arxiv: v3 [math.pr] 12 Dec 2017

Transcription

1 RECOMBINING TREE APPROXIMATIONS FOR OPTIMAL STOPPING FOR DIFFUSIONS ERHAN BAYRAKTAR, YAN DOLINSKY, AND JIA GUO arxv: v3 [math.pr] 12 Dec 2017 Abstract. In ths paper we develop two numercal methods for optmal stoppng n the framewor of one dmensonal dffuson. Both of the methods use the Sorohod embeddng n order to construct recombnng tree approxmatons for dffusons wth general coeffcents. Ths technque allows us to determne convergence rates and construct nearly optmal stoppng tmes whch are optmal at the same rate. Fnally, we demonstrate the effcency of our schemes on several models. Key words. Amercan Optons, Optmal Stoppng, Recombnng Trees, Sorohod Embeddng 1. Introducton. It s well nown that prcng Amercan optons leads to optmal stoppng problems see [17, 18]. For fnte maturty optmal stoppng problems, there are no explct solutons even n the relatvely smple framewor where the dffuson process s a standard Brownan moton. Motvated by the calculatons of Amercan optons prces n local volatlty models we develop numercal schemes for optmal stoppng n the framewor of one dmensonal dffuson. In partcular, we develop tree based approxmatons. In general for non-constant volatlty models the nodes of the tree approxmaton trees do not recombne and ths fact results n an exponental and thus a computatonally explosve tree that cannot be used especally n prcng Amercan optons. We wll present two novel ways of constructng recombnng trees. The frst numercal scheme we propose, a recombnng bnomal tree on a unform tme and space lattce, s based on correlated random wals. A correlated random wal s a generalzed random wal n the sense that the ncrements are not dentcally and ndependently dstrbuted and the one we ntroduce has one step memory. The dea to use correlated random wals for approxmatng dffuson processes goes bac to [16], where the authors studed the wea convergence of correlated random wals to Marov dffusons. The dsadvantage of the wea convergence approach s that t can not provde error estmates. Moreover, the wea convergence result can not be appled for numercal computatons of the optmal stoppng tme. In order to obtan error estmates for the approxmatons and calculate numercally the optmal control we should consder all the processes on the same probablty space, and so methods based on strong approxmaton theorems come nto pcture. In ths paper we apply the Sorohod embeddng technque for small perturbatons of the correlated random wals. Our approach can be seen as an extenson of recombnng tree approxmatons from the case when a stoc evolves accordng to the geometrcal Brownan moton to the case of a more general dffuson evoluton. Ths partcular case requred the Sorohod embeddng nto the Brownan moton wth a constant varance and t was treated n the more general game optons case n [21, 12]. Under boundness and Lpschtz condtons on the drft and volatlty of the dffuson, we obtan error estmates of order On 1/4. Moreover we show how to construct E. Bayratar s supported n part by the Natonal Scence Foundaton under grant DMS and by the Susan M. Smth Professorshp. Y. Dolnsy s supported by supported by MareCure Career Integraton Grant, no and the ISF grant no 160/17 Department of Mathematcs, Unversty of Mchgan, erhan@umch.edu. Department of Statstcs, Hebrew Unversty and School of Mathematcal Scences, Monash Unversty yan.dolnsy@mal.huj.ac.l. Department of Mathematcs, Unversty of Mchgan, guoja@umch.edu. 1

2 a stoppng tme whch s optmal up to the same order. In fact, we consder a more general setup where the dffuson process mght have absorbng barrers. Clearly, most of the local volatlty modes whch are used n practce for nstance, the CEV model [9] and the CIR model [10] do not satsfy the above condtons. Stll, by choosng an approprate absorbng barrers for these models, we can effcently approxmate the orgnal models, and for the absorbed dffusons, whch satsfy the above condtons, we apply our results. Our second numercal scheme s a recombnng trnomal tree, whch s obtaned by drectly samplng the orgnal process at sutable chosen random ntervals. In ths method we relax the contnuty assumpton and wor wth dffusons wth measurable coeffcents, e.g. the coeffcents can be dscontnuous, whle we eep the boundedness condtons. See Secton 5.5 for an example. The man dea s to construct a sequence of random tmes such that the ncrement { of the dffuson } between two sequel tmes T belongs to some fxed set of the form σ n, 0, σ T n and the expectaton of the dfference between two sequel tmes equals to T n. Here n s the dscretzaton parameter and T s the maturty date. Ths dea s nspred by the recent wor [2, 1] where the authors appled Sorohod embeddng n order to obtan an Euler approxmaton of rregular one dmensonal dffusons. Followng ther methodology we construct an exact scheme along stoppng tmes. The constructons are dfferent and n partcular, n contrast to the above papers we ntroduce a recombnng tree approxmaton. The above papers do provde error estmate n fact they are of the same order as our error estmates for the expected value of a functon of the termnal value from mathematcal fnance pont of vew, ths can be vewed as European Vanlla optons. Snce we deal wth Amercan optons, our proof requres addtonal machnery whch allows to treat stoppng tmes. The second method s more drect and does not requre the constructon of a dffuson perturbaton. In partcular t can be used for the computatons of Barrer optons prces; see Remar 4.1. As we do for the frst method, we obtan error estmates of order On 1/4 and construct a stoppng tme whch s optmal up to the same order. Comparson wth other numercal schemes. The most well-nown approach to evaluate Amercan optons n one dmenson s the fnte dfference scheme called the projected SOR method, see e.g. [28]. As opposed to a tree based scheme, the fnte dfference scheme needs to artfcally restrct the doman and mpose boundary condtons to fll n the entre lattce. The usual approach s the so-called far-feld boundary condton as s done n [28]. See the dscusson n [29]. The man problem s that t s not nown how far s suffcent and the error s hard to quantfy. Ths problem was addressed recently by [29] for put optons wrtten on CEV models by what they call an artfcal boundary method, whch s model dependent n that an exact boundary condton s derved that s then embedded nto the numercal scheme. In fact, the PDE s transformed nto a new PDE whch satsfes a Neumann boundary condton. Ths technque requres havng an explct expresson of a Sturm-Lovlle equaton assocated wth the Laplace transform of the prcng equaton. As an mprovement over [29] the papers [30, 23] propose a numercal method based on solvng the ntegral equatons that the optmal exercse boundary satsfes. None of these papers dscuss the convergence rate or prove that ther proposed optmal exercse tmes are nearly optmal. We have the advantage of havng an optmal stoppng problem at the dscrete level and wthout much addtonal effort are able to show that these stoppng tmes are actually approxmately optmal when appled to the contnuous 2

3 tme problem. We compare our numercal results to these papers n Table 5.6. Another popular approach s the Euler scheme or other Monte-Carlo based schemes see e.g. [13, 3]. The grd structure allows for an effcent numercal computatons of stochastc control problems va dynamcal programmng snce computaton of condtonal expectaton smplfes consderably. Compare ths to the least squares method n [25] also see [13]. Besdes the computatonal complexty, the bas n the least squares s hard to characterze snce t also reles on the choce of bases functons. Recently a hybrd approach was developed n [7]. The scope of ths paper s more general and s n the sprt of [25]. Our dscusson above n comparng our proposed method to Monte-Carlo apples here. Moreover, although [7] provdes a convergence rate analyss usng PDE methods requrng regularty assumptons on the coeffcents, whch our scheme does not need, our paper n addton can prove that the proposed stoppng tmes from our numercal approxmatons are nearly optmal. To summarze, our contrbutons are We buld two recombnng tree approxmatons for local volatlty models, whch consderably smplfes the computaton of condtonal expectatons. By usng the Sorohod embeddng technque, we gve a proof of the rate of convergence of the schemes. Ths technque n partcular allows us to show that the stoppng tmes constructed from the numercal approxmatons are nearly optmal and the error s of the same magntude as the convergence rate. Ths rest of the paper s organzed as follows. In the next secton we ntroduce the setup and ntroduce the two methods we propose and present the man theoretcal results of the paper, namely Theorems 2.1 and 2.2 see the last statements n subsectons 2.2 and 2.3. Sectons 3 and 4 are devoted to the proof of these respectve results. In Secton 5 we provde a detaled numercal analyss for both of our methods by applyng them to varous local volatlty models. 2. Prelmnares and Man Results The Setup. Let {W t } t=0 be a standard one dmensonal Brownan moton, and let Y t, t 0 be a one dmensonal dffuson 2.1 dy t = σy t dw t + µy t dt, Y 0 = x. Let {F t } T t=0 be a fltraton whch satsfes the usual condtons such that Y t, t 0 s an adapted process and W t, t 0 s a Brownan moton wth respect to ths fltraton. We assume that the SDE 2.1 has a wea soluton that s unque n law. Introduce an absorbng barrers B < C where B [, and C, ]. We assume that x B, C and loo at the absorbed stochastc process X t = I t<nf{s:ys / B,C}Y t + I t nf{s:ys / B,C}Y nf{s:ys / B,C}, t 0. Motvated by the valuaton of Amercan optons prces we study an optmal stoppng problem wth maturty date T and a reward ft, X t, t [0, T ] where f : [0, T ] R R + satsfes 2.2 ft 1, x 1 ft 2, x 2 L 1 + x 1 t 2 t 1 + x 2 x 1, t 1, t 2 [0, T ], x 1, x 2 R for some constant L. Clearly, payoffs of the form ft, x = e rt x K + call optons and ft, x = e rt K x + put optons ft n our setup. 3

4 The optmal stoppng value s gven by 2.3 V = sup τ T [0,T ] E[fτ, X τ ], where T [0,T ] s the set of stoppng tmes n the nterval [0, T ], wth respect to the fltraton F t, t Bnomal Approxmaton Scheme Va Random Wals. In ths Secton we assume the followng. Assumpton 2.1. The functons µ, σ : B, C R are bounded and Lpschtz contnuous. Moreover, σ : B, C R s strctly postve and unformly bounded away from zero. Bnomal Approxmaton of the State Process. Fx n N and let h = hn := T n be the tme dscretzaton. Snce the meanng s clear we wll use h nstead of hn. Let ξ n 1,..., ξ n n { 1, 1} be a sequence of random varables. In the sequel, we always use the ntal data ξ n 0 1. Consder the random wal X n = x + h =1 ξ n = 0, 1,..., n wth fnte absorbng barrers B n < C n where B n = x + h mn{ Z [ n 1, : x + h > B + h 1/3 } C n = x + h max{ Z, n + 1] : x + h < C h 1/3 }. Clearly, the process {X n }n =0 les on the grd x + h{ n, 1 n,..., 0, 1,..., n} n fact because of the barrers ts le on a smaller grd. We am to construct a probablstc structure so the par {X n, ξn }n =0 forms a Marov chan wealy approxmatng wth the rght tme change the absorbed dffuson X. We loo for a predctable wth respect the fltraton generated by ξ n 1,..., ξ n n process α n = {α n }n =0 whch s unformly bounded n space and n and a probablty measure P n on σ{ξ n 1,..., ξ n n } such that the perturbaton defned by 2.4 ˆXn := X n + hα n ξn, = 0, 1,..., n s matchng the frst two moments of the dffuson X. Namely, we requre that for any = 1,..., n on the event B n < X n 1 < C n 2.5 E n ˆXn n 2.6 E n ˆX n ˆX 1 ξn 1,..., ξ n 1 = hµx n 1 + oh, n ˆX 1 2 ξ n 1,..., ξ n 1 = hσ 2 X n 1 + oh, where we use the standard notaton oh to denote a random varable that converge to zero as h 0 a.s. after dvdng by h. We also use the conventon Oh to denote a random varable that s unformly bounded after dvdng by h. 4

5 ˆX n From 2.4 t follows that X n = o1. Hence the convergence of X n s equvalent to the convergence of ˆXn. It remans to solve the equatons By applyng together wth the fact that α n s predctable and ξ n 2 1 we get n E n ˆX n ˆX 1 2 ξ n 1,..., ξ n 1 = h1 + 2α n + h Ths together wth 2.6 gves that α n α n = σ2 X n 1 1, = 0,..., n 2 s a soluton, where we set X n 1 x h. Next, 2.5 yelds that E n ξ n ξn 1,..., ξ n 1 = αn 1 ξn 1 + hµx n 1 + α n 2 α n oh. 1 Recall that ξ n { 1, 1}. We conclude that the probablty measure P n s gven by pror to absorbng tme 2.7 P n ξ n = ±1 ξ n 1,..., ξ n 1 = ± αn 1 ξn 1 + hµx n 1 + α n 1., = 1,..., n. In vew of Assumpton 2.1 we assume that n s suffcently large so P n s ndeed a probablty measure. Moreover, we notce that α n 1 = σ2 X n 1 hξ n Thus the rght hand sde of 2.7 s determned by X n 1, ξn 1, and so {Xn, ξn }n =0 s ndeed a Marov chan. Optmal Stoppng Problem on a Bnomal Tree. For any n denote by T n the fnte set of all stoppng tmes wth respect to fltraton σ{ξ n 1,..., ξ n }, = 0,..., n. Introduce the optmal stoppng value 2.8 V n := max η T n E n [fηh, X n η ]. By usng standard dynamcal programmng for optmal stoppng see [27] Chapter I we can calculate V n and the ratonal stoppng tmes by the followng bacward recurson. For any = 0, 1,..., n denote by G n all the ponts on the grd x + h{, 1,..., 0, 1,..., } whch le n the nterval [Bn, C n ]. Defne the functons J n : G n { 1, 1} R, = 0, 1,..., n For = 0, 1,..., n 1 J n z, y = max {fh, z, 2 =1 J n n z, y = ft, z α y + hµz J n + 1h, z + 1 } h, f z B n, C n, α 5

6 where α = σ2 z y h 1 2, α = σ2 z 1 2, and We get that and the stoppng tme { 2.9 ηn = n mn J n z, y = max fmh, z f z {B n, C n }. m n V n = J n 0 x, 1 : J n s a ratonal stoppng tme. Namely, Xn, ξn V n = E n [fη nh, X n η n ]. } = fh, Xn Sorohod Embeddng. Before we formulate our frst result let us ntroduce the Sorohod embeddng whch allows to consder the random varables {ξ n, Xn }n =0 wthout changng ther jont dstrbuton and the dffuson X on the same probablty space. Set, M t := x + t The man dea s to embed the process X n := X n 0 σy s dw s = Y t + hα n ξn α n 0 ξn t h µy s ds, t 0. =0 µx n, = 0, 1,..., n nto the martngale {M t } t=0. Observe that pror the absorbng tme, the process n { X }n =0 s a martngale wth respect to the measure P n n, and X 0 = x. Set, α n 0 = σ2 x h 1, θ n 0 = 0, ξ n 0 = 1, X n 0 = x. 2 For = 0, 1,..., n 1 defne by recurson the followng random varables +1 = σ2 X n 1, 2 α n If X n B n, C n then 2.10 { θ n +1 = nf t > θ n : M t M n θ + hα n ξn 2.11 ξ n +1 = I θ n < sgn M n +1 θ M n +1 θ where we put sgnz = 1 for z > 0 and = 1 otherwse, and 2.12 X n +1 = Xn + hξ n hµx n = } h1 + α n +1, + hα n ξn + hµx n,

7 If X n / B n, C n then θ n +1 = θn + h and X n +1 = Xn. Set, Θ n := n mn{ : X n / B n, C n } and observe that on the event < Θ n, θ n s the stoppng tme whch corresponds to the Sorohod embeddng of the bnary random varable wth values n the random set {± h1 + α n +1 hα n ξn hµx n }, nto the martngale {M t M n θ } n t θ. Moreover, the grd structure of X n mples that f X n / B n, C n then X n {B n, C n }. Lemma 2.1. The stoppng tmes {θ n }n =0 varables {ξ n, Xn }n =0 satsfy 2.7. Proof. For suffcently large n we have that for any < n h1+α n +1 hα n ξn hµxn < 0 < h1+α n +1 have a fnte mean and the random +1 hα n ξn hµxn. Thus by usng the fact that volatlty of the martngale M s bounded away from zero, we conclude Eθ n +1 θn < for all < n. Hence the stoppng tmes {θn }n =0 have a fnte mean. Next, we establsh 2.7 for the redefned {ξ n, Xn }n =0. Fx and consder the event < Θ n. From 2.10 we get 2.13 M n θ M n +1 θ = h1 + α n +1 ξn The stochastc process {M t M θ n s a bounded martngale and so EM θ n +1 Eξ n +1 F θ n Snce ξ n +1 { 1, 1} we arrve at Pξ n +1 = ±1 F = 1 θ n 2 +1 hα n } θn +1 t=θ n M θ n = αn ξn + hµx n 1 + α n +1 1 ± αn ξn hµx n. F n θ = 0. Hence, from 2.13 ξn. + hµx n 1 + α n +1 and conclude that the above rght hand sde s σ{ξ n 1,..., ξ n } measurable 2.7 holds true. The frst Man Result. Theorem 2.1. The values V and V n defned by 2.3 and 2.8, respectvely satsfy V n V = On 1/4. Moreover, f we consder the random varables ξ n 0,..., ξ n n defned by and denote τn T [0,T ] by τn = T θ n η, n whch n η n s from 2.9 and θ n s from 2.10, then V E[fτn, X τ n ] = On 1/4. 7

8 2.3. Trnomal Tree Approxmaton. In ths secton we relax the Lpschtz contnuty requrement and assume the followng. Assumpton 2.2. The functons µ, σ, 1 σ : B, C R are bounded and measurable. As our assumpton ndcates the results n ths secton apply for dffusons wth dscontnuous coeffcents. See Secton 5.5 for a prcng problem for a regme swtchng volatlty example. See also [4] for other applcatons of such models. Remar 2.1. From the general theory of one dmensonal, tme homogeneous SDE see Secton 5.5 n [19] t follows that f σ, µ : R are measurable functons such that σz 0 for all z R and the functon µz + σz + σ 1 z s unformly bonded, then the SDE 2.1 has a unque wea soluton. Snce the dstrbuton of X s determned only by the values of µ, σ n the nterval B, C we obtan by lettng σ, µ 1 outsde of the nterval B, C that Assumpton 2.2 above s suffcent for an exstence and unqueness n law, of the absorbed dffuson X. Clearly, Assumpton 2.1 s stronger than Assumpton 2.2. A relevant reference here s [4] whch not only consders the exstence of wea solutons to SDEs but also of ther Mallavn dfferentablty. In ths secton we assume that x, B, C Q {, } recall that the barrers B and C can tae the values and, respectvely, and so for suffcently large n, we can choose a constant σ = σn > sup y B,C σy + h sup y B,C µy whch satsfes C x σ, x B h σ N { }. h Trnomal Approxmaton of the State Process. The man dea n ths secton s to fnd stoppng tmes 0 = ϑ n 0 < ϑ n 1 <... < ϑ n n, such that for any = 0, 1,..., n X n ϑ +1 X ϑ n { σ h, 0, σ h} and Eϑ n +1 ϑn F = h + Oh 3/2. ϑ n In ths case the random varables {X n ϑ } n =0 le on the grd x + σ h{ b n, 1 b n,..., 0, 1,..., c n } where b n = n x B σ and c h n = n C x σ. Moreover, we wll see that h max 0 n ϑn h = O h. Sorohod Embeddng. Next, we descrbe the constructon. For any ntal poston B + σ h X 0 C σ h and A [0, σ h] consder the stoppng tmes κ X0 A = 2 =1 Observe that X κ X 0 A h. ρ X0 A = nf{t : X t X 0 = A} and I Xρ X 0 =X 0+ 1 A nf{t ρ X0 A : X t = X 0 or X t = X σ h}. A X 0 { σ h, 0, σ h}. Let us prove the followng lemma. Lemma 2.2. There exsts a unque  = ÂX 0, n 0, σ h] such that Eκ X0  = Proof. Clearly, for any A 1 < A 2 κ X0 A 1 κ X0 A 2 we conclude that the functon ga := Eκ X0 A 8 a.s. Snce κ X0 A 1 κ X0 A 2 for A 1 A 2 s strctly ncreasng whch satsfes

9 g0 = 0. Thus n order to complete the proof t remans to show that g σ h h. Observe that g σ h = Eρ X0 σ. Assume by contradcton that EρX0 h σ < h. From h the Itô sometry and the Jensen Inequalty we obtan σ X ρ 0 σ h X ρ 0 σ h h =E X X ρ 0 X 0 E σx t dw t + E µx t dt σ h 0 0 sup σy Eρ X0 σ + sup µy Eρ X0 h σ < σ h. h y R y R Ths clearly a contradcton, and the result follows. Next, we recall the theory of ext tmes of Marov dffusons see Secton 5.5 n [19]. Set, y z µw 2.15 py = exp 2 X 0 X 0 σ 2 w dw dz, py z pa pb py z G a,b y, z =, a y, z b, pb pa Then for any A [0, σ h] 2.16 and M a,b y = b a 2G a,b y, z p zσ 2 z dz, y [a, b]. Eκ X0 A = EρX0 A + PX ρ X 0 = X 0 + AM A X0,X 0+ σ h X 0 + A + PX X ρ 0 = X 0 AM A X0 σ h,x 0 X 0 A = M X0 A,X 0+AX 0 + px 0 px 0 A px 0 + A px 0 A M X 0,X 0+ σ h X 0 + A + px 0 + A px 0 px 0 + A px 0 A M X 0 σ h,x 0 X 0 A q 1 X 0, A := PX κ X 0 A q 1 X 0, A := PX κ X 0 A px 0 px 0 A px 0 + A px 0 = X 0 + σh = px 0 + A px 0 A px 0 + σ, h px 0 px 0 + A px 0 px 0 px 0 A = X 0 σh = px 0 + A px 0 A px 0 px 0 σ, h q 0 X 0, A := PX κ X 0 A = X 0 = 1 q 1 X 0, A q 1 X 0, A. We am to fnd numercally  = ÂX 0, n [0, σ h] whch satsfes Eκ X0 A = h + Oh 3/2. Observe that p X 0 = 1. From the Mean value theorem and the fact that µ σ 2 s unformly bonded we obtan that for any X 0 σ h a y, z b X 0 + σ h G a,b y, z 1 + O hy z a 1 + O hb y z p = z 1 + O h 2 b a =1 + O h y z ab y z. b a 9

10 Hence, for any X 0 σ h a y b X 0 + σ h b M a,b y = 2 a Ths together wth 2.16 yelds 2.17 Eκ X0 A = X0+A + + X 0 A X0+ σ h X 0 X0 X 0 σ h y z ab y z b aσ 2 dz + Oh 3/2. z X 0 z + A X 0 X 0 + A X 0 z Aσ 2 dz z X 0 + A z X 0 X 0 + σ h X0 + A z σ dz hσ 2 z X 0 A z + σ h X 0 X 0 X 0 A z σ dz + Oh 3/2. hσ 2 z Thus, Â = ÂX 0, n can be calculated numercally by applyng the bsecton method and Remar 2.2. If n addton to Assumpton 2.2 we assume that σ s Lpschtz then 2.17 mples σ 2 X 0 Eκ X0 A A 2 σ h A + A σ h A 2 =A σ + Oh 3/2 h = σa h + Oh 3/2. Thus for the case where σ s Lpschtz we set ÂX 0, n = σ2 X 0 h. σ Now, we defne the Sorohod embeddng by the followng recurson. Set ϑ n 0 = 0 and for = 0, 1,..., n ϑ n +1 = I X ϑ n X n ϑ B,C κ ÂX ϑ n + I,n X n ϑ / B,Cϑ n + h. From the defnton of κ and Â, n t follows that 2.14 holds true. Optmal Stoppng of the Trnomal Model. Denote by S n the set of all stoppng tmes wth respect to the fltraton {σx n ϑ,..., X n 1 ϑ } n =0, wth values n the set {0, 1,..., n}. Introduce the correspondng optmal stoppng value 2.19 Ṽ n := max E[fηh, X n η S n ϑ ]. η As before, Ṽ n and the ratonal stoppng tmes can be found by applyng dynamcal programmng. Thus, defne the functons J n : {x + σ h{ b n, 1 b n,..., 0, 1,..., c n }} R, = 0, 1,..., n J n n z = ft, z. 10

11 For = 0, 1,..., n 1 J n z = max fh, z, = 1,0,1 q n z, Âz, nj +1 z + σ h f z B, C and We get that J n z = max fmh, z f z {B, C}. m n and the stoppng tmes gven by { 2.20 η n = n mn satsfes The second man result. Ṽ n = J n 0 x : J n X ϑ n Ṽ n = E[f η nh, X n ϑ ]. η n } = fh, X n ϑ Theorem 2.2. The values V and Ṽn defned by 2.3 and 2.19 satsfy V Ṽn = On 1/4. Moreover, f we denote τ n = T ϑ n η n, where ϑn s defned by 2.18 and η n by 2.20, then V E[fτ n, X τ n ] = On 1/4. Remar 2.3. Theorems 2.1 and 2.2 can be extended wth the same error estmates to the setup of Dynn games whch are correspondng to game optons see [20, 22]. The dynamcal programmng n dscrete tme can be done n a smlar way by applyng the results from [26]. Moreover, as n the Amercan optons case, the Sorohod embeddng technque allows to lft the ratonal tmes from the dscrete setup to the contnuous one. Snce the proof for Dynn games s very smlar to our setup, then for smplcty, n ths wor we focus on optmal stoppng and the prcng of Amercan optons. 3. Proof of Theorem 2.1. Proof. Fx n N. Recall the defnton of θ n, T n, ηn from Secton 2.2. Denote by T n the set of all stoppng tmes wth respect to the fltraton {F n θ } n =0, wth values n {0, 1,..., n}. Clearly, T n T n. From the strong Marov property of the dffuson X t follows that 3.1 V n = sup E[fη n h, X η n n ] = E[fηnh, X n η ]. n η T n Defne the functon φ n : T [0,T ] T n by φ n τ = n mn{ : θ n 11 τ}. The equalty

12 3.1 mples that V n sup τ T X E[fφ n τh, X n [0,T ] φ nτ ]. Hence, from 2.2 we obtan 3.2 V V n + O1 sup E X τ X n θ τ T [0,T ] + O1E φnτ + O1E max 0 n Xn sup X t max 0 t T 1 n θn h + max 1 n θn θ n 1. Next, recall the defnton of τ n and observe that 3.3 V E[fτn, X τ n ] V n O1E O1 θ n n sup T t θ n n T max 0 n Xn X n θ X t X n θ n T O1E sup 0 t T X n θ X t max 1 n θn h. Let Θ := nf{t : X t / B, C} be the absorbng tme. From the Burholder Davs Gundy nequalty and the nequalty a + b m 2 m a m + b m, a, b 0, m > 0 t follows that for any m > 1 and stoppng tmes ς 1 ς E sup X t X s m ς 1 t ς 2 2 m E sup ς 1 Θ t ς 2 Θ ς2 Θ m/2 = O1E σ 2 X t dt ς 1 Θ = O1E ς 2 ς 1 m/2 + ς 2 ς 1 m. M t M ς1 Θ m + µ m ς 2 Θ ς 1 Θ m + ς 2 ς 1 m Observe that for any stoppng tme τ T [0,T ], τ θ n φ max nτ 1 nθ n T θ n n. Moreover, 2 max 1 n θ n h + h max 1 n θ n θ n θ n Thus Theorem 2.1 follows from , the Cauchy Schwarz nequalty, the Jensen nequalty and Lemmas below Techncal estmates for the proof of Theorem 2.1. The next lemma s a techncal step n provng Lemmas whch are the man results of ths subsecton, whch are then used for the proof of Theorem 2.1. Lemma 3.1. Recall the defnton of Θ n gven after For any m > 0 E max Y n 0 Θ θ X n m = Oh m/2. n Proof. From the Jensen nequalty t follows that t s suffcent to prove the clam for m > 2. Fx m > 2 and n N. We wll apply the dscrete verson of the Gronwall nequalty. Introduce the random varables U := I Θn X n Y n θ. Snce the process α n s unformly bounded and µ s Lpschtz contnuous, then from 2.4 and 12

13 2.13 we obtan that 3.5 U =O 1 h + I Θn h =0 O 1 h + I Θn h 1 +O1 =0 I <Θn O 1 h + O1 =0 sup θ n t θ n +1 =0 µx n µx n 1 =0 1 1 L + Oh =0 θ n +1 θ n µy t dt µy n θ θ n +1 θn Y t Y n θ θ n +1 θn =0 1 U + =0 I + J where I : = I <Θn µy θ n J : = I <Θn µy n θ L : = I <Θn sup θ n t θ n +1 θ n +1 θn Eθ n +1 θn Eθ n +1 θn F n θ h, Y t Y n θ θ n +1 θn. F n θ, Next, from 2.7, 2.13 and the Itô Isometry t follows that on the event < Θ n n θ E σ 2 Y t dt F n θ n θ = E M n θ M n +1 θ 2 F n θ =h1 + 2α n +1 + h α n +1 2 α n 2 + Oh 3/2 = hσ 2 X n + Oh 3/2. On the other hand, the functon σ s bounded and Lpschtz, and so 3.7 E θ n +1 θ n σ 2 Y t dt F θ n =σ 2 X n Eθ n +O1E +O1 θ n X n +1 θn sup t θ n +1 Y θ n F n θ Y t Y n θ θ n E θ n +1 θn +1 θn F θ n. F θ n From and the fact that σ bounded away from zero we get that on the event < Θ n 3.8 E θ n +1 θn F n θ = h + Oh 3/2 + O1E + O1 X n Y θ n E sup θ n t θ n +1 θ n +1 θn 13 Y t Y n θ θ n F θ n. +1 θn F θ n

14 Clearly, 3.6 mples that σ s bounded away from zero on the event < Θ n, Eθ n +1 θn F n θ = Oh. Ths together wth 3.8 gves µ s bounded 3.9 J = Oh 3/2 + OhU + O1EL F n θ. From 3.5 and 3.9 we obtan that for any = 1,..., n max U j = O 1 h + Oh max U j 0 j 0 j + max 0 n 1 =0 =0 n 1 I + O1 =0 n 1 L + O1 =0 EL F n θ. Next, recall the followng nequalty, whch s a drect consequence of the Jensen s nequalty, 3.10 n a m n m 1 =1 n =1 a m, a 1,..., a n 0, m 1. Usng the above nequalty along wth Jensen s nequalty we arrve at E max U j m 0 j 1 = Oh m/2 + Oh E max U j m 0 j =0 n 1 + O1E max I m + On m 1 EL m. 0 n 1 From the dscrete verson of Gronwall s nequalty see [8] 3.11 E max 0 n U m = 1 + Oh n = Oh m/2 + O1E Oh m/2 + O1E =0 =0 =0 =0 n 1 max I m + On m 1 EL m 0 n 1 n 1 max I m + On m 1 EL m. 0 n 1 Next, we estmate E max 0 n 1 =0 I m and EL m F, = 0, 1,..., n θ n 1. By applyng the Burholder-Davs-Gundy nequalty for the martngale {M t M θ n } θn +1 t follows that for any m > 1/2 t=θ n I <Θn E θ n +1 θ n =O1I <Θn E m σ 2 Y t dt F θ n θ n max t θ n +1 M t M θ n 14 =0 2 m F θ n =0 = Oh m I <Θn

15 where the last equalty follows from the fact that I <Θn θ n max t θ n +1 M t M n θ = O hi <Θn. Snce σ s bounded away from zero we get 3.12 I <Θn E θ n +1 θn m F n θ = Oh m I <Θn, m > 1/2. Next, observe that =0 I, = 0,..., n 1 s a martngale. From the Burholder- Davs-Gundy nequalty, 3.10, 3.12 and the fact that µ s bounded we conclude n 1 m/ E max I m O1E I 2 0 n 1 =0 =0 n 1 O1n m/2 1 E[ I m ] = O1n m/2 1 noh m = Oh m/2. Fnally, we estmate EL m F for = 0, 1,..., n 1. Clearly, on the event < Θ θ n n, sup θ n t θ n +1 Y t Y θ n sup θ n t θ n +1 Hence, from 3.12 we get 3.14 EL m F n θ I <Θn E Oh m/2 θ n = Oh 3m/2. =0 M t M n θ + µ θ n +1 θn =O h + µ θ n +1 θn. +1 θn m + O1θ n +1 θn 2m F θ n Ths together wth 3.11 and 3.13 yelds E max 0 n U m result follows. Lemma 3.2. For any m > 0 E max 1 n θn h m = Oh m/2. = Oh m/2, and the Proof. Fx m > 2 and n N. Observe recall the defnton after 2.12 that for Θ n we have θ n h = θ n Θ n Θ n h. Hence 3.15 max 1 n θn h = max θ n h. 1 Θ n Redefne the terms I, J from Lemma 3.1 as followng I := I <Θn θ n +1 θn Eθ n J := I <Θn Eθ n +1 θn θn F n θ, F n θ h.

16 Then smlarly to t follows that E max I m = Oh m/2. 0 n 1 =0 Moreover, by applyng Lemma 3.1, 3.9 and 3.14 we obtan that for any, E[ J m ] = Oh 3m/2. We conclude that E max θ n h m = O1E max I m + O1E max J m 1 Θ n 0 n 1 0 n 1 = Oh m/2. Ths together wth 3.15 completes the proof. We end ths secton wth establshng the followng estmate. Lemma 3.3. Proof. Set Γ n = sup 0 t θ n n =0 E max X X n 0 n θ n = Oh 1/4. =0 Y t + max 0 n X n, n N. From Lemma 3.2 m ] <. Thus, from the Burholder t follows that for any m > 1, sup n N E[θ n n Davs Gundy nequalty and the fact that µ, σ are bounded we obtan sup n N E[ sup Y t m ] <. 0 t θ n n Ths together wth Lemma 3.1 gves that recall that X n remans constant after Θ n 3.16 sup E[Γ m n ] < m > 1. n N We start wth estmatng E max 0 Θn X n θ X n. Fx n and ntroduce the events O = { max 0 <Θ n O 1 = { max 0 <Θ n sup θ n t θn +1 sup θ n t θn +1 O 2 = { max X n 1 Θ n Y t X n n 1/3 }, Y t Y n θ n 1/3 /2}, Y n θ n 1/3 /2}. From Lemma 3.1 for m = 6 and the Marov nequalty we get PO 2 = Oh. Observe that on the event < Θ n, sup n θ M t M t θn n +1 θ = O h. Hence, from the fact that µ s unformly bounded we obtan that for suffcently large n n 1 PO 1 P I <Θn θ n =0 +1 θn 16 > h 1/2 Onh 4 /h 2 = Oh

17 where the last nequalty follows form the Marov neqaulty and 3.12 for m = 4. Clearly, 3.17 PO PO 1 + PO 2 = Oh. From the smple nequaltes B n B, C C n n 1/3 t follows that { Θ n : X n θ Y n θ } O. Thus from Lemma 3.1, and the Cauchy Schwarz nequalty t follows E max X n 0 Θ θ X n E max Y n n 0 Θ θ X n + E[2Γ n I O ] n O h + O1 PO = O h. It remans to estmate E max Θn< n X n θ X n. Let Q P be the probablty measure gven by Z t := dq t dp F µy u t t = exp 0 σy u dw µ 2 Y u u 0 2σ 2 Y u du, t 0. From Grsanov s theorem t follows that under the measure Q, Y s a martngale. Assume that the martngale Y starts at some Y 0 B, C and we want to estmate Qmax 0 t T X t Y 0 > ɛ for ɛ > 0. Defne a stoppng tme ς = T nf{t : Y t = Y 0 + ɛ} nf{t : Y t = B}. Then from the Optonal stoppng theorem Y 0 = E Q [Y ς ] B1 QY ς = Y 0 + ɛ + Y 0 + ɛqy ς = Y 0 + ɛ. Hence, B s an absorbng barrer for X 3.18 Q max X t Y 0 > ɛ QY ς = Y 0 + ɛ Y 0 B 0 t T Y 0 + ɛ B. Smlarly, 3.19 Q max 0 t T Y 0 X t > ɛ C Y 0 C + ɛ Y 0. Next, recall the event O from the begnnng of the proof. Consder the event Õ = {Θ n < n} \ O and choose ɛ > 3n 1/3. Observe that θ n n θ n Θ n = n Θ n h T. Moreover on the event Õ, mnc X, X θ n n Θn θ B 3n 1/3 for suffcently large Θn n. Thus, from Q Õ X n θ X t ɛ F 3n 1/3 θ n Θn Θn 3n 1/3 + ɛ a.s. We conclude that 3.21 E Q I 0 sup θ n Θn <t θn n 1 sup θ n Θn <t θn n X θ n Θn X t F θ n Θn 1 3n 1/3 3n 1/3 + 3n 3n 1/3 1/3 + ɛ dɛ = On 1/3 ln n a.s., 17

