May 2007 Exam MFE Solutions 1. Answer = (B)

Similar documents
The Mathematics Of Stock Option Valuation - Part Four Deriving The Black-Scholes Model Via Partial Differential Equations

Tentamen i 5B1575 Finansiella Derivat. Måndag 27 augusti 2007 kl Answers and suggestions for solutions.

MAFS Quantitative Modeling of Derivative Securities

Some Remarks on Derivatives Markets (third edition, 2013)

Matematisk statistik Tentamen: kl FMS170/MASM19 Prissättning av Derivattillgångar, 9 hp Lunds tekniska högskola. Solution.

INSTITUTE OF ACTUARIES OF INDIA

Black-Scholes Model and Risk Neutral Pricing

Market Models. Practitioner Course: Interest Rate Models. John Dodson. March 29, 2009

INSTITUTE OF ACTUARIES OF INDIA

Introduction to Black-Scholes Model

UCLA Department of Economics Fall PhD. Qualifying Exam in Macroeconomic Theory

Pricing FX Target Redemption Forward under. Regime Switching Model

Models of Default Risk

Erratic Price, Smooth Dividend. Variance Bounds. Present Value. Ex Post Rational Price. Standard and Poor s Composite Stock-Price Index

Tentamen i 5B1575 Finansiella Derivat. Torsdag 25 augusti 2005 kl

Computations in the Hull-White Model

Brownian motion. Since σ is not random, we can conclude from Example sheet 3, Problem 1, that

Equivalent Martingale Measure in Asian Geometric Average Option Pricing

An Analytical Implementation of the Hull and White Model

Pricing Vulnerable American Options. April 16, Peter Klein. and. Jun (James) Yang. Simon Fraser University. Burnaby, B.C. V5A 1S6.

Change of measure and Girsanov theorem

MA Advanced Macro, 2016 (Karl Whelan) 1

Option pricing and hedging in jump diffusion models

Ch 6. Option Pricing When Volatility is Non-Constant

You should turn in (at least) FOUR bluebooks, one (or more, if needed) bluebook(s) for each question.

Alexander L. Baranovski, Carsten von Lieres and André Wilch 18. May 2009/Eurobanking 2009

Available online at ScienceDirect

Final Exam Answers Exchange Rate Economics

Economic Growth Continued: From Solow to Ramsey

Interest Rate Products

Valuation and Hedging of Correlation Swaps. Mats Draijer

IJRSS Volume 2, Issue 2 ISSN:

Optimal Early Exercise of Vulnerable American Options

LIDSTONE IN THE CONTINUOUS CASE by. Ragnar Norberg

t=1 C t e δt, and the tc t v t i t=1 C t (1 + i) t = n tc t (1 + i) t C t (1 + i) t = C t vi

CENTRO DE ESTUDIOS MONETARIOS Y FINANCIEROS T. J. KEHOE MACROECONOMICS I WINTER 2011 PROBLEM SET #6

Bond Prices and Interest Rates

Foreign Exchange, ADR s and Quanto-Securities

On the multiplicity of option prices under CEV with positive elasticity of variance

Extended MAD for Real Option Valuation

Quanto Options. Uwe Wystup. MathFinance AG Waldems, Germany 19 September 2008

Option Valuation of Oil & Gas E&P Projects by Futures Term Structure Approach. Hidetaka (Hugh) Nakaoka

Volatility and Hedging Errors

Black-Scholes and the Volatility Surface

Single Premium of Equity-Linked with CRR and CIR Binomial Tree

An Incentive-Based, Multi-Period Decision Model for Hierarchical Systems

Forwards and Futures

Dynamic Programming Applications. Capacity Expansion

Pricing formula for power quanto options with each type of payoffs at maturity

(c) Suppose X UF (2, 2), with density f(x) = 1/(1 + x) 2 for x 0 and 0 otherwise. Then. 0 (1 + x) 2 dx (5) { 1, if t = 0,

A pricing model for the Guaranteed Lifelong Withdrawal Benefit Option

Hull-White one factor model Version

1 Purpose of the paper

Question 1 / 15 Question 2 / 15 Question 3 / 28 Question 4 / 42

Jarrow-Lando-Turnbull model

Lecture Notes to Finansiella Derivat (5B1575) VT Note 1: No Arbitrage Pricing

Macroeconomics II A dynamic approach to short run economic fluctuations. The DAD/DAS model.

