arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2401.03345q-fin.MFq-fin.CPq-fin.PR
收藏

实践中的波动率模型:粗糙、路径依赖还是马尔可夫?

Volatility models in practice: Rough, Path-dependent or Markovian?

Eduardo Abi Jaber, Shaun, Li

AI总结:

本文基于SPX期权数据实证检验粗糙波动率模型,发现其与SPX微笑曲线形态不一致,并识别出仅需3至4个参数的非粗糙路径依赖模型和双因子马尔可夫模型,在刻画一周至三年SPX微笑方面表现更优。

摘要:

我们利用SPX期权数据开展了一项实证研究,检验粗糙波动率文献中若干与期权价格相关的主张。研究结果表明,参数H∈(0,1/2)的粗糙波动率模型与SPX微笑曲线的整体形态不一致。具体而言,平值SPX偏斜与这些模型生成的幂律形态不相容,该形态在短期限下增长过快,而在长期限下衰减过慢。对于一周至三个月之间的期限,粗糙波动率模型的表现不如具有相同参数数量的一因子马尔可夫模型。当扩展到更长期限时,粗糙波动率模型并未持续优于一因子马尔可夫模型。我们的研究识别出一个非粗糙路径依赖模型和一个双因子马尔可夫模型,它们在刻画一周至三年之间的SPX微笑曲线方面优于各自的粗糙对应模型,且仅需3至4个参数。

英文摘要:

We present an empirical study examining several claims related to option prices in rough volatility literature using SPX options data. Our results show that rough volatility models with the parameter $H \in (0,1/2)$ are inconsistent with the global shape of SPX smiles. In particular, the at-the-money SPX skew is incompatible with the power-law shape generated by these models, which increases too fast for short maturities and decays too slowly for longer maturities. For maturities between one week and three months, rough volatility models underperform one-factor Markovian models with the same number of parameters. When extended to longer maturities, rough volatility models do not consistently outperform one-factor Markovian models. Our study identifies a non-rough path-dependent model and a two-factor Markovian model that outperform their rough counterparts in capturing SPX smiles between one week and three years, with only 3 to 4 parameters.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