Hedging errors with Leland's option model in the presence of transaction costs

Nonzero transaction costs invalidate the Black–Scholes [1973. Journal of Political Economy 81, 637–654] arbitrage argument based on continuous trading. Leland [1985. Journal of Finance 40, 1283–1301] developed a hedging strategy which modifies the Black–Scholes hedging strategy with a volatility adjusted by the length of the rebalance interval and the rate of the proportional transaction cost. Kabanov and Safarian [1997. Finance and Stochastics 1, 239–250] calculated the limiting hedging error of the Leland strategy and pointed out that it is nonzero for the approximate pricing of an European call option, in contradiction to Leland's claim. As a further contribution, we first identify the mathematical flaw in the argument of Leland's claim and then quantify the expected percentage of hedging losses in terms of the hedging frequency and the level of the option strike price.     

A note on transaction costs and the interpretation of dividend drop‐off ratios

In a recent edition of this Journal, Bartholdy and Brown (1999) presented an analysis of the ex‐dividend share price behaviour of shares listed on the New Zealand Stock Exchange. The authors conclude that their results are consistent with the tax clientele effect (driven by long‐term investors) and that there is little or no support for the short‐term trading hypothesis. Our purpose is to highlight the importance of transaction costs in analyses such as Bartholdy and Brown's. We argue that their results have an alternative interpretation because their analysis excludes the impact of transaction costs. We extend their model to include transaction costs and show that their results are not necessarily inconsistent with the short‐term trading hypothesis. A critical point of our analysis is that, in the presence of transaction costs, the equilibrium drop‐off ratio for dividend strip traders will be less than one, and, in some cases, can be less than the equilibrium drop‐off ratio for long‐term investors.     

Optimal hedging in an extended binomial market under transaction costs

We develop an approach to optimal hedging of a contingent claim under proportional transaction costs in a discrete time financial market model which extends the binomial market model with transaction costs. Our model relaxes the binomial assumption on the stock price ratios to the case where the stock price ratio distribution has bounded support. Non-self-financing hedging strategies are studied to construct an optimal hedge for an investor who takes a short position in a European contingent claim settled by delivery. We develop the theoretical basis for our optimal hedging approach, extending results obtained in our previous work. Specifically, we derive a no-arbitrage option price interval and establish properties of the non-self-financing strategies and their residuals. Based on the theoretical foundation, we develop a computational algorithm for optimizing an investor relevant criterion over the set of admissible non-self-financing hedging strategies. We demonstrate the applicability of our approach using both simulated data and real market data.     

On Leland's strategy of option pricing with transactions costs

We compute the limiting hedging error of the Leland strategy for the approximate pricing of the European call option in a market with transactions costs. It is not equal to zero in the case when the level of transactions costs is a constant, in contradiction with the claim in Leland (1985).     

Portfolio optimisation with strictly positive transaction costs and impulse control

One crucial assumption in modern portfolio theory of continuous-time models is the no transaction cost assumption. This assumption normally leads to trading strategies with infinite variation. However, following such a strategy in the presence of transaction costs will lead to immediate ruin. We present an impulse control approach where the investor can change his portfolio only finitely often in finite time intervals. Further, we consider transaction costs including a fixed and a proportional cost component. For the solution of the resulting control problems we present a formal optimal stopping approach and an approach using quasi-variational inequalities. As an application we derive a nontrivial asymptotically optimal solution for the problem of exponential utility maximisation.     

A Note on Option Pricing for the Constant Elasticity of Variance Model

We study the arbitrage free optionpricing problem for the constant elasticity of variance (CEV) model. To treatthestochastic aspect of the CEV model, we direct attention to the relationship between the CEV modeland squared Bessel processes. Then we show the existence of a unique equivalentmartingale measure and derive the Cox's arbitrage free option pricing formulathrough the properties of squared Bessel processes. Finally we show that the CEVmodel admits arbitrage opportunities when it is conditioned to be strictlypositive.     

Asset Pricing and Hedging in Financial Markets with Transaction Costs: An Approach Based on the Von Neumann–Gale Model

The paper develops a general discrete-time framework for asset pricing and hedging in financial markets with proportional transaction costs and trading constraints. The framework is suggested by analogies between dynamic models of financial markets and (stochastic versions of) the von Neumann–Gale model of economic growth. The main results are hedging criteria stated in terms of “dual variables” – consistent prices and consistent discount factors. It is shown how these results can be applied to specialized models involving transaction costs and portfolio restrictions.     

A note on the forward measure

For a Markov process , the forward measure over the time interval is defined by the Radon-Nikodym derivative , where is a given non-negative function and is the normalizing constant. In this paper, the law of under the forward measure is identified when is a diffusion process or, more generally, a continuous-path Markov process.