7 pages 1. Hull and White Generalized model. Ismail Laachir. March 1, Model Presentation 1

MORNING SESSION. Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 Time: 8:30 a.m. 11:45 a.m. INSTRUCTIONS TO CANDIDATES

Online Appendix. Using the reduced-form model notation proposed by Doshi, el al. (2013), 1. and Et

R e. Y R, X R, u e, and. Use the attached excel spreadsheets to

a. If Y is 1,000, M is 100, and the growth rate of nominal money is 1 percent, what must i and P be?

Econ 546 Lecture 4. The Basic New Keynesian Model Michael Devereux January 2011

Coupling Smiles. November 18, 2006

On Monte Carlo Simulation for the HJM Model Based on Jump

OPTIMUM FISCAL AND MONETARY POLICY USING THE MONETARY OVERLAPPING GENERATION MODELS

CHAPTER 3 How to Calculate Present Values. Answers to Practice Questions

Changes of Numeraire for Pricing Futures, Forwards, and Options

FINAL EXAM EC26102: MONEY, BANKING AND FINANCIAL MARKETS MAY 11, 2004

Synthetic CDO s and Basket Default Swaps in a Fixed Income Credit Portfolio

STATIONERY REQUIREMENTS SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS 20 Page booklet List of statistical formulae New Cambridge Elementary Statistical Tables

Money in a Real Business Cycle Model

Financial Econometrics (FinMetrics02) Returns, Yields, Compounding, and Horizon

Principles of Finance CONTENTS

On the Impact of Inflation and Exchange Rate on Conditional Stock Market Volatility: A Re-Assessment

Financial Econometrics Jeffrey R. Russell Midterm Winter 2011

Credit Spread Option Valuation under GARCH. Working Paper July 2000 ISSN :

ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS. CHAPTERS 6-9; (Blanchard)

Financial Markets And Empirical Regularities An Introduction to Financial Econometrics

Unemployment and Phillips curve

A Theory of Tax Effects on Economic Damages. Scott Gilbert Southern Illinois University Carbondale. Comments? Please send to

HEDGING VOLATILITY RISK

(1 + Nominal Yield) = (1 + Real Yield) (1 + Expected Inflation Rate) (1 + Inflation Risk Premium)

Fundamental Basic. Fundamentals. Fundamental PV Principle. Time Value of Money. Fundamental. Chapter 2. How to Calculate Present Values

Aspects of Some Exotic Options

Spring 2011 Social Sciences 7418 University of Wisconsin-Madison

CHAPTER CHAPTER18. Openness in Goods. and Financial Markets. Openness in Goods, and Financial Markets. Openness in Goods,

LIBOR MARKET MODEL AND GAUSSIAN HJM EXPLICIT APPROACHES TO OPTION ON COMPOSITION

CHAPTER CHAPTER26. Fiscal Policy: A Summing Up. Prepared by: Fernando Quijano and Yvonn Quijano

Asymmetry and Leverage in Stochastic Volatility Models: An Exposition

FAIR VALUATION OF INSURANCE LIABILITIES. Pierre DEVOLDER Université Catholique de Louvain 03/ 09/2004

Research Article A General Gaussian Interest Rate Model Consistent with the Current Term Structure

ECON Lecture 5 (OB), Sept. 21, 2010

Supplement to Models for Quantifying Risk, 5 th Edition Cunningham, Herzog, and London

Pricing options on defaultable stocks

Fair Valuation of Participating Policies in Stochastic Interest Rate Models: Two-dimensional Cox-Ross-Rubinstein Approaches

Introduction. Enterprises and background. chapter

Appendix B: DETAILS ABOUT THE SIMULATION MODEL. contained in lookup tables that are all calculated on an auxiliary spreadsheet.

4452 Mathematical Modeling Lecture 17: Modeling of Data: Linear Regression

VaR and Low Interest Rates

Transcription:

May 007 Exam MFE Soluions. Answer = (B) Le D = he quarerly dividend. Using formula (9.), pu-call pariy adjused for deerminisic dividends, we have 0.0 0.05 0.03 4.50 =.45 + 5.00 D e D e 50 e = 54.45 D ( 0.99005 + 0.9753) 50 0.970446. Rearranging he equaion yields D.96356 = 54.45 4.50 48.53 =.477, or D = 0.73.. Answer = (A) Le p be he rue probabiliy of he sock going up. Thus, pus + ( p)ds = e αh S (which is equaion (.3) on p. 347), yielding αh e d p =. u d Because α = 0., h =, u =.433, and d = 0.756, we have p = 0.5. 3. Answer = (C) Le P denoe he price of he European pu opion. Then, 0.055 ½ 0.0 ½ P= 98e N( d) 00e N( d ) by formula (.3) wih S = 00, K = 98, δ = %, σ = 50%, r = 5.5%, and T = ½. Here, d is calculaed using formula (.a) and is equal o 0.975589 0.30; d is from formula (.b) and is equal o 0.055995 0.06. From he normal cdf able, N(0.06) = 0.539 and N( 0.30) = 0.679 = 0.38. Thus, P 0.055 / 0.0/ 98e 0.539 00e 0.38 =.93.90. 4. Answer = (E) For a special pu opion wih srike price K, he payoff upon immediae exercise is K 50. This value should be compared wih P, he price of he corresponding one-period European pu opion. The value of P can be deermined using pu-call pariy:

r δ P = Ke Se + C. Wih S = 50, r = 4%, and δ = 8%, 0.04 0.08 P = K e 50 e + C = 0.9608K 46.558 + C. K C P K 50 40 9..396 0 50 4.9 6.794 0 60 0.7.0 0 70 0.00.00 0 From he able above, we see ha i is no opimal o exercise any of hese special pu opions immediaely. 5. Answer = (D) By (.9), σ opion = σ sock Ω = 0.50 Ω, where Ω is he opion elasiciy. By (.8), Ω = SΔ/C, where Δ is he opion dela, Δ = e N( d) (see page 383). By (.), C = Se N( d) Ke N( d) = SΔ Ke N( d). Thus, Ω = SΔ/C = SΔ/[SΔ Ke N( d) ] = /[ Ke N( d) /(SΔ)] = /{ [ Ke N( d) ]/[S e N( d) ]}. We are given S = 85, K = 80, δ = 0, r = 5.5%, T =. By equaion (.a), d is 0.48 0.48; hence, Nd ( ) 0.6844. By equaion (.b), d is 0.088 0.0; hence, Nd ( ) 0.490. Wih hese values, we obain e N( d ) 85 e 0 0.6844 = 58.74, S Ke N( d) 80 e 0.055 0.490 = 37.537. Hence, Ω = /{ [ Ke N( d) ]/[S e N( d) ]}.78, and

σ opion = σ sock Ω 0.50.78 =.39. Remark: To derive he volailiy of an opion by means of Iô s Lemma, see equaions (.8) and (.9). Chaper is no in he syllabus of Exam MFE. 6. Answer = (C) Because of he ideniy Maximum( S (3), S (3)) = Maximum( S (3) S (3), 0) + S (3), he payoff of he claim can be decomposed as he sum of he payoff of he exchange opion in saemen (v) of he problem and he price of sock a ime 3. In a noarbirage model, he price of he claim mus be equal o he sum of he exchange opion price (which is 0) and he prepaid forward price for delivery of sock a ime 3 (which is e δ 3 S (0)). So, he answer is 0 + e 0. 3 00 = 58.6. Remark: If one buys e δ 3 share of sock a ime 0 and re-invess all dividends, one will have exacly one share of sock a ime 3. 7. Answer = (E) By formula (4.3), he call opion price is C = P(0, T)[F N(d ) K N(d )], where T =, P(0, T) = P(0, ) = 0.9434, F = F 0, [P(, )] = P(0, )/P(0, ) = 0.887/0.9434 = 0.934598, K = 0.959. Wih σ = 0.05, we have ln( F / K) + σ T d = = 0.0 0., σ T d = d σ T 0. 0.05 = 0.6. Thus, N(d ) N(0.) = 0.583, N(d ) N(0.6) = 0.5636. Hence, C = P(0, T)[F N(d ) K N(d )] = 0.9434[0.9346 0.583 0.959 0.5636] = 0.9434 0.03 0.0 3

Remarks: () The foonoe on page 79 poins ou ha he call opion price formula can also be expressed as C = P(0, )N(d ) KP(0, )N(d ). () The symbol F in he Black formula (4.3) denoes a forward price, bu he same symbol in he Black formula (.7) denoes a fuures price. There is no conradicion because, in he Black model discussed on page 38, he ineres rae is consan. I is saed on page 46 ha if he ineres rae were no random, hen forward and fuures price would be he same. (3) Consider a forward conrac, wih delivery dae T, for an underlying asse whose price a ime T is denoed by S(T). For < T, he ime- prepaid forward price is P F, T [S(T)] = E [e R(, T) S(T)] by risk-neural pricing. Here, we use he noaion in he las paragraph of page 783; E means he condiional expecaion wih respec o he risk-neural probabiliy measure given he informaion up o ime, and R(, T) = T r ( u) du. (4.) Thus, he ime- forward price is P F,T [S(T)] = F, T [S(T)] = E [e R(, T) S(T)]. P(, P(, Noing (4.0), we can rewrie his formula as R(, E [ e S( ] F, T [S(T)] =. R(, E [ e ] If he shor-rae, r(u), is no sochasic, hen he righ-hand side is R(, R(, E [ e S( ] e E [ S( ] = = E R(, R(, [S(T)], E [ e ] e E [] which is he formula for he ime- fuures price of he underlying asse deliverable a ime T. (4) Consider he special case S(T) = P(T, T + s). Then he ime- prepaid forward price of he zero-coupon bond deliverable a ime T is P F, T [P(T, T + s)] = E [ e R(, T) P(T, T + s)] R(, T) = E [ e E T [e R(T, T+s) ]] = E [ e R(, T) e R(T, T+s) ] = E [ e R(, T) R(T, T+s) ] = E [e R(, T+s) ] = P(, T + s), where he hird equaliy is by he law of ieraed expecaions. Thus, he ime- forward price is P F, T [P(T, T + s)] = F, T [P(T, T + s)] = P(, T + s), P(, P(, which is equaion (4.3). 4

8. Answer = (C) By formulas (.) and (.a, b), wih δ = 0, he call opion price is rt S(0) N( σ T) S(0) e ( ) e N σ T = S(0) N( σ T) N( σ T) = S(0) N( σ T) where he las equaliy is due o he ideniy N( x) = N(x). By (0.), he random variable ln S( ) Thus, saemen (iii) means ha σ = 0.4, and σ T = 0.4 0 = =. Therefore, he opion price is S(0) N() = 00 0.843 = 68.6. [ ] [ ] is normally disribued wih variance σ. 9. Answer = (A) This problem is a modificaion of he example on page 805. Noe ha he example is abou cap paymens on a four-year loan, no a hree-year loan. An ineres rae cap pays he difference beween he realized ineres rae in a period and he cap rae, if he difference is posiive. Observe ha in his problem only r u and r uu are higher han 7.5%. A he u node, i is expeced ha a paymen of 00 (7.704% 7.5%) will be made a he end of he year. Thus, he presen value of he paymen a he node is 00 ( 7.704% 7.5% ) = 0.894. + 7.704% A he uu node, i is expeced ha a paymen of 00 (9.89% 7.5%) will be made a he end of he year. Thus, he presen value of he paymen a he node is 00 ( 9.89% 7.5% ) =.7668. + 9.89% 5

The ree below corresponds o Figure 4.5 and Figure 4.9 of McDonald (006). Year 0 Year Year 6.000% $0 7.704% $0.894 4.673% $0 9.89% $.7668 6.000% $0 3.639% $0 By risk-neural pricing, he ime-0 price of he ineres rae cap is / + 6% 0.894 / / +.7668 + 6% + 7.704% = 0.08934 + 0.47649 = 0.56587 0.57 Remark: The cap paymens are no $0.894 and $.7668. They are $00 (7.704% 7.5%) o be paid one year afer he u node, and $00 (9.89% 7.5%) o be paid one year afer he uu node. One may be emped o pu $00 (7.704% 7.5%) a he uu node and a he ud node, and pu $00 (9.89% 7.5%) a he uuu node and a he uud node. Unforunaely, his can be confusing, because hese cash flows are no pah-independen. For example, if one reaches he ud node via he d node, hen here is no cap paymen because r d is less han 7.5%. 0. Answer = (B) Le y = number of unis of he sock you will buy, z = number of unis of he Call-II opion you will buy. If x or y urns ou o be negaive, his means ha you sell. Dela-neuraliy means 000 0.585 = y + z 0.7773. Gamma-neuraliy means 000 0.065 = y 0 + z 0.0746. 6

From he second equaion (he gamma-neural equaion), we obain z = 65./0.0746 = 87.654 87.7. (This is sufficien o deermine ha (B) is he correc answer.) Subsiuing his in he firs equaion (he dela-neural equaion) yields y = 58.5 87.7 0.7773 = 95.8.. Answer = (D) Wih u =.8, d = 0.890, h = 0.5, andδ = 0, he risk-neural probabiliy ha he sock price will increase a he end of a period is ( r δ ) h 0.05 0.5 e d e 0.890 p* = = = 0.465. (0.5) u d.8 0.890 For he wo-period model, he sock prices are S 0 = 70 Su = us0 =.8 70 = 8.67 Sd = ds0 = 0.890 70 = 6.30 Suu = usu =.8 8.67 = 97.63 Sud = dsu = 0.890 8.67 = 73.58 S = ds = 0.890 6.30 = 55.45 dd d Le P 0, P u, P d, P uu, P ud, P dd denoe he corresponding prices for he American pu opion. The hree prices a he opion expiry dae are P uu = max(k S uu, 0) = max(80 97.63, 0) = 0, P ud = max(k S ud, 0) = max(80 73.58, 0) = 6.4, P dd = max(k S dd, 0) = max(80 55.45, 0) = 4.55. By he backward inducion formula (0.), he wo prices a ime are P u = max(k S u, e rh [P uu p* + P ud ( p*)]) = max(80 8.67, e 0.05/ [0 0.465 + 6.4 ( 0.465)]) = e 0.05/ 6.4 0.535 = 3.35, P d = max(k S d, e rh [P ud p* + P dd ( p*)]) = max(80 6.30, e 0.05/ [6.4 0.465 + 4.55 ( 0.465)]) = max(7.70, 5.7) = 7.70. Finally, he ime-0 price of he American pu opion is P 0 = max(k S 0, e rh [P u p* + P d ( p*)]) = max(80 70, e 0.05/ [3.35 0.465 + 7.70 ( 0.465)]) = max(0, 0.75) = 0.75. 7

. Answer = (A) Define he funcion f (x, ) = xe (r r*)(t ). Then, G() = f (S(), ). Obviously, f ( x, ) = e (r r*)(t ), f ( x, ) = 0, and f ( x, ) = f(x, )(r r*)( ). x x By Iô s Lemma, we have dg() = e (r r*)(t ) ds() + 0 + f(s(), )(r* r)d = e (r r*)(t ) S()[0.d + 0.4dZ()] + G()(r* r)d = G()[0.d + 0.4dZ()] + G()(0.0 0.08)d = G()[(0. + 0.0)d + 0.4dZ()] = G()[0.d + 0.4dZ()]. 3. Answer = (E) In a Vasicek model, zero-coupon bond prices are of he form B(, T) r PT (,, r) = ATe (, ). (4.6) Furhermore, he funcions AT (, ) and B(, are funcions of T. Therefore, we can rewrie formula (4.6) as P(, T, r) = exp α( T ) + β( T ) r. ( [ ]) The firs wo pieces of daa ell us: () () 0.04 0.9445 = e α β () () 0.05 0.93 = e α β which, by aking logarihms, are equivalen o 0.057 = α() + β () 0.04 0.0703 = α() + β () 0.05 The soluion of his pair of linear equaions is β () =.3 α () = 0.0043 The las piece of daa says () () r* 0.8960 = β e α Taking logarihms yields 0.098 = α() + β () r *, or r* = (0.098 0.0043)/.3 = 0.08. 8

Remark: By comparing (4.9) wih (4.6), we see ha he word Vasicek in his problem can be changed o CIR. 4. Answer = (E) This is a one-period binomial model. Le p* be he risk-neural probabiliy of an increase in he sock price. (See page 3.) Then, r 0.08 60 e 45 60 e 45 p* = = = 0.79988896 0.8. 70 45 70 45 By risk-neural pricing, he price of he sraddle is e r [p* 70 K + ( p*) 45 K ] = e 0.08 [p* 70 50 + ( p*) 45 50 ] = e 0.08 [p* 0 + ( p*) 5] = e 0.08 [5p* + 5] e 0.08 [5 0.8 + 5] = e 0.08 7 = 5.693 5.70. 5. Answer = (C) This is a variaion of Example.3 on page 380. Because of he discree dividend, we are o use he version of he Black-Scholes pu opion formula ha is in erms of prepaid forward prices. The prepaid forward price of he sock is P F0,/ ( S ) = 50.50e 0.05/3 = 50.5 0.98347 = 48.548. We apply formula (.a), wih S = 48.548, K = 50, r = 0.05, δ = 0, σ = 0.3, and T = ½, o obain d = {ln(48.548/50) + [0.05 0 + (0.3) /] ½}/{0.3 ½} = { 0.0995 + 0.0475}/0.3 = 0.08740 0.08. (This is he same as applying he formula for d ha follows (.5) on page 380.) Then, d = 0.08740 0.3 = 0.939 0.3. I now follows from he prepaid forward price version of (.3) ha he pu opion price is 50e 0.05/ N(+0.3) 48.548N( 0.08) = (50 0.97535 0.557) (48.548 0.468) = 6.9039.745 = 4.894 4.9. 9

6. Answer = (D) r δ Define β =. Then, he formulas on page 403 for h and h are σ and r h = + + σ β β r h = β β + σ. Adding hese wo equaions yields h + h = β. Hence, β = 7/9 or β = 7/8. For r = 5% and σ = 0.3, r h = + + σ β β 7 7 0.05 = + +.5. 8 8 0.3 Alernaive soluion: The parameers h and h are he posiive and negaive roos, respecively, of he quadraic equaion σ h σ + (r δ )h r = 0; (*) see he sudy noe Some Remarks on Derivaives Markes. Thus, σ h σ σ + (r δ )h r = (h h )(h h ). Consequenly, σ σ r δ = ( h h ) σ 7 = 9. Hence, he quadraic equaion (*) becomes 0.3 0.3 h + ( 7 )h 0.05 = 0, 9 he posiive roo of which is h. Remark: For a posiive δ, he posiive roo h is in fac greaer han. 0

7. Answer = (B) In erms of he noaion in Secion 4.5, K = 90 and K = 00. By (.), and (.a, b), saemen (ii) of he problem is δ 4 (0) T = S e Nd ( ) Ke Nd ( ), () where S ( ) 0 = 80, ln( S(0) / K ) + ( r δ + σ ) T d =, σ T and ln( S(0) / K ) + ( r δ σ ) T d = d σ T =. σ T Do noe ha boh d and d depend on K, bu no on K. From he las paragraph on page 383 and from saemen (iii), we have Δ= e N( d) = 0., and hence equaion () becomes 4 = 80 0. 00 e N( d), or e N( d ) = (80 0. 4) /00 = 0.. By (4.5) on page 458, he gap call opion price is S(0) e Nd ( ) Ke Nd ( ) = 80 0. 90 0. = 5.. Remark: The payoff of he gap call opion is [S(T) K ] I(S(T) > K ), where I(S(T) > K ) is he indicaor random variable, which akes he value if S(T) > K and he value 0 oherwise. Because he payoff can be expressed as S(T) I(S(T) > K ) K I(S(T) > K ), we can obain he pricing formula (4.5) by showing ha he ime-0 price for he ime-t payoff S(T) I(S(T) > K ) is S(0) e N( d), and he ime-0 price for he ime-t payoff I(S(T) > K ) is e N(d ).

Noe ha boh d and d are calculaed using he srike price K. We can use riskneural pricing o verify hese wo resuls: E*[e S(T) I(S(T) > K )] = S(0) e N( d), which is he pricing formula for a European asse-or-nohing (or digial share) call opion, and E*[e I(S(T) > K )] = e N(d ), which is he pricing formula for a European cash-or- nohing (or digial cash) call opion. Here, we follow he noaion on pages 604 and 605 ha he aserisk is used o signify ha he expecaion is aken wih respec o he risk-neural probabiliy measure. Under he risk-neural probabiliy measure, he random variable ln[s(t)/s(0)] is normally disribued wih mean (r δ σ )T and variance σ T. The second expecaion formula, which can be readily simplified as E*[I(S(T) > K )] = N(d ), is paricularly easy o verify: Because an indicaor random variable akes he values and 0 only, we have E*[I(S(T) > K )] = Prob*[S(T) > K ], which is he same as Prob*(ln[S(T)/S(0)] > ln[k /S(0)]). To evaluae his probabiliy, we use a sandard mehod, which is also described on pages 590 and 59. We subrac he mean of ln[s(t)/s(0)] from boh sides of he inequaliy and hen divide by he sandard deviaion of ln[s(t)/s(0)]. The lef-hand side of he inequaliy is now a sandard normal random variable, Z, and he righ-hand side is ln[ K / S(0)] ( r δ σ / ) T ln[ S(0) / K] + ( r δ σ / ) T = σ T σ T = d. Thus, we have E*[I(S(T) > K )] = Prob*[S(T) > K ], = Prob(Z > d ) = N( d ) = N(d ). The firs expecaion formula, E*[e S(T) I(S(T) > K )] = S(0) e N( d), is harder o derive. One mehod is o use formula (8.9), which is in he syllabus of Exam C, bu no in he syllabus of Exam MFE. A more elegan way is he acuarial mehod of Esscher ransforms, which is no par of he syllabus of any acuarial examinaion. I shows ha he expecaion of a produc, E*[e S(T) I(S(T) > K )], can be facorized as a produc of expecaions, E*[e S(T)] E**[I(S(T) > K )], where ** signifies a changed probabiliy measure. I follows from (0.6) and (0.4) ha E*[e S(T)] = e S(0).

To evaluae he expecaion E**[I(S(T) > K )], which is Prob**[S(T) > K ], one shows ha, under he probabiliy measure **, he random variable ln[s(t)/s(0)] is normally disribued wih mean (r δ σ )T + σ T = (r δ + σ )T, and variance σ T. Then, wih seps idenical o hose above, we have E**[I(S(T) > K )] = Prob**[S(T) > K ], = Prob(Z > d ) = N( d ) = N(d ). Alernaive soluion: Because he payoff of he gap call opion is [S(T) K ] I(S(T) > K ) = [S(T) K ] I(S(T) > K ) + (K K ) I(S(T) > K ), he price of he gap call opion mus be equal o he sum of he price of a European call opion wih he srike price K and he price of (K K ) unis of he corresponding cash-or-nohing call opion. Thus, wih K = 90, K = 00, and saemen (ii), he price of he gap call opion is 4 + (00 90) e Prob*[S(T) > 00] = 4+ 0 e N( d). On he oher hand, from (ii), (iii), and (.), i follows ha 4 = 80(0.) 00 e N( d). Thus, e N( d) = 0., and he price of he gap call opion is 4 + 0 0. = 5.. 8. Answer = (A) In an arbirage-free model, wo asses having he same source of randomness (heir prices driven by he same Brownian moion) mus have he same Sharpe raio; see Secion 0.4. Wih r = 4%, we hus have 0.07 0.04 G 0.04 =, 0. H or G = 0.5H + 0.04. () If f(x) is a wice-differeniable funcion of x, hen Iô s Lemma (page 664) simplifies as df(y()) = f (Y())dY() + f (Y())[dY()], because f (x) = 0. If f(x) = ln x, hen f (x) = /x and f (x) = /x. Hence, 3

d(ln[y()]) = dy() + [dy ( )] Y( ). () [ Y ( )] We are given ha dy() = Y()[Gd + HdZ()]. (3) Thus, [dy()] = {Y()[Gd + HdZ()]} = [Y()] H d, (4) by applying he muliplicaion rules (0.7) on pages 658 and 659. Subsiuing (3) and (4) in () and simplifying yields d(ln[y()]) = (G H )d + HdZ(). Comparing his equaion wih he one in (i), we have H = σ, (5) G H = 0.06. (6) Applying () and (5) o (6) yields a quadraic equaion of σ, σ 0.5σ + 0.0 = 0, whose roos can be found by using he quadraic formula or by facorizing, (σ 0.)(σ 0.4) = 0. By condiion (iii), we canno have σ = 0.4. Thus, σ = 0.. Subsiuing H = 0. in () yields G = 0.5 0. + 0.04 = 0.065. Remark: Exercise 0. on page 675 is o use Iô s Lemma o evaluae d[ln(s)]. 9. Answer = (D) The dela-gamma approximaion is merely he Taylor series approximaion wih up o he quadraic erm. In erms of he Greek symbols, he firs derivaive is Δ, and he second derivaive is Γ. The approximaion formula is P(S + ε) P(S) + ε Δ + ε Γ. (3. & 3.5) Wih P(30) = 4, Δ = 0.8, Γ = 0.0, and ε =.50, we have P(3.5) 4 + (.5)( 0.8) + (.5) (0.) = 3.695 3.70. 4