of 14
8/22/2019 Pricing of American Options
1/14
University of Houston/Department of MathematicsDr. Ronald H.W. Hoppe
Numerical Methods for Option Pricing in Finance
Chapter 6: Pricing of American Options
6.1 The Black-Scholes Inequality
6.1.1 American put option
We know from Chapter 1 that the price PA of an American put option satisfies
() PA(S, t) (K S)+
, 0 t T .
Since PA(0, t) = K = (K S)+|S=0 and PA(K, t) = 0, due to the continuity and monotonicity
of PA there exists 0 SF(t) < K such that the payoff is reached, i.e.,
PA(SF(t), t) = K SF(t) .
Consequently, we have
PA(S, t)> (K S)
+
, S > SF(t)= K S , 0 S SF(t)
.
8/22/2019 Pricing of American Options
2/14
University of Houston/Department of MathematicsDr. Ronald H.W. Hoppe
Numerical Methods for Option Pricing in Finance
Stopping and Continuation Region
S
T
t
S
F
Continuation region
region
Stopping
(t)FS
(T)
In the (S, t)-plane, the set
{(SF(t), t) | 0 t T}
defines a curve which partitions the semi-infinite strip
[0,) [0, T] into two parts:
The stopping region
S := {(S, t) | S SF(t)}
and the continuation region
C := {(S, t) | S > SF(t)}.
The economical meaning of the continuation and the stopping region is as follows:
In the stopping region we have PA = K S and the put option should be exercised, since = K S + S = K can be invested at the risk-free interest rate r > 0.In the continuation region we have PA > (K S)
+ and an early exercise of the option does not
make sense.
8/22/2019 Pricing of American Options
3/14
University of Houston/Department of MathematicsDr. Ronald H.W. Hoppe
Numerical Methods for Option Pricing in Finance
Free boundary and stopping time
FS
T
t
S
(T)
Free boundary
(t)FS
Continuation region
region
Stopping
Since the curve (SF(t), t) | 0 t T} is an unknown
of the problem, it is referred to as a free boundary.
The time instanttS := min {0 t T | S = SF(t)}
is called the stopping time.
At tS, the put option should be exercised, since holding it longer would reduce the profit of the
risk-free investment.
8/22/2019 Pricing of American Options
4/14
University of Houston/Department of MathematicsDr. Ronald H.W. Hoppe
Numerical Methods for Option Pricing in Finance
The determination of the free boundary requires an additional boundary condition besides
PA(SF(t), t) = K SF(t). For that purpose we consider the slopePAS (SF(t), t) where PA(S, t) touches
the straight line K S which obviously has the slope 1. We can rule out the case PAS
(SF(t), t) 1 can be excluded as well. In other words,
we obtain PAS
(SF(t), t) = 1 .
Hence, in case of an American put option with proportional dividend D0 > 0, the price PA(S, t) of
the put option satisfies the free boundary problem
S SF(t) : PA(S, t) = K S
S > SF(t) :PAt
+1
2
2 S2
2PAS2
+ (rD0) SPAS
rPA = 0
with final condition PA(S,T) = (K S)+ and boundary conditions
PA(0, t) = K , limS
PA(S, t) = 0 , PA(SF(t), t) = K SF(t) , (PA/S)(SF(t), t) = 1 .
8/22/2019 Pricing of American Options
5/14
University of Houston/Department of MathematicsDr. Ronald H.W. Hoppe
Numerical Methods for Option Pricing in Finance
6.1.2 American call option
As shown in Chapter 1, the price CA of an American call option is the same as the price CE ofa European call option, if no dividends are paid. However, in case of a proportional dividend
D0 > 0, for t < T and sufficiently large S we have
CA(S, t) (SK)+ = SK > S exp(D0(T t)) (d1) K exp(r(T t)) (d2) = CE(S, t) ,
where d1/2 = ln(SK) + (rD0
2
2 )(T t)
T t .
Since CA(K, t) = 0 and limS CA(S, t) = SK > 0, due to the continuity and monotonicity ofCAthere exists SF(t) > K such that the payoff is reached, i.e.,
CA(SF(t), t) = SF(t) K ,whence
CA(S, t)
= SK , S SF(t)> (SK)+ , 0 S < SF(t) .
8/22/2019 Pricing of American Options
6/14
University of Houston/Department of Mathematics
Dr. Ronald H.W. HoppeNumerical Methods for Option Pricing in Finance
Stopping and Continuation Region
F (T)
T
t
S
S
Continuation region
(t)FS
region
Stopping
As in case of the put, the free boundary
{(SF(t), t) | 0 t T}defines a continuation region
C := {(S, t) | S SF(t)} ,
where it is advantageous to keep the option, and a
stopping region
S := {(S, t) | S > SF(t)} ,where an early exercise makes sense.
The price CA of the call option satisfies the free boundary problem
S SF(t) : CA(S, t) = SK
S < SF(t) :CAt
+1
2
2 S22CAS2
+ (rD0) SCAS
rCA = 0
with final condition CA(S,T) = (SK)+ and boundary conditions
CA(0, t) = 0 , limS
CA(S, t) = O(S) , CA(SF(t), t) = SF(t)K , (CA/S)(SF(t), t) = 1 .
8/22/2019 Pricing of American Options
7/14
University of Houston/Department of Mathematics
Dr. Ronald H.W. HoppeNumerical Methods for Option Pricing in Finance
6.1.3 The Black-Scholes inequality for American optionsThe free boundary problem for the price V = PA of an American put can be formulated as a
Linear Complementarity Problem (LCP) which does not explicitly contain the free boundary.
As in the derivation of the Black-Scholes equation, we assume a risk-free, self-financing portfolio
()1 Y = c1 B + c2 S V .
As in Chapter 3, we deduce c2 = VS and
()2 dY = (c1 r B V
t
1
2
2 S2
2V
S2) dt .
The owner of the portfolio has sold the put. If the buyer does not exercise it optimally, the
seller can realize a higher profit than for a risk-free investment, i.e., dY rYdt. Inserting ()1
and ()2 into this inequality results in the so-called Black-Scholes inequality
()V
t+
1
2
2 S2
2V
S2+ (rD0) S
V
S r V 0 .
8/22/2019 Pricing of American Options
8/14
University of Houston/Department of Mathematics
Dr. Ronald H.W. HoppeNumerical Methods for Option Pