 0 e r P (, ( 0 e r. (5 G (, ( 0 e r = 0 dµ ( 0 dµ (. (

7 Define a family of Borel measures { µ t } t 0 on (0, as follows: For any Borel set A in (0,, put µ t (A = 0 e rt dµ t (, (7 η (A where η( = ( 0 e r, > 0. It is not hard to see that µ t ((0, = for all t 0. Moreover, for every Borel set A in (0,, we have d µ( = 0 e r dµ ( and d µ ( = 0 e r dµ (. (8 η(a It follows from (5 and (8 that A η(a G(, = e r d µ ( e r A d µ (. (9 Remark 3. Suppose that for every t > 0, the measure µ t is absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure on (0,. Denote the Radon-Nikodym derivative by D t. hen for every t > 0, the measure µ t admits a density D t given by D t ( = ( 0 e rt 3 3 D t ( (0 e rt, > 0. he net lemma provides a link between the asymptotic behavior of the implied volatility near infinity and near zero. Lemma 3. Let C be a call pricing function and let P be the corresponding put pricing function. Denote by {µ t } t 0 the family of marginal distributions of the stock price process X, and define a family of measures { µ t } t 0 by formula (7 and a function G by formula (9. hen G is a call pricing function with the same interest rate r and the initial condition 0 as the pricing function C, and with a stock price process X having { µ t } t 0 as the family of its marginal distributions. Proof. It suffices to prove that Conditions -5 in the characterization of call pricing functions formulated in the introduction are valid for the function G. We have µ ([0, =. his equality follows from (8 and (3. In addition, equality (6 holds for µ t, by (8. Put V(, = d µ ( d µ (. hen G(, = e r V(,. Moreover, the function V(, is conve on [0, since its second distributional derivative coincides with the measure µ. his establishes conditions and. he equality G(0, = ( 0 + can be obtained using (8 and (9. his gives Condition 4. Net, we see that (9 implies G(, e r d µ (, and hence lim G(, = 0. his establishes Condition 5. In order to prove Condition 3 for G, we notice that (4 gives the following: G (,e r = ( C,e r Now it is clear that Condition 3 for G follows from the same condition for C. herefore, G is a call pricing function. his completes the proof of Lemma 3.. 7

8 Let us denote by I C the implied volatility associated with the call pricing function C and by I G the implied volatility associated with the call pricing function G. Replacing by I C ( in (3 and taking into account the equality C BS (,I C ( = and (4, we see that C BS (, ( 0 e rt (,I C (, = G, ( 0 e r. herefore, the following lemma holds: Lemma 3.3 Let C be a call pricing function and let G be the call pricing function defined by (9. hen for all 0 and > 0. I C (, = I G (, ( 0 e r (30 Formula (30 can be interpreted as a symmetry condition for the implied volatility. For a certain class of uncorrelated stochastic volatility models, a similar ( condition was established in [30] (see also [0]. For the models from this class, we have I(, = I, ( 0 e r. Lemma 3.3 and the results obtained in Section can be used to find sharp asymptotic formulas for the implied volatility as 0. heorem 3.4 Let C be a call pricing function, and let P be the corresponding put pricing function. Suppose that P is a function such that P( P( as 0. (3 hen the following asymptotic formula holds: as 0. I( = [ P( ] P( An important special case of heorem 3.4 is as follows: ( +O P( (3 P( heorem 3.5 Let C be a call pricing function, and let P be the corresponding put pricing function. hen ] ( I( = [ P( +O( (33 P( P( P( as 0. Proof of heorem 3.4. Formulas (3 and (5 imply that G( G( as where G( = P ( (0 e r. (34 Applying heorem 3.4 to G and G, we get I G ( = [ + G( ] G( ( +O G( (35 G( as. It follows from (35, (30, and (34 that [ I C ( = ( ] 0e r + ( 0 e r P( ( 0 e r P( ( +O (36 P( P( 8

