Dynamic Portfolio Choice II

Similar documents
M.I.T Fall Practice Problems

Illiquidity, Credit risk and Merton s model

THE OPTIMAL ASSET ALLOCATION PROBLEMFOR AN INVESTOR THROUGH UTILITY MAXIMIZATION

INTERTEMPORAL ASSET ALLOCATION: THEORY

From Discrete Time to Continuous Time Modeling

FINANCIAL OPTION ANALYSIS HANDOUTS

Asset-Liability Management

Lifetime Portfolio Selection: A Simple Derivation

Lecture Notes 1

Martingale Pricing Applied to Dynamic Portfolio Optimization and Real Options

2.1 Mean-variance Analysis: Single-period Model

EE266 Homework 5 Solutions

Some useful optimization problems in portfolio theory

Mathematics of Finance Final Preparation December 19. To be thoroughly prepared for the final exam, you should

Pricing Dynamic Solvency Insurance and Investment Fund Protection

Contagion models with interacting default intensity processes

Dynamic Model of Pension Savings Management with Stochastic Interest Rates and Stock Returns

Risk Neutral Valuation

Martingale Pricing Theory in Discrete-Time and Discrete-Space Models

1 Dynamic programming

Hedging with Life and General Insurance Products

Introduction to Dynamic Programming

Financial Giffen Goods: Examples and Counterexamples

AMH4 - ADVANCED OPTION PRICING. Contents

MATH3075/3975 FINANCIAL MATHEMATICS TUTORIAL PROBLEMS

All Investors are Risk-averse Expected Utility Maximizers. Carole Bernard (UW), Jit Seng Chen (GGY) and Steven Vanduffel (Vrije Universiteit Brussel)

Economics 2010c: Lecture 4 Precautionary Savings and Liquidity Constraints

Optimal Investment for Worst-Case Crash Scenarios

Continuous-Time Consumption and Portfolio Choice

Optimal Allocation and Consumption with Guaranteed Minimum Death Benefits with Labor Income and Term Life Insurance

Hedging Derivative Securities with VIX Derivatives: A Discrete-Time -Arbitrage Approach

Utility Indifference Pricing and Dynamic Programming Algorithm

Effectiveness of CPPI Strategies under Discrete Time Trading

SYSM 6304: Risk and Decision Analysis Lecture 6: Pricing and Hedging Financial Derivatives

EE365: Risk Averse Control

EMF. Strategic Asset Allocation. Prof. Massimo Guidolin EXECUTIVE MASTER IN FINANCE ACADEMIC DIRECTOR ANDREA BELTRATTI MILANO I ITALY

Optimal Investment for Generalized Utility Functions

Lecture Note 8 of Bus 41202, Spring 2017: Stochastic Diffusion Equation & Option Pricing

Handout 8: Introduction to Stochastic Dynamic Programming. 2 Examples of Stochastic Dynamic Programming Problems

Investment Guarantees Chapter 7. Investment Guarantees Chapter 7: Option Pricing Theory. Key Exam Topics in This Lesson.

Online Appendix: Extensions

Binomial model: numerical algorithm

FINANCIAL OPTIMIZATION. Lecture 5: Dynamic Programming and a Visit to the Soft Side

Financial Risk Management

δ j 1 (S j S j 1 ) (2.3) j=1

NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MATHEMATICS, STATISTICS & PHYSICS SEMESTER 1 SPECIMEN 2 MAS3904. Stochastic Financial Modelling. Time allowed: 2 hours

Optimal Stopping Rules of Discrete-Time Callable Financial Commodities with Two Stopping Boundaries

Advanced Financial Economics Homework 2 Due on April 14th before class

1 Asset Pricing: Bonds vs Stocks

6.231 DYNAMIC PROGRAMMING LECTURE 10 LECTURE OUTLINE

Lecture 17: More on Markov Decision Processes. Reinforcement learning

Lecture 3: Review of mathematical finance and derivative pricing models

Option Pricing with Delayed Information

Introduction to Real Options

EE641 Digital Image Processing II: Purdue University VISE - October 29,

Resolution of a Financial Puzzle

Binomial Option Pricing

Control Improvement for Jump-Diffusion Processes with Applications to Finance

The Black-Scholes Model

SOLVING ROBUST SUPPLY CHAIN PROBLEMS

Variable Annuities with Lifelong Guaranteed Withdrawal Benefits

induced by the Solvency II project

Optimization Models in Financial Mathematics

Lecture 1: Lucas Model and Asset Pricing

Exponential utility maximization under partial information

Brownian Motion. Richard Lockhart. Simon Fraser University. STAT 870 Summer 2011

The Black-Scholes PDE from Scratch

Log-Robust Portfolio Management

A NOVEL BINOMIAL TREE APPROACH TO CALCULATE COLLATERAL AMOUNT FOR AN OPTION WITH CREDIT RISK

All Investors are Risk-averse Expected Utility Maximizers

Mathematics in Finance

King s College London

Asset Pricing Models with Underlying Time-varying Lévy Processes

Lecture 2: Stochastic Discount Factor

Lec 1: Single Agent Dynamic Models: Nested Fixed Point Approach. K. Sudhir MGT 756: Empirical Methods in Marketing

1 Precautionary Savings: Prudence and Borrowing Constraints

Optimal Investment with Deferred Capital Gains Taxes

Optimal Dam Management

Lecture 8: The Black-Scholes theory

The Use of Importance Sampling to Speed Up Stochastic Volatility Simulations

Are stylized facts irrelevant in option-pricing?

MYOPIC INVENTORY POLICIES USING INDIVIDUAL CUSTOMER ARRIVAL INFORMATION

Option Pricing. Chapter Discrete Time

Definition Pricing Risk management Second generation barrier options. Barrier Options. Arfima Financial Solutions

Chapter 5 Macroeconomics and Finance

GRANULARITY ADJUSTMENT FOR DYNAMIC MULTIPLE FACTOR MODELS : SYSTEMATIC VS UNSYSTEMATIC RISKS

Risk Neutral Pricing Black-Scholes Formula Lecture 19. Dr. Vasily Strela (Morgan Stanley and MIT)

Lecture 7: Bayesian approach to MAB - Gittins index

Credit Risk : Firm Value Model

Evaluation of proportional portfolio insurance strategies

θ(t ) = T f(0, T ) + σ2 T

STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT ALBANY Department of Economics. Ph. D. Comprehensive Examination: Macroeconomics Spring, 2009

Sequential Decision Making

Solving dynamic portfolio choice problems by recursing on optimized portfolio weights or on the value function?

Lecture 17. The model is parametrized by the time period, δt, and three fixed constant parameters, v, σ and the riskless rate r.

Lecture 4. Finite difference and finite element methods

Chapter 15: Jump Processes and Incomplete Markets. 1 Jumps as One Explanation of Incomplete Markets

25857 Interest Rate Modelling

( ) since this is the benefit of buying the asset at the strike price rather

Introduction to Probability Theory and Stochastic Processes for Finance Lecture Notes

Transcription:

Dynamic Portfolio Choice II Dynamic Programming Leonid Kogan MIT, Sloan 15.450, Fall 2010 c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 1 / 35

Outline 1 Introduction to Dynamic Programming 2 Dynamic Programming 3 Applications c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 2 / 35

Overview When all state-contingent claims are redundant, i.e., can be replicated by trading in available assets (e.g., stocks and bonds), dynamic portfolio choice reduces to a static problem. There are many practical problems in which derivatives are not redundant, e.g., problems with constraints, transaction costs, unspanned risks (stochastic volatility). Such problems can be tackled using Dynamic Programming (DP). DP applies much more generally than the static approach, but it has practical limitations: when the closed-form solution is not available, one must use numerical methods which suffer from the curse of dimensionality. c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 4 / 35

IID Returns Formulation Consider the discrete-time market model. There is a risk-free bond, paying gross interest rate R f = 1 + r. There is a risky asset, stock, paying no dividends, with gross return R t, IID over time. The objective is to maximize the terminal expected utility max E 0 [U(W T )] where portfolio value W t results from a self-financing trading strategy W t = W t 1 [φ t 1 R t + (1 φ t 1 )R f ] φ t denotes the share of the stock in the portfolio. c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 5 / 35

Principle of Optimality Suppose we have solved the problem, and found the optimal policy φ t. Consider a tail subproblem of maximizing E s [U(W T )] starting at some point in time s with wealth W s. time s, Wealth W s, policy (s) φ s Value f-n J(s, W s ) policy (s) φ s+1 policy (s) φ s+1 U(W T ) U(W T ) U(W T ) U(W T ) c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 6 / 35

Principle of Optimality Let (s)φ s, (s) φ s +1,..., (s) φ T 1 denote the optimal policy of the subproblem. The Principle of Optimality states that the optimal policy of the tail subproblem coincides with the corresponding portion of the solution of the original problem. The reason is simple: if policy ( (s) φ ) could outperform the original policy on the tail subproblem, the original problem could be improved by replacing the corresponding portion with ( (s) φ ). c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 7 / 35

IID Returns DP Suppose that the time-t conditional expectation of terminal utility under the optimal policy depends only on the portfolio value W t at time t, and nothing else. This conjecture needs to be verified later. [ ] E t U(W T ) (t) φ t,...,t 1 = J(t, W t ) We call J(t, W t ) the indirect utility of wealth. Then we can compute the optimal portfolio policy at t 1 and the time-(t 1) expected terminal utility as J(t 1, W t 1 ) = max E t 1 [J(t, W t )] φ t 1 W t = W t 1 [φ t 1 R t + (1 φ t 1 )R f ] J(t, W t ) is called the value function of the dynamic program. (Bellman equation) c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 8 / 35

IID Returns DP DP is easy to apply. Compute the optimal policy one period at a time using backward induction. At each step, the optimal portfolio policy maximizes the conditional expectation of the next-period value function. The value function can be computed recursively. Optimal portfolio policy is dynamically consistent: the state-contingent policy optimal at time 0 remains optimal at any future date t. Principle of Optimality is a statement of dynamic consistency. c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 9 / 35

IID Returns Binomial tree Stock price { u, with probability p S t = S t 1 d, with probability 1 p Start at time T 1 and compute the value function J(T 1, W T 1 ) = max E T 1 [U(W T ) φ T 1 ] = φ T 1 pu [W T 1 (φ T 1 u + (1 φ t 1 )R f )] + max φ T 1 (1 p)u [WT 1 (φ T 1 d + (1 φ T 1 )R f )] Note that value function at T 1 depends on W T 1 only, due to the IID return distribution. c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 10 / 35

IID Returns Binomial tree Backward induction. Suppose that at t, t + 1,..., T 1 the value function has been derived, and is of the form J(s, W s ). Compute the value function at t 1 and verify that it still depends only on portfolio value: J(t 1, W t 1 ) = max E t 1 [J(t, W t ) φ t 1 ] = φ t 1 pj [t, W t 1 (φ t 1 u + (1 φ t 1 )R f )] + max φ t 1 (1 p)j [t, Wt 1 (φ t 1 d + (1 φ t 1 )R f )] Optimal portfolio policy φ t 1 depends on time and the current portfolio value: φ = φ (t 1, W t 1 ) t 1 c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 11 / 35

IID Returns, CRRA Utility Binomial tree 1 Simplify the portfolio policy under CRRA utility U(W T ) = 1 γ W 1 γ T [ ] 1 J(T 1, W T 1 ) = max E T 1 W 1 γ T φ T 1 = φ T 1 1 γ 1 p W 1 γ 1 γ 1 γ T 1 (φ T 1 u + (1 φ T 1 )R f ) + max φ T 1 1 1 γ 1 γ (1 p) 1 γ W T 1 (φ T 1 d + (1 φ T 1 )R f ) = A(T 1) W 1 γ T 1 where A(T 1) is a constant given by p (φ T 1 u + (1 φ T 1 )R f ) 1 γ + 1 A(T 1) = max φ T 1 1 γ (1 p) (φt 1 d + (1 φ T 1 )R f ) 1 γ c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 12 / 35