18 where E Q denotes the expectaton wth respect to Q. Next, denote Z n = Z θ n n Z θ n Θn. Observe that for a random varable X, EX F n θ = E Q Z m X F n Θn θ. Θn From the relatons θ n n θ n Θ n = n Θ n h T t follows that for any m R, E Q [Zn m ] s unformly bounded n n. Ths together wth the condtonal Holder nequalty, , and gves E sup X n θ X n E[2Γ n I O ] + E Θ n< n + E E Q and the result follows. Z n IÕ + E IÕ X n Θ n E Q 2Z n Γ n IÕI supθ n 1 sup θ n Θn <t θn n Θn <t θn n X θ n Θn X n θ O h + E Θn X θ n Θn X t F θ n Θn X t >1 F θ n Θn 3n 1/3 4/5 O1 3n 1/ /5 + E O1 On 1/3 ln n + On 1/3 = Oh 1/4 4. Proof of Theorem 2.2. The proof of Theorem 2.2 s less techncal than the proof of Theorem 2.1. We start wth the followng Lemma. Lemma 4.1. Recall the stoppng tme ρ X0 A from Secton 2.3. For X 0 B, C and 0 < ɛ < mnx 0 B, C X 0 we have E ρ X0 ɛ m = Oɛ 2m m > 0. Proof. Choose m > 1, X 0 B, C and 0 < ɛ < mnx 0 B, C X 0. Defne the stochastc process M t = py t, t 0 where recall p s gven n It s easy to see that p s strctly ncreasng functon and {M t } t 0 s a local martngale whch satsfes M t = t 0 p Y u σy u dw u. Hence ρ X0 ɛ = nf{t : M t = px 0 ± ɛ}. From the Burholder Davs Gundy nequalty t follows that there exsts a constant C > 0 such that max { 4.1 px 0 + ɛ 2m, px 0 ɛ 2m} E max M t 2m CE 0 t ρ X 0 ɛ ρ X 0 ɛ 0 p Y u σy u 2 du m 2m C nf y [X p yσy E ρ X0 ɛ m. 0 ɛ,x 0+ɛ] Snce µ σ s unformly bounded, then for y [X 2 0 ɛ, X 0 + ɛ] we have py = Oɛ and p y = 1 Oɛ. Ths together wth 4.1 competes the proof. Now we are ready to prove Theorem

19 Proof of Theorem 2.2. The proof follows the steps of the proof of Theorem 2.1, however the current case s much less techncal. The reason s that we do not tae a perturbaton of the process X t, t 0 and so we have an exact scheme at the random tmes {ϑ n }n =0. Thus, we can wrte smlar nequaltes to , only now the analogous term to max 0 n X n X n θ s vanshng. Hence, we can sp Lemmas 3.1 and 3.3. Namely, n order to complete the proof of Theorem 2.2 t remans to show the followng analog of Lemma 3.2: 4.2 E max 1 n ϑn h m = Oh m/2, m > 0. Wthout loff of generalty, we assume that m > 1. Set, H = ϑ n ϑ n 1 E ϑ n ϑ n 1 F, = 1,..., n. ϑ n 1 Clearly the stochastc process { =1 H } n =1 s a martngale, and from 2.14 we get that for all, ϑ n h = =1 H + O h. Moreover, on the event X n ϑ B, C 1 ϑ n ϑ n X 1 ρ n ϑ 1 σ and so from Lemma 4.1, E[H m h ] = Ohm. Ths together wth the Burholder Davs Gundy nequalty and 3.10 yelds E max 1 n ϑn h m Oh m/2 + O1E max H m 1 n =1 n m/2 Oh m/2 + O1E and the result follows. Oh m/2 + O1n m/ Some remars on the proofs. =1 H 2 n =1 E[ H m ] = Oh m/2 Remar 4.1. Theorem 2.2 can be easly extended to Amercan barrer optons whch we study numercally n Sectons Namely, let B < x < C and let Y be the unque n law soluton of 2.1. Let τ B,C = T nf{t : Y t / B, C}. Consder the optmal stoppng value V = sup E[I τ τb,c fτ, X τ ] τ T [0,T ] whch corresponds to the prce of Amercan barrer optons. Let us notce that f we change n the above formula, the ndcator I τ τb,c to I τ<τb,c the value remans the same. As before, we choose n suffcently large and a constant σ = σn > sup y B,C σy + h sup y B,C µy whch satsfes C x σ, x B h σ N { }. Defne h where η n B,C nterval [0, ϑ n n = 0, 1,..., n. current case as well. = n mn{ : Y ϑ n Ṽ n = max E[I n η S n η η fηh, X n B,C ϑ ] η {B, C}}. In ths case, we observe that on the ] the process Y can reach the barrers B, C only at the moments ϑ n Hence, by smlar arguments, Theorem 2.2, can be extended to the 19

20 Remar 4.2. Let us notce that n both of the proofs we get that the random maturty dates θ n n, ϑ n n are close to the real maturty date T, and the error estmates are of order On 1/2. Hence, even for the smplest case where the dffuson process Y s the standard Brownan moton we get that the random varables Y T Y n θ, Y T Y n n ϑ n are of order On 1/4. Ths s the reason that we can not expect better error estmates f the proof s done va Sorohod embeddng. In [24] the authors got error estmates of order On 1/2 for optmal stoppng approxmatons va Sorohod embeddng, however they assumed very strong assumptons on the payoff, whch excludes even call and put type of payoffs. Our numercal results n the next secton suggest that the order of convergence we predcted s better than we prove here. In fact, the constant multplyng the power of n s small, whch we thn s due to the fact that we have a very effcent way of calculatng condtonal expectatons. We wll leave the nvestgaton of ths phenomena for future research. 5. Numercal examples. In the frst subsecton we consder two toy models, whch are varatons of geometrc Brownan moton, the frst one wth capped coeffcents and the other one wth absorbng boundares. In Subsectons 5.2, we consder the CEV model and n 5.3, we consder the CIR model. In Subsecton 5.4 we consder the European capped barrer of [11] and ts Amercan counterpart. We close the paper by consderng another modfcaton of geometrc Brownan moton wth dscontnuous coeffcents, see Subsecton 5.5. In these sectons we report the values of the opton prces, optmal exercse boundares, the tme/accuracy performance of the schemes and numercal convergence rates. All computatons are mplemented n Matlab R2014a on IntelR CoreTM U GHz, 8.00 GB nstalled RAM PC Approxmaton of one dmensonal dffuson wth bounded µ and σ by usng both two schemes. We consder the followng model: 5.1 ds t = [A 1 S t B 1 ]dt + [A 2 S t B 2 ]dw t, S 0 = x, where A 1, B 1, A 2, B 2 are constants, and the Amercan put opton wth stre prce $K and expry date T : 5.2 vx = sup τ T [0,T ] E [ e rτ K S τ +]. Fgure 5.1 shows the value functon v and the optmal exercse boundary curve whch we obtaned usng both schemes. Table 5.1 reports the schemes tae and Fgure 5.2 shows the rate of convergence of both models. 20

21 Fg The left fgure shows that value functon of Amercan put 5.2 under model 5.1 wth parameters: n = 8000, r = 0.1, K = 4, A 1 = 10, A 2 = 10, B 1 = 2, B 2 = 2, T = 0.5. The rght fgure s the optmal exercse boundary curve. Here τ s the tme to maturty. Table 5.1 Put opton prces5.2 under model 5.1: scheme 1 scheme 2 scheme 1 scheme 2 n= n= error% error% CPU 0.540s 0.374s CPU 2.097s 1.467s scheme 1 scheme 2 scheme 1 scheme 2 n= n= error% error% CPU 4.749s 3.249s CPU 8.726s 5.747s scheme 1 scheme 2 scheme 1 scheme 2 n= n= error% error% CPU s 9.145s CPU s s Parameters used n computaton are: r = 0.1, K = 4, A 1 = 10, A 2 = 10, B 1 = 2, B 2 = 2, T = 0.5, x = 4. Error s computed by tang absolute dfference between v n x and v x and then dvdng by v x. Fg Convergence rate fgure of both two schemes n the mplement of Amercan put 5.2 under 5.1. We draw log v v n vs log n for both schemes to show the convergence speed. Here we pc vx = v x for x = 4 and n {40, 400, 4000}. The slope of the left lne gven by lnear regresson s , and the rght s Parameters used n computaton are: r = 0.1, K = 4, A 1 = 10, A 2 = 10, B 1 = 2, B 2 = 2, T = 0.5, x = 4. 21

22 For comparson we wll also consder a geometrc Brownan moton wth absorbng barrers. Let 5.3 dy t = Y t dt + Y t dw t, Y 0 = x, and B, C [, wth B < x < C and denote 5.4 X t = I t<nf{s:ys / B,C}Y t + I t nf{s:ys / B,C}Y nf{s:ys / B,C}, X 0 = x. As n the prevous example, we show below the value functon, tmes the schemes tae and the numercal convergence rate. Fg The left fgure shows the value functon of Amercan put 5.2 under model 5.4 wth parameters: n = 30000, r = 0.1, K = 4, C = 10, B = 2, T = 0.5. The rght fgure s the optmal exercse boundary curve. Fg Convergence rate fgure of both two schemes n the mplement of Amercan put 5.2 under 5.4. We draw log v v n vs log n for both schemes to show the convergence speed. Here we pc, vx = v x for x = 4 and n {40, 400, 4000}. The slope of the left lne gven by lnear regresson s , the rght one s

23 Table 5.2 put opton prces5.2 under 5.4 scheme 1 scheme 2 scheme 1 scheme 2 n= n= error% error CPU 0.240s 0.029s CPU 0.667s 0.091s scheme 1 scheme 2 scheme 1 scheme 2 n= n= error% error CPU 1.220s 0.157s CPU 1.927s 0.254s scheme 1 scheme 2 scheme 1 scheme 2 n= n= error% error CPU 2.720s 0.359s CPU 3.723s 0.457s Note: Parameters used n computaton: r = 0.1, K = 4, C = 10, B = 2, T = 0.5, x = 4. Error s computed by tang absolute dfference between v n x and v x and then dvdng by v x Prcng Amercan put opton under CEV. Set β 0 and consder the CEV model: 5.5 ds t = rs t + δs β+1 t dw t, S 0 = x, and let δ = σ 0 x β to be consstent wth the notaton of [11]. Consder the Amercan put opton prcng problem: 5.6 v A x = sup τ T [0,T ] E [ e rτ K S τ +]. Clearly, the CEV model gven by 5.5 does not satsfes our assumptons. However, ths lmtaton can be solved by truncatng the model. The next result shows that f we choose absorbng barrers B, C > 0 such that B s small enough and C s large enough, then the optmal stoppng problem does not change much. Hence, we can apply our numercal scheme for the absorbed dffuson and stll get error estmates of order On 1/4. Lemma 5.1. Choose 0 < B < C. Consder the CEV model gven by 5.5 and let X be the absorbed process X t = I t<nf{s:ss / B,C}S t + I t nf{s:ss / B,C}S nf{s:ss / B,C}, t 0. Then 5.7 sup E[e rτ K S τ + ] sup E[e rτ K X τ + ] = I τ τ B B + OC, 1, τ T [0,T ] τ T [0,T ] where τ s the optmal tme for frst the expresson on the left and τ B s the frst tme S t s below the level B. 1 1 It mght seem to be a moot pont to have I τ τ B snce ths nvolves determnng the optmal stoppng boundary. But one can actually easly determne B s satsfyng ths condton through 23

24 Proof. Let us brefly argue that E max 0 t T St < for all. Clearly, f β = 0 then S s a geometrc Brownan moton and so the statement s clear. For β < 0 we observe that the process Y = S β belongs to CIR famly of dffusons see equaton 1 n [14]. Such process can be represented n terms of BESQ squared Bessel processes; see equaton 4 n [14]. Fnally, the moments of the runnng maxmum of the absolute value Bessel process can be estmated by Theorem 4.1 n [15]. Hence from the Marov nequalty t follows that Pmax 0 t T S t M = OM. Next, consder the stoppng tme τ B = nf{t : S t = B} T. If τ B < T then the payoff of the put opton s K B, and snce S s non negatve ts B optmal to stop at ths tme. It s clear also that one would mae no error f B s always n the stoppng regon. Table 5.3 Prcng Amercan puts 5.6 under the CEV 5.5 model wth dfferent β s by usng the frst scheme K β = 1 β = Parameters used n computaton are: σ 0 = 0.2, x = 100, T = 0.5, r = 0.05, n = 15000, B = 0.01, C = 200. The values n the parentheses are the results from last row of Tables 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 from paper [29], whch carres out the artfcal boundary method dscussed n the ntroducton. Ths s a fnte dfference method whch reles on artfcally ntroducng an exact boundary condton. Table 5.4 Prces of the Amercan puts 5.6 under 5.5 wth dfferent β s by usng the second scheme K β = 1 β = Parameters used n computaton are: σ 0 = 0.2, x = 100, T = 0.5, r = 0.05, n = 15000, B = 0.01, C = 200. The values n the parentheses are the results from last row of Tables 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 from paper [29], whch carres out the artfcal boundary method dscussed n the ntroducton. Ths s a fnte dfference method whch reles on artfcally ntroducng an exact boundary condton. through settng B b, the perpetual verson of the problem whose stoppng boundary, whch can be determned by fndng the unque root of 5.8 F x = φ x K x φx + 1, n whch the functon φ s gven by [11, Equaton 38] wth λ = r, see e.g. [6]. The perpetual Blac-Scholes boundary, 5.9 b = 2rK/2r + δ 2 s n fact s a lower bound to b for β < 0, whch can be proved usng the comparson arguments n [5]. 24

25 Fg The left fgure shows that value functon of Amercan put 5.6 under CEV 5.5 wth parameters: n = 2000, β = 1 3, δ = σ 0100 β, σ 0 = 0.2, T = 0.5, r = 0.05, B = 0.01, C = 200, K = 90. The rght fgure s the optmal exercse boundary curve whch τ = T t denotes tme to maturty. Wth these parameters F 60 = , F 70 = where F s defned n 5.8, from whch we conclude that the unque root s n 60,70. So there n fact s no error n ntroducng a lower barrer. In ths case b = where b s defned n 5.9. Snce we observed that second scheme exhbts faster convergence, we report the CPU tme and errors for second scheme. Table 5.5 Prces of the Amercan puts under 5.5 wth dfferent beta s second scheme β = 1 β = 1 3 K= CPU 0.335s 0.259s error% K= CPU 0.314s 0.256s error% K= CPU 0.338s 0.253s error% Parameters used n computaton are: σ 0 = 0.2, x = 100, T = 0.5, r = 0.05, B = 0.01, C = 200. The Error s computed by tang absolute dfference between v n x and v x and then dvdng by v x. 25

26 Table 5.6 Prcng Amercan puts 5.6 under 5.5 wth dfferent σ 0 second scheme σ 0 = 0.2 σ 0 = 0.3 σ 0 = 0.4 K= CPU 0.247s 0.171s 0.136s error% K= CPU 0.237s 0.172s 0.154s error% K= CPU 0.203s 0.170s 0.146s error% Parameters used n computaton are: T = 3, r = 0.05, x = 40, β = 1, n = 100, B = 0.01, C = 100. Error s computed by tang absolute dfference between v n x and v x and then dvdng by v x. The values n the parentheses are the results computed by FDM: reported n Table 1 of [30]. In Table 5.6 we compare our numercal results wth the ones reported n Table 1 of [30], the numercal values here are closer to results computed by FDM: , whch s the tradtonal Cran-Ncolson fnte dfference scheme the refer to the sze of the lattce. The CPU tme of FDM: s s. Table 1 of [30] also reports the performance of the Laplace-Carson transform and the artfcal boundary method of [29] both of whch we brefly descrbed n the ntroducton. The CPU for Laplace-Carson method s 0.609s, ABC: s s. If we consder FDM: as a Benchmar, our method s more than 30 tmes faster wth accuracy up to 4 decmal ponts. Comparng wth ABC: method, our method s about 5 tmes faster wth the same accuracy. Our method s about 3 tmes faster than what the Laplace transform method produced when t had accuracy up to 3 decmal ponts. Here accuracy represents the absolute dfference between the computed numercal values and the FDM: dvded by the FDM: Prcng Amercan put opton under CIR. In ths subsecton, we use numercal scheme to evaluate Amercan put optons v A x recall formula 5.6 under CIR model. Ths model s used for prcng VIX optons, see e.g. [23]. Let the volatlty follow 5.10 dy t = β αy t dt + σ Y t dw t, Y 0 = y, Consder the absorbed process X t = I t<nf{s:ys / B,C}Y t + I t nf{s:ys / B,C}Y nf{s:ys / B,C}, t 0, for 0 < B < C. Same arguments as n Secton 5.2 gve that for CIR process Pmax 0 t T Y t C = OC, 1. Moreover, from Theorem 2 n [14] t follows that Pmn 0 t T Y t B = OB 2ν for ν = 2β σ 1 > 0. Thus f we consder the 2 absorbed dffuson X then the change of the value of the opton prce s bounded by OC + OB 2ν for all. In fact, potentally we do not mae any error by havng an absorbng boundary f B s small enough, as we argued n the prevous secton. 26

27 Table 5.7 Prces of Amercan puts 5.6 under 5.10 wth dfferent K scheme 1 scheme 2 K = K = K = Parameters used n computaton are: σ = 2, y = 40, T = 0.5, r = 0.1, B = 0.01, C = 200, β = 2, α = 0.5, n = As the prevous example, snce the second scheme loos more effcent, we only report ts tme wth the accuracy performance here. Table 5.8 Amercan put prces under 5.10 for a varety of K s usng the second scheme K = 35 K = 40 K = 45 n = CPU 0.245s 0.202s 0.198s error% n = CPU 0.600s 0.585s 0.579s error% n = CPU 0.807s 0.813s 0.839s error% Parameters used n computaton are: σ = 2, y = 40, T = 0.5, r = 0.1, B = 0.01, C = 200, β = 2, α = 0.5. Error s computed by tang absolute dfference between v n x and v x and then dvdng by v x Prcng double capped barrer optons under CEV by usng second scheme. In ths subsecton, we use second scheme to evaluate double capped barrer call optons under the CEV model gven by 5.5. Let us denote the European opton value by 5.11 v E x = e rt E [ I T <τ S T K +], and the Amercan opton value by 5.12 v A x = sup τ T [0,T ] E [ I τ<τ e rτ S τ K +], where τ = nf{t 0; S t L, U}. We use the parameters values gven n [11] and report our results n Table 5.9 and Fgure

28 Table 5.9 Double capped European Barrer Optons 5.11 under CEV5.5 second scheme U L K β = 0.5 β = 0 β = 2 β = CPU 0.970s 1.026s 6.203s 1.209s error 0.96% 1.2% 0.4% 2.7% CPU 0.957s 1.102s 6.066s 1.205s error 0.98% 1.2% 0.44% 2.3% CPU 0.961s 1.023s 6.205s 1.187s error 1.00% 1.3% 0.53% 2.2% n Table 5.10 Double capped Amercan Barrer Optons 5.12 under CEV5.5 second scheme U L K β = 0.5 β = 0 β = 2 β = CPU 0.965s 1.007s 1.248s 1.170s error 0.55% 0.63% 0.56% 0.81% CPU 0.942s 1.017s 1.239s 1.211s error 0.70% 0.8% 0.47% 0.57% CPU 0.968s 1.044s 1.145s 1.188s error 1.00% 1.2% 0.35% 0.17% n Parameters used n calculatons are: x = 100, σ100 = 0.25 denotng σs = δs 1+β, r = 0.1, T = 0.5. Error s computed by tang the absolute dfference between v n and v and then dvdng by v Fg The left fgure shows the value functon v A x5.12 and v E x5.11 wth Parameters: δ = 2.5, r = 0.1, T = 0.5, β = 0.5, n = 5000, L = 90, U = 120, K = 100,. In the rght fgure, we show the log v v n vs log n pcng vx = v x, x = 100, and n {400, 1000, 3000, 8000, 20000}. The slope of the blue lne gven by lnear regresson s Prcng double capped Amercan barrer optons wth jump volatlty by usng second scheme. In ths subsecton, we show the numercal results for 28

29 prcng double capped Amercan barrer opton when the volatlty has a jump. Consder the followng modfcaton of a geometrc Brownan moton: 5.13 ds t = rs t dt + σs t S t dw t, S 0 = x where σs t = σ 1, for S t [0, S 1 ], σs t = σ 2, for S t [S 1,. We wll compute the Amercan opton prce 5.14 vx = sup τ T [0,T ] E [ e rτ I τ<τ S τ K +], where τ = nf{t 0; S t L, U}. We use scheme 2 here, snce t can handle dscontnuous coeffcents; see Fgures 5.7 and 5.8. We compare t to the geometrc Brownan moton gbm problem wth dfferent volatlty parameters. In partcular, we observe that although the jump model s prce and the gbm model wth average volatlty are close n prce, the optmal exercse boundares dffer sgnfcantly. Fg There are four curves n the left fgure. They are value functons 5.14 under model 5.13 wth dfferent values of σs t as specfed n the legend. The parameters used n computatons are: n = 4000, r = 0.1, S 1 = K = 8, L = 2, U = 10, σ 1 = 0.7, σ 2 = 0.3, T = 0.5. Here σ 2 < σ 1+σ 2 < σ 2 1, and as expected the gbm opton prce decreases as σ decreases but the gbm prce wth jump volatlty and one correspondng to gbm wth σ = σ 2 ntersect n the nterval [7, 8]. The rght fgure s of the optmal exercse boundary curves. Fg Convergence rate fgure of scheme 2 n the mplement of double capped Amercan put 5.14 under We pc vx = v x to be the actual prce, and the other three values are v 70 x, v 700 x, v 7000 x, x = 8. The slope of the blue lne gven by lnear regresson approach s Parameters used n computaton: n = 4000, r = 0.1, K = 8, L = 2, U = 10, σ 1 = 0.7, σ 2 = 0.3, S1 = 8, T =