9 as 0. It is not hard to see that formula (34 implies Finally, using (36 and the mean value theorem, we get (3. his completes the proof of heorem 3.4. Remark 3.6 Note that (37 shows that [P(] as 0. [ P( ] as 0. (37 4 Sharp asymptotic formulas for the implied volatility and Lee s moment formulas In [8], Roger Lee obtained important asymptotic formulas for the implied volatility. We will net formulate Lee s results. heorem 4. Let I be the implied volatility associated with a call pricing function C. Define a number p by { p = sup p 0 : E [ ] } X +p <. (38 hen the following equality holds: where the function ψ is given by lim sup I( = ψ( p (39 ψ(u = 4( u +u u, u 0. (40 heorem 4. Let I be the implied volatility associated with a call pricing function C. Define a number q by q = sup { q 0 : E [ X q ] } <. (4 hen the following formula holds: lim sup 0 I( = ψ( q. (4 Formulas (39 and (4 are called Lee s moment formulas, and the numbers + p and q are called the right-tail inde and the left-tail inde of the distribution of the stock price X, respectively. hese numbers show how fast the tails of the distribution of the stock price decay. We will net show how to derive Lee s moment formula (39 using our formula (0. In order to see how (0 is linked to Lee s formulas, we note that for every a > 0, ( +a a = ( a +a a = ψ(a. (43 herefore, Lee s formulas (39 and (4 can be rewritten as follows: lim sup I( = + p p (44 and lim sup 0 I( = + q q. (45 Our net goal is to establish formula (44. 9

10 Lemma 4.3 Let C be a call pricing function and put hen l = liminf (. (46 lim sup Proof of Lemma 4.3. Observe that (0 implies I( = + ( +O ( = + ( + +O I( = +l l. (47 ( ( ( as. It is clear that (47 follows from (48. Let us continue the proof of formula (44. Denote by ρ the complementary distribution function of X given by ρ (y = P[X > y], y > 0. hen (48 Define the following numbers: = e r ρ (ydy, > 0. (49 r = sup { r 0 : = O ( r as }, (50 and { ( s = sup s 0 : ρ (y = O y (+s } as y. (5 Lemma 4.4 he numbers p, l, r, and s given by (38, (5, (50, and (5, respectively, are all equal. Proof. If s = 0, then the inequality s r is trivial. If s > 0 is such that ρ (y = O ( y (+s as y, then ( = O y (+s dy = O ( s as. Hence s r. Net let r 0 be such that = O( r as. hen (49 shows that there eists c > 0 for which c r e r ρ (ydy e r ρ (ydy e r ρ (, > 0. herefore, ρ ( = O ( (r+ as. It follows that r s. his proves the equality r = s. Suppose that 0 < l <. hen for every ε > 0, there eists ε > 0 such that (l ε, > ε. herefore l+ε, > ε. It follows that l ε r for all ε > 0, and hence l r. he inequality l r also holds if l = 0 or l =. his fact can be established similarly. o prove the inequality r l, suppose that r 0 and r < r. hen = O( r as, and hence and cr for some c > 0 and all > 0. It follows that c +r. 0 c+r, > 0

11 Now it is clear that lim inf r. (5 Using (5, we see that l r. If r = 0, then the inequality l r is trivial. his proves that l = r = s. It is clear that for all p 0, [ ] E = (+p y p ρ (ydy. (53 X +p Suppose that s = 0, then the inequality s p is trivial. If for some s > 0, ρ (y = O ( [ ] y (+s as y, then it is not hard to see using (53 that E X +p < for all p < s. It follows that s p. [ ] On the other hand, if E < for some p 0, then M > X +p 0 y p ρ (ydy p ρ (ydy = e r p. (54 In the proof of (54, we used (53 and (49. It follows from (54 that = O( p as, and hence p r. his completes the proof of Lemma 4.4. o finish the proof of formula (39, we observe that (47 and the equality l = p in Lemma 4.4 imply formula (44. It will be eplained net how to obtain formula (45 from formula (33. aking into account (33, we get the following lemma: Lemma 4.5 Let C be a call pricing function and define a number by ( m = liminf 0 P(. (55 hen lim sup 0 I( = m m. (56 hen and he inequality m where m is defined by (55 follows from Remark 3.6. Put η (y = P[X y] = ρ (y, y 0. P( = e r η (ydy E [ X q for all q > 0. Note that η (0 = P[X = 0]. Consider the following numbers: and 0 ] = q y q η (ydy 0 u = sup{u : P( = O( u as 0} (57 v = sup{v 0 : η (y = O(y v as y 0}. (58 It is not hard to see, using the same ideas as in the proof of Lemma 4.4, that the following lemma holds: Lemma 4.6 he numbers q, m, u, and v defined by (4, (55, (57, and (58, respectively, satisfy the condition q + = m = u = v +. Now it is clear that formula (45 follows form (56 and Lemma 4.6.

12 5 Sharp asymptotic formulas for the implied volatility and the tail-wing formulas of Benaim and Friz In [], Benaim and Friz studied asymptotic relations between a given call pricing function, the implied volatility associated with it, and the law of the stock returns, under an additional assumption that there eist non-trivial moments of the stock price. We will net give several definitions from the theory of regularly varying functions (these definitions will be needed in the remaining part of the paper, and then formulate some of the results obtained in []. Definition 5. Let α R and let f be a Lebesgue measurable function defined on some neighborhood of infinity. he function f is called regularly varying with inde α if the following condition holds: For every λ > 0, f(λ f( λα as. he class consisting of all regularly varying functions with inde α is denoted by R α. Functions belonging to the class R 0 are called slowly varying. he following asymptotic formula is valid for all functions f R α with α > 0: e f(y dy f( as. (59 (see heorem 4..0 (i in [5]. his result is known as Bingham s Lemma. Definition 5. Let α R and let f be a positive function defined on some neighborhood of infinity. he function f is caled smoothly varying with inde α if the function h( = f (e is infinitely differentiable and h ( α, h (n ( 0 for all integers n as. An equivalent definition of the class SR α is as follows: for all n. n f (n ( f SR α lim = α(α...(α n+ (60 f( Definition 5.3 Let g be a function on (0, such that g( 0 as g. A function l defined on (a,, a 0, is called slowly varying with remainder g if l R 0 and l(λ = O(g( as for all λ >. l( Definitions (5. - (5.3 can be found in [5]. he theory of regularly varying functions has interesitng applications in financial mathematics. Besides [], [3], and [4], such functions appear in the study of Paretotype tails of distributions of stock returns (see, e.g, [] and the references therein. We refer the reader to [] for more information on Pareto-type distributions and their applications. Pareto-type distributions are defined as follows. Let X be a random variable on a probability space (Ω,F,P, and let F be the distribution function of X given by F(y = P[X y], y R. By F we denote the complementary distribution function of X, that is, the function F(y = F(y, y R. he distribution F is called a Pareto-type distribution if the complementary distribution function F is well fit by a power law. More precisely, F is a Pareto-type distribution with inde α > 0 iff there eists a function h R 0 such that F(y y α h(y as y. We will net formulate some of the results obtained in [] adapting them to our notation (see heorem in []. Note that Benaim and Friz use a different normalization in the Black-Scholes formula and consider the normalized implied volatility as a function of the -strike k. In the formulation of heorem 5.4 below, the function ψ defined by ψ(u = 4 ( u +u u is used. his function has already appeared in Section 4. It is clear that ψ is strictly decreasing on the interval [0, ] and maps this interval onto the interval [0,]. heorem 5.4 Let C be a pricing function and suppose that E [ X +ε ] < for some ε > 0. (6 hen the following statements hold:

13 . If = ep{ η(} with η R α, α > 0, then I( ( ψ. If F(y = ep{ ρ(y} with ρ R α, α > 0, then I( ( ψ [ρ(] as. (6 as. (63 3. If the distribution µ of the stock price X admits a density D and if D ( = ep{ h(} (64 as, where h R α, α > 0, then I( ( ψ [ D (] as. (65 Note that V(k and c(k in [] correspondin ournotation to I( and e r, respectively. We also take into account that the distribution density of the stock returns f(k, where k stands for the -strike, is related to the density D by the formula f(k = e k D (e k. he formulas contained in heorem 5.4 are called the right-tail-wing formulas of Benaim and Friz. he idea to epress the asymptotic properties of the implied volatility in terms of the behavior of the distribution density of the stock price has also been eploited in [9] and [] in the case of special stock price models with stochastic volatility. Our net goal is to derive heorem 5.4 from Corollary.7. he net statement is nothing else but this corollary in disguise. Corollary 5.5 For any pricing function C, ( I( = ψ ( +O( (66 as, where ψ is defined by (40. he equivalence of formulas (0 and (66 can be easily shown using (43. Remark 5.6 It follows from Corollary 5.5 that formula (6 holds for any call pricing function, and hence no restrictions are needed in Part of heorem 5.4. Moreover, formula (66 contains an error term, which is absent in formula (6. We will net brifly eplain how to obtain (63 and (64. We will prove a slightly more general statement assuming that F(y ep{ ρ(y} (67 as y in Part of heorem 5.4 and D ( ep{ h(} (68 as in Part 3. Some of the ideas used in the proof below are borrowed from [] (see the proofs in Section 3 of []. With no loss of generality, we may suppose that α. he proof of the tail-wing formulas is based on Bingham s Lemma and the following equalities: = e r F(ydy (69 3

14 and F(y = y D (d. (70 If α > in Parts or 3 of heorem 5.4, then the moment condition (6 holds and we have ρ(u u R α in Part and h(u u R α in Part 3. If α =, then the moment condition gives ρ(u u R in Part and h(u u R in Part 3 (see Section 3 in []. Suppose that (67 holds. Put λ(u = ρ(u u. hen we have Ĉ( as, where Ĉ( = Applying formula (59 to the function λ, we obtain as. Since Ĉ(, we also have and hence ep{ λ(u} du. Ĉ( λ( = ρ( Ĉ(, ρ( as. Now it clear that formula (63 follows from (0 and (43. Net assume that equality (68 holds. hen (70 implies (67 with ρ(y = y e h(u du. Applying Bingham s Lemma, we see that ρ R α. his reduces the case of the distribution density D of the stock price in heorem 5.4 to that of the complement distribution function F. Remark 5.7 he tail-wing formula (63 also holds provided that α = and ρ(u u R β with 0 < β. A similar statement is true in the case of formula (65. he proof of these assertions does not differ from the proof given above. Interesting eamples here are ρ(u = u+u β if β < and ρ(u = u+ u if β =. u Note that the moment condition does not hold in these cases. Formulas (63 and (65 do not include error estimates. Our net goal is to find asymptotic formulas for the implied volatility which contain error estimates. We can do it under certian smoothness assumptions on the functions ρ and h appearing in heorem 5.4. heorem 5.8 Let C be a call pricing function and let F be the complementary distribution function of the stock price X. Suppose that F(y ep{ ρ(y} (7 as y, where ρ is a function such that either ρ SR α with α >, or ρ SR and λ(u = ρ(u u R β for some 0 < β. hen ( ( [ρ( ] I( = ρ( ρ( +O (7 ρ( as. 4

15 heorem 5.9 Let C be a call pricing function and let D be the distribution density of the stock price X. Suppose that D ( ep{ h(} (73 as, where h is a function such that either h SR α with α >, or h SR and g(u = h(u u SR β for some 0 < β. hen ( ( [h( ] I( = h( h( +O (74 h( as. Remark 5.0 Formulas (7 and (74 are equivalent to the formulas I( = ψ ( ρ( ( [ρ( ] +O,, (ρ( and I( = ψ ( h( ( [h( ] +O,, (h( respectively, where the function ψ is defined by (40. If equality holds in (7 and (73, then we get the following tail-wing formulas with error estimates: ( I( = ψ [ F( ] ( +O [ ] [ ] F( F( and I( = ( ( ψ [ D (] +O( [ D (] [ D (] as. We will net prove heorem 5.9. he proof of heorem 5.8 is similar, but less complicated. We leave it as an eercise for the reader. Proof of heorem 5.9. We borrow several ideas used in the proof of formula (59 (see heorem 4..0 (i in [5]. he following lemma is standard: Lemma 5. Suppose r SR α with α > 0. hen as. e r(u du = e r( r ( Proof. Using the integration by parts formula, we see that ( ( +O r( where e r(u du = e r( r ( ρ (u = ( r = r (u (u r (u. e r(u ρ (udu (75 5

16 It follows from (60 that ρ (u = O ( r(u as u. Using (60 again, we obtain ( e r(u ρ (udu = O ( = O r (ue r(u r(ur (u du r (ue r(u u r(u du (76 as. Since for every ε > 0, the function u e εr(u ur(u is ultimately decreasing, (76 implies that ( e r(u ρ (udu = O e r( r( (77 as. Now Lemma 5. follows from (75, (77, and (60. Let us continue the proof of heorem 5.9. For h SR α with α >, we have g SR α. On the other hand, if α =, we assume that g SR β with 0 < β. Consider the following functions: D ( = ep{ h(} and Ĉ( = D ( = ep{ g(}. We have as. Now applying Lemma 5. we get e g(u du = e h( g ( e g(u du e h(u du (78 ( ( +O g( and as. It follows that e g(u du ( ( e h(u du = e h( h +O ( h( e h(u du = e h( ( ( h( h (g +O ( g( (79 as. In the proof of (79 we used (60. Net employing (78, (79, and (60 we obtain Net we see that where = ( e h( h(g(. (80 h(g( = Ĉ( (. (8 It follows from (8 that there eists a > 0 such that Ĉ( a Ĉ(, >. (8 Indeed, if α >, we can take a > α α in (8, and if α = and 0 < β, we take a > β β. It is not hard to see that an estimate similar to (8 is valid with C instead of C. Now it follows from Corollary.6 that formula (74 holds. he proof of heorem 5.9 is thus completed. Similar results can be obtained in the case of the left-tail-wing formulas established in []. We will only forulate the following assertion which is equivalent to heorem 3.5: 6

17 Corollary 5. Let C be a call pricing function, and let P be the corresponding put pricing function. hen I( = ( ( P( ψ +O( P( P( as 0, where ψ(u = 4 ( u +u u, u 0. he equivalence of heorem 3.5 and Corollary5. can be shown using (43 with a = ( P(. 6 Stock price distribution densities and pricing functions in stochastic volatility models his section begins with a trivial eample which is the implied volatility in the Black-Scholes model. Let us see what can be obtained by applying heorem 5.9 to the Black-Scholes model, and at least make sure that lim I( = σ. A similar computation was felicitously called a sanity check in []. he distribution density of the stock price in the Black-Scholes model is given by { { ( 0 e D ( = r ep σ t ( } 3 ep σ } πσ 8 0 e r. his follows from (7. Hence, D satisfies condition (73 in heorem 5.9 with h(u = σ ( u ( 0 e r + u. It is clear that h SR. Applying heorem 5.9, we get I( = ( σ 0 e µ + σ ( 0 e µ ( +O as. Itisnothardtoseethatright-handsideofthepreviousasymptoticformulatendstoσ as. Regularly varying stock price distributions. Recall that Pareto-type distributions were defined in Section 5. Our net goal is to show that in certain stock price models with stochastic volatility, the stock price X t is Pareto-type distributed for every t > 0. he models of our interest here are the uncorrelated Stein-Stein, Heston, and Hull-White models. We will first formulate several results obtained in [8, 0, ]. Recall that the stock price process X t and the volatility process Y t in the Hull-White model satisfy the following system of stochastic differential equations: { dxt = rx t dt+y t X t dwt dy t = νy t dt+ξy t dzt. (83 In (83, r 0 is the interest rate, ν R, and ξ > 0. he Hull-White model was introduced in [5]. he volatility process in this model is a geometric Brownian motion. he Stein-Stein model is defined as follows: { dxt = rx t dt+ Y t X t dw t dy t = q(m Y t dt+σdz t. (84 It was introduced and studied in [3]. In this model, the absolute value of an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process plays the role of the volatility of the stock. We assume that r 0, q 0, m 0, and σ > 0. he Heston model was developed in [4]. It is given by { dxt = rx t dt+ Y t X t dwt dy t = q(m Y t dt+c Y t dzt, (85 7

18 where r 0 and m 0, and c 0. he volatility equation in (85 is uniquely solvable in the strong sense, and the solution Y t is a positive stochastic process. his process is called a Co-Ingersoll-Ross process. We assume that the processes W t and Z t in (83, (84, and (85 are independent Brownian motions under a risk-free probability P. he initial conditions for the processes X and Y are denoted by 0 and y 0, respectively. We will net formulate sharp asymptotic formulas for the distribution density D t of the stock price X t in special stock price models. hese formulas were obtained in [8, 0, ].. Stein-Stein model. he following result was established in []: here eist positive constants B, B, and B 3 such that ( D t 0 e rt ( = B ( e B (+O B3 ( 4 (86 as. he constants in (86 depend on the model parameters. he constant B 3 satisfies B 3 >. Eplicit formulas for the constants B, B, and B 3 can be found in []. It follows from (86, the mean value theorem, and the inequality e a ae a, 0 a, (87 that as where B 0 = ( 0 e rt B3. ( D t ( = B 0 ( e B (+O B3 ( 4. Heston model. It was shown in [] that there eist constants A > 0, A > 0, and A 3 > such that ( D t 0 e rt = A ( 3 ( 4 +qm c e A (+O A3 ( 4 (89 as. he constants in (89 depend on the model parameters. Eplicit epressions for these constants can be found in []. It follows from (89, the mean value theorem, and (87 that D t ( = A 0 ( 3 ( 4 +qm c e A (+O A3 ( 4 (90 as where A 0 = A ( 0 e rt A3. 3. Hull-White model. he following asymptotic formula holds for the distribution density of the stock price in the Hull-White model (see heorem 4. in [0]: (88 ( D t 0 e rt = C ( c ( c3 ( [ ep [ tξ ]+ t y 0 ] t y 0 ( ( +O ( (9 as. he constants C, c, and c 3 have been computed in [0]. It follows from (9, the mean value theorem, and (87 that D t ( = C 0 ( c ( c3 ( [ ep [ tξ ]+ t y 0 ] t y 0 ( ( +O ( (9 as where C 0 = C( 0 e rt. Equalities (88, (90, and (9 show that the distribution density D t of the stock price in the Stein-Stein, Heston, and Hull-White model is well-fit by a power law. Indeed, for the Stein-Stein model we have D t ( βt h t (,, (93 8

19 with β t = B 3 and h t ( = B 0 ( e B, (94 and it is not hard to see that h t R 0. For the Heston model, (93 is valid with β t = A 3 and h t ( = A 0 ( 3 4 +qm c e A. (95 he function h t defined in (95 is a slowly varying function. For the Hull-White model, condition (93 holds with β t = and ( [ h t ( = C 0 ( c ( c3 ep [ tξ ]+ ] t t. (96 Here we also have h t R 0. Note that the constants B 3 and A 3 in (94 and (95 depend on t (see []. Remark 6. It is also true that the functions h t in (94 and (95 are slowly varying with remainder g( = (. o prove this fact, put h a,b ( = ( a e b where b > 0 and a R. hen the function h a,b is slowly varying with remainder g( = (. his follows from the following asymptotic formula: h a,b (λ h a,b ( = (+λa[ ep { b +λ b } ] +(+λ a ( a ( a ( +O (,. he net theorem shows that the distribution of the stock price X t in the Stein-Stein, Heston, and Hull-White models is of Pareto-type. heorem 6. he following are true for the complementary distribution function F t :. Let t > 0 and let F t be the complementary distribution function of the stock price X t in the Stein-Stein model. hen F t (y y αt h t (y (97 as y. In (97, α t = B 3 and h t (y = B 3 h t(y where h t is defined in (94.. For the Heston model, formula (97 holds with α t = A 3, h(y = A 3 h t(y where h t is defined in ( For the Hull-White model, the formula F t (y y h t (y holds with h t defined in (96.. o prove heorem 6., we integrate equalities (88, (90, and (9 on the interval [, and take into account the following theorem due to aramata: For all α < and l R 0, y 0 α+ l( tα l(tdt α y 0 as (see Proposition.5.0 in [5]. It follows from heorem 6. that the Pareto-type inde α t of the stock price X t in the Stein-Stein model is equal to B 3. For the Heston model, we have α t = A 3, and for the Hull-Whie model, the Pareto-type inde satisfies α t =. 9

20 7 Asymptotic behavior of call pricing functions in special stochastic volatility models In this section, we obtain sharp asymptotic formulas for call pricing functions in the Hull-White, Stein-Stein, and Heston models. he net theorem provides a general asymptotic formula for a call pricing function under certain restrictions on the distribution density of the stock price. heorem 7. Let C be a call pricing function and suppose that the distribution of the stock price X admits a density D. Suppose also that D ( = β h((+o(ρ( (98 as, where β <, h is a slowly varying function with remainder g, and ρ( 0 as. hen as. = e r (β +(β + β+ h([+o(ρ(+o(g(] (99 Proof. he following assertion (see heorem 3.. in [7], or problem 30 on p. 9 in [5] will be used in the proof: heorem 7. Let L be a slowly varying function with remainder g, and let v be a positive function on (, such that hen as. λ ǫ v(λdλ < for some ǫ 0. v(λ L(λ L( dλ = It follows from (03 and heorem 7. that v(λdλ+o(g( = e r ( D (d = e r ( β h(d(+o(ρ( = e r β+ h( = e r β+ h( (y y βh(y h( dy(+o(ρ( (y y β dy[+o(ρ(+o(g(] as. Now it is clear that formula (99 holds, and the proof of heorem 7. is thus completed. heorem 7. allows us to characterize the asymptotic behavior of the call pricing function in the Stein-Stein and the Heston model. heorem 7.3 (a he following formula holds for the call pricing function in the Stein-Stein model: = e r B ( ( 0 ( B 3 ( B 3 ( e B B3 +O ( 4 (00 as. he constants in (00 are the same as in (88. (b he following formula holds for for the call pricing function in the Heston model: = e r A ( 0 ( A 3 ( A 3 ( 3 4 +qm c e A (+O A3 ( 4 (0 as. he constants in (0 are the same as in (90. 0

21 It is not hard to see that heorem 7.3 follows from (88, (90, Remark 6., and heorem 7.. Net we turn our attention to the Hull-White model. Note that heorem 7.3 can not be applied in this case since for the Hull-White model we have β =. Instead, we will employ an asymptotic formula for fractional integrals established in [0] (see heorem 3.7 in [0]. A special case of this formula is as follows: Let b( = B( be a positive increasing function on [c, with B ( as. hen ep{ b(}d = ep{ b(} b ( as. Formula (0 will be used in the proof of the following result: ( ( +O ( (0 heorem 7.4 Let C be a call pricing function, and suppose that the distribution of the stock price X admits a density D. Suppose also that D ( = ep{ b(}(+o(ρ( (03 as. Here the function b is positive, increasing on [c, for some c > 0, and such that the condition b( = B(. Moreover, B ( as, and ρ( 0 as. hen as. Proof. We have Using (0 we get r ep{ b(} [ ( = e B +O ( ] +O(ρ( ( [ = e r D (d [ = e r ep{ b(}d ] D (d ] ep{ b(}d (+O(ρ( = e r ep{ b(}d(+o(ρ(+o(ep{ b(} = e r ep{ b(u}d(+o(ρ(+o(ep{ b(}. r ep{ b(} ( ( = e b +O ( [+O(ρ(]+O(ep{ b(} ( r ep{ b(} = e B ( (04 [ ( +O ( ] +O(ρ( +O(ep{ b(}. (05 Since B ( as, (05 implies (04. he net statement characterizes the asymptotic behavior of a call pricing function in the Hull-White model. heorem 7.5 Let C be a call pricing function in the Hull-White model. hen = 4ξ C 0 e r ( c + ( c3 ( [ ep [ ξ ]+ y 0 ] y 0 ( ( +O ( (06 as. he constants in (06 are the same as in formula (88.

22 Proof. We will employ heorem 7.4 in the proof. It is not hard to see using (9 that formula (03 holds for the distribution density D of the stock price in the Hull-White model. Here we choose the functions b, B, and ρ as follows: b(u = C 0 c ( [ u c 3 u+ ξ y 0 [ u ]+ y 0 ] u, B(u = C 0 c u c 3 u+ ( [ y0 ξ + u+ ] y 0 + u, and ρ( = (. It is clear that B (u and B (u u as u. Moreover, using the mean value theorem, we obtain the following estimate: B ( 4ξ = O( ( (07 as. Net, taking into account (04 and (07, we see that (06 holds. Remark 7.6 heorem. and formulas (00, (0, and (06 can be used to obtain the asymptotic formulas with error estimates for the implied volatility in the Hull-White, Stein-Stein, and Heston models established in [9] and []. 8 Appendi We will net prove the characterization of call pricing functions that was formulated in the introduction. he following well-known fact from the theory of conve functions will be used in the proof: If U( is a conve function on (0,, then the second (distributional derivative µ of the function U is a locally finite Borel measure on (0, and any such measure is the second derivative of a conve function U which is unique up to the addition of an affine function. Let C be a pricing function and denote by µ the distribution of the random variable X. hen the second distributional derivative of the function e r C(, coincides with the measure µ. Our goal is to establish that conditions -5 in the characterization of call pricing functions hold. It is clear that conditions and 4 follow from the definitions. Condition can be established using the equivalence of (3 and (6. We will net prove that Condition 3 holds. his condition is equivalent to the following inequality: 0 ( + dµ S ( e rs 0 ( + dµ ( e r (08 for all 0 and 0 S <. he previous inequality can be established by taking into account the fact that the process e rt X t, t 0, is a martingale and applying Jensen s inequality. Finally, Condition 5 follows from the estimate C(, e r dµ ( and (6. his proves the necessity in the characterization of call pricing functions. o prove the sufficiency, let us assume that C is a function such that Conditions -5 hold. Consider ( the family of Borel probability measures {ν } 0 on R defined as follows: For every 0, ν (A = µ e r A if A is a Borel subset of [0,, and ν ((,0 = 0. In this definition, the symbol µ stands for the second distributional derivative of the function e r C(,. Since Condition 3 is equivalent to (08, we have ( + dν S ( ( + dν ( (09 R for all 0 and 0 S <. Let ϕ be a non-decreasing conve function on [0, and denote by η its second distributional derivative. hen we have ϕ( = R 0 ( u + dη(u+a+b for all 0, where a

23 and b are some constants. Net using (09 and (6, we obtain ϕ(dν S ( ϕ(dν ( (0 R for all 0, 0 S <. Hence, the family {ν } 0 is increasing in the conve ordering. he reasoning leading from (09 to (0 is known (see [5], or Appendi in [8]. By ellerer s theorem (heorem 3 in [6], (0 and (6 imply the eistence of a filtered probability space (Ω,F,F t,p and of a Markov (F t,p -martingale Y such that the distribution of Y coincides with the measure ν for every 0. Now put X = e r Y, 0. It follows that the measure µ is the distribution of the random variable X for every 0. his produces a stock price process X such that the process e rt X t is a martingale. Net, we see that Condition 4 implies µ 0 = δ 0, and hence X 0 = 0 P -a.s. aking into account inequality (6, we define the following function: V(, = dµ ( R dµ ( = E [ (X +]. ( It is clear that the second distributional derivative of the function V(, coincides with the measure µ. herefore, e r C(, = V(, + a( + b( for all 0 and 0, where the functions a and b do not depend on. Since lim C(, = 0 (Condition 5 and lim C(, = 0, we see that a( = b( = 0, and hence C(, = e r V(,. It follows from ( that C is a call pricing function. References [] Beirlant, J., Y. Goegebeur, J. eugels, and J. Segers: Statistics of Etremes: heory and Applications, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Chichester, England, 004. [] Benaim, S., and P. Friz: Regular variation and smile asymptotics, Math. Finance 9 (009, -. [3] Benaim, S., and P. Friz: Smile asymptotics II: Models with known moment generating function, J. Appl. Probab. 45 (008, 6-3. [4] Benaim, S., P. Friz, and R. Lee: On Black-Scholes implied volatility at etreme strikes, in Frontiers in Quantitative Finance: Volatility and Credit Risk Modeling, R. Cont, Editor, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ, 009, pp [5] Bingham, N. H., C. M. Goldie, and J. L. eugels: Regular Variation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 987. [6] Buehler, H.: Epensive martingales, Quantitative Finance 6 (006, [7] Carmona, R., and S. Nadtochiy: Local volatility dynamic models, Finance and Stochastics 3 (009, -48. [8] Carr, P., and D. B. Madan: owards a theory of volatility trading, in R. Jarrow (Ed., Volatility, Risk Publications, 998, pp [9] Carr, P., and D. B. Madan: A note on sufficient conditions for no arbitrage, Finanace Research Letters (005, [0] Cont, R.: Empirical properties of asset returns: stylized facts and statistical issues, Quant. Finance (00, [] Cousot, L.: Conditions on option prices for absence of arbitrage and eact calibration, Journal of Banking and Finance 3 (007, [] Davis, M. H. A., and D. G. Hobson: he range of traded option prices, Mathematical Finance 7 (007, -4. 3

24 [3] Fengler, M. R.: Semiparametric Modeling of Implied Volatility, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg, 005. [4] Fouque, J.-P., G. Papanicolaou, and. R. Sircar: Derivatives in Financial Markets with Stochastic Volatility, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 000. [5] Föllmer, H., and A. Schied: Stochastic Finance, nd Edition, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, 004. [6] Gatheral, J.: he Volatility Surface, A Practitioner s Guide, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ, 006. [7] Goldie, C. M., and R. L. Smith: Slow variation with remainder: theory and applications, Quart. J. Math. Oford (, 38 (987, [8] Gulisashvili, A., and E. M. Stein: Asymptotic behavior of the distribution of the stock price in models with stochastic volatility: the Hull-White model, C. R. Acad Sci. Paris, Ser. I 343 (006, [9] Gulisashvili, A., and E. M. Stein: Implied volatility in the Hull-White model, Mathematical Finance 9 (009, [0] Gulisashvili, A., and E. M. Stein: Asymptotic behavior of distribution densities in models with stochastic volatility, I, to be published in Mathematical Finance. [] Gulisashvili, A., and E. M. Stein: Asymptotic behavior of the stock price distribution density and implied volatility in stochastic volatility models, submitted for publication. [] Hamza,., and F.C. lebaner: A family of non-gaussian martingales with Gaussian marginals, Journal of Appl. Math. and Stochastic Analysis Vol. 007, Article I 97, 9 pages, doi:0.55/007/9733. [3] Henry-Labordère, P.: Analysis, Geometry, and Modeling in Finance: Advanced Methods in Option Pricing, Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL, 009. [4] Heston, S. L.: A closed-form solution for options with stochastic volatility, with applications to bond and currency options, Review of Financial Studies 6 (993, [5] Hull, J., and A. White: he pricing of options on assets with stochastic volatilities, J. Finance 4 (987, [6] ellerer, H. G.: Markov-omposition und eine Anwendung auf Martingale, Math. An. 98 (97, 99-. [7] Lamberton, D., and B. Lapeyre: Introduction to Stochastic Calculus Applied to Finance, Second Edition, Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton London New York, 008. [8] Lee, R.: he moment formula for implied volatility at etreme strikes, Math. Finance 4(004, [9] Madan, D. B, and M. Yor: Making Markov matringales meet marginals: with eplicit constructions, Bernoulli 8 (00, [30] Renault, E., and N. ouzi: Option hedging and implied volatilities in a stochastic volatility model, Math. Finance 6(3 (996, [3] Stein, E. M., Stein, J.: Stock price distributions with stochastic volatility: An analytic approach, Review of Financial Studies 4 (99,