IID Returns, CRRA Utility Binomial tree Backward induction [ ] J(t 1, W t 1 ) = max E t 1 A(t)W 1 γ t φ t 1 = φ t 1 1 γ pa(t)w t 1 (φ t 1 u + (1 φ t 1 )R f ) 1 γ + max φ t 1 (1 p)a(t)w 1 γ (φ t 1 d + (1 φ t 1 )R f ) 1 γ t 1 = A(t 1) W 1 γ t 1 where A(t 1) is a constant given by p (φ t 1 u + (1 φ t 1 )R f ) 1 γ + A(t 1) = max A(t) φ t 1 (1 p) (φt 1 d + (1 φ t 1 )R f ) 1 γ c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 13 / 35

Black-Scholes Model, CRRA Utility Limit of binomial tree Parameterize the binomial tree so the stock price process converges to the Geometric Brownian motion with parameters µ and σ: p = 1/2, (( ) ) (( ) ) u = exp µ σ2 Δt + σ Δt, d = exp µ σ2 Δt σ Δt 2 2 Let R f = exp(r Δt). Time step is now Δt instead of 1. Take a limit of the optimal portfolio policy as Δt 0: p (φ t u + (1 φ t )R f ) 1 γ + φ t = arg max A(t + Δt) φ t 1 γ (1 p) (φ t d + (1 φ t )R f ) 1 + (1 γ)(r + φ t (µ r )) Δt arg max A(t + Δt) φ t (1/2)(1 γ)γφ 2 t σ 2 Δt Optimal portfolio policy φ t µ r = γσ 2 c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 14 / 35

Black-Scholes Model, CRRA Utility Optimal portfolio policy φ t µ r = γσ 2 We have recovered the Merton s solution using DP. Merton s original derivation was very similar, using DP in continuous time. The optimal portfolio policy is myopic, does not depend on the problem horizon. The value function has the same functional form as the utility function: indirect utility of wealth is CRRA with the same coefficient of relative risk aversion as the original utility. That is why the optimal portfolio policy is myopic. If return distribution was not IID, the portfolio policy would be more complex. The value function would depend on additional variables, thus the optimal portfolio policy would not be myopic. c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 15 / 35

General Formulation Consider a discrete-time stochastic process Y t = (Y t 1,..., Y t N ). Assume that the time-t conditional distribution of Y t+1 depends on time, its own value and a control vector φ t : pdf t (Y t+1 ) = p(y t+1, Y t, φ t, t) For example, vector Y t could include the stock price and the portfolio value, Y t = (S t, W t ), and the transition density of Y would depend on the portfolio holdings φ t. The objective is to maximize the expectation [ ] T 1 E 0 u(t, Y t, φ t ) + u(t, Y T ) t=0 For example, in the IID+CRRA case above, Y t = W t, u(t, Y t, φ t ) = 0, t = 0,..., T 1 and u(t, Y T ) = (1 γ) 1 (Y T ) 1 γ. We call Y t a controlled Markov process. c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 17 / 35

Formulation State augmentation Many dynamic optimization problems of practical interest can be stated in the above form, using controlled Markov processes. Sometimes one needs to be creative with definitions. State augmentation is a common trick used to state problems as above. Suppose, for example, that the terminal objective function depends on the average of portfolio value between 1 and T. Even in the IID case, the problem does not immediately fit the above framework: if the state vector is Y t = (W t ), the terminal objective ( ) T 1 γ 1 1 W t 1 γ T t=1 cannot be expressed as T 1 u(t, Y t, φ t ) + u(t, Y T ) t=0 c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 18 / 35

Formulation State augmentation Continue with the previous example. Define an additional state variable A t : A t = t 1 W s t s=1 Now the state vector becomes Is this a controlled Markov process? Y t = (W t, A t ) The distribution of W t+1 depends only on W t and φ t. Verify that the distribution of (W t+1, A t+1 ) depends only on (W t, A t ): t+1 1 1 A t+1 = W s = (ta t + W t+1 ) t + 1 t + 1 s=1 Y t is indeed a controlled Markov process. c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 19 / 35

Formulation Optimal stopping Optimal stopping is a special case of dynamic optimization, and can be formulated using the above framework. Consider the problem of pricing an American option on a binomial tree. Interest rate is r and the option payoff at the exercise date τ is H(S τ ). The objective is to find the optimal exercise policy τ, which solves [ ] max E Q 0 (1 + r ) τ H(S τ ) τ The exercise decision at τ can depend only on information available at τ. Define the state vector (S t, X t ) where S t is the stock price and X t is the status of the option X t {0, 1} If X t = 1, the option has not been exercised yet. c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 20 / 35

Formulation Optimal stopping Let the control be of the form φ t {0, 1}. If φ t = 1, the option is exercised at time t, otherwise it is not. The stock price itself follows a Markov process: distribution of S t+1 depends only on S t. The option status X t follows a controlled Markov process: X t+1 = X t (1 φ t ) Note that once X t becomes zero, it stays zero forever. Status of the option can switch from X t = 1 to X t+1 = 0 provided φ t = 1. The objective takes form [ ] T 1 max E Q 0 (1 + r ) t H(S t )X t φ t φ t t=0 c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 21 / 35

Bellman Equation The value function and the optimal policy solve the Bellman equation J(t 1, Y t 1 ) = max E t 1 [u(t 1, Y t 1, φ t 1 ) + J(t, Y t ) φ t 1 ] φ t 1 J(T, Y T ) = u(t, Y T ) c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 22 / 35

American Option Pricing Consider the problem of pricing an American option on a binomial tree. Interest rate is r and the option payoff at the exercise date τ is H(S τ ). The objective is to find the optimal exercise policy τ, which solves [ ] Q max E 0 (1 + r ) τ H(S τ ) τ The exercise decision at τ can depend only on information available at τ. The objective takes form [ ] T 1 Q max E 0 (1 + r ) t H(S t )X t φ t φ t {0,1} t=0 If X t = 1, the option has not been exercised yet. Option price P(t, S t, X = 0) = 0 and P(t, S t, X = 1) satisfies ( ) P(t, S t, X = 1) = max H(S t ), (1 + r) 1 E Q t [P(t + 1, S t+1, X = 1)] c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 24 / 35

Asset Allocation with Return Predictability Formulation Suppose stock returns have a binomial distribution: p = 1/2, (( ) ) (( ) ) u t = exp µ t σ2 Δt + σ Δt, d t = exp µ t σ2 Δt σ Δt 2 2 where the conditional expected return µ t is stochastic and follows a Markov process with transition density f (µ t µ t 1 ) Conditionally on µ t 1, µ t is independent of R t. Let R f = exp(r Δt). The objective is to maximize expected CRRA utility of terminal portfolio value [ ] 1 max E 0 W 1 γ T 1 γ c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 25 / 35

Asset Allocation with Return Predictability Bellman equation We conjecture that the value function is of the form J(t, W t, µ t ) = A(t, µ t )W t 1 γ The Bellman equation takes form [ ] 1 γ A(t 1, µ t 1 )W t = max E t 1 A(t, µ t ) (W t 1 (φ t 1 (R t R f ) + R f )) 1 γ 1 φ t 1 The initial condition for the Bellman equation implies 1 A(T, µ T ) = 1 γ We verify that the conjectured value function satisfies the Bellman equation if [ ] A(t 1, µ t 1 ) = max E t 1 A(t, µ t ) (φ t 1 (R t R f ) + R f ) 1 γ φ t 1 Note that the RHS depends only on µ t 1. c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 26 / 35

Asset Allocation with Return Predictability Optimal portfolio policy The optimal portfolio policy satisfies [ ] φ t 1 = arg max E t 1 A(t, µ t ) (φ t 1 (R t R f ) + R f ) 1 γ φ t 1 [ ] = arg max E t 1 [A(t, µ t )] E t 1 (φ t 1 (R t R f ) + R f ) 1 γ φ t 1 because, conditionally on µ t 1, µ t is independent of R t. Optimal portfolio policy is myopic, does not depend on the problem horizon. This is due to the independence assumption. Can find φ t numerically. In the continuous-time limit of Δt 0, φ t µ t r = γσ 2 c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 27 / 35

Asset Allocation with Return Predictability Hedging demand Assume now that the dynamics of conditional expected returns is correlated with stock returns, i.e., the distribution of µ t given µ t 1 is no longer independent of R t. The value function has the same functional form as before, J(t, W t, µ t ) = A(t, µ t )W t 1 γ The optimal portfolio policy satisfies [ ] φ t 1 = arg max E t 1 A(t, µ t ) (φ t 1 (R t R f ) + R f ) 1 γ φ t 1 Optimal portfolio policy is no longer myopic: dependence between µ t and R t affects the optimal policy. The deviation from the myopic policy is called hedging demand. It is non-zero due to the fact that the investment opportunities (µ t ) change stochastically, and the stock can be used to hedge that risk. c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 28 / 35

Optimal Control of Execution Costs Formulation Suppose we need to buy b shares of the stock in no more than T periods. Our objective is to minimize the expected cost of acquiring the b shares. Let b t denote the number of shares bought at time t. Suppose the price of the stock is S t. The objective is [ ] T min E 0 S t b t b 0,...,T 1 t=0 What makes this problem interesting is the assumption that trading affects the price of the stock. This is called price impact. c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 29 / 35

Optimal Control of Execution Costs Formulation Assume that the stock price follows S t = S t 1 + θb t + ε t, θ > 0 Assume that ε t has zero mean conditional on S t 1 and b t : E[ε t b t, S t 1 ] = 0 Define an additional state variable W t denoting the number of shares left to purchase: W t = W t 1 b t 1, W 0 = b The constraint that b shares must be bought at the end of period T can be formalized as b T = W T c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 30 / 35

Optimal Control of Execution Costs Solution We can capture the dynamics of the problem using a state vector Y t = (S t 1, W t ) which clearly is a controlled Markov process. Start with period T and compute the value function J(T, S T 1, W T ) = E T [S T W T ] = (S T 1 + θw T ) W T Apply the Bellman equation once to compute Find J(T 1, S T 2, W T 1 ) = min E T 1 [S T 1 b T 1 + J(T, S T 1, W T )] b T 1 [ ] (S T 2 + θb T 1 + ε T 1 )b T 1 + = min E T 1 b T 1 J(T, S T 2 + θb T 1 + ε T 1, W T 1 b T 1 ) W T 1 b T 1 = 2 ( ) 3 J(T 1, S T 2, W T 1 ) = W T 1 S T 2 + θw T 1 4 c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 31 / 35

Optimal Control of Execution Costs Solution Continue with backward induction to find T k b 0 = b W T k b = k + 1 ( ) k + 2 J(T k, S T k 1, W T k ) = W T k S T k 1 + θw T k 2(k + 1) Conclude that the optimal policy is deterministic b 1 = = b T = T + 1 c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 32 / 35

Key Points Principle of Optimality for Dynamic Programming. Bellman equation. Formulate dynamic portfolio choice using controlled Markov processes. Merton s solution. Myopic policy and hedging demand. c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 33 / 35

References Bertsimas, D., A. Lo, 1998, Optimal control of execution costs, Journal of Financial Markets 1, 1-50. c Leonid Kogan ( MIT, Sloan ) Dynamic Portfolio Choice II 15.450, Fall 2010 34 / 35

MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 15.450 Analytics of Finance Fall 2010 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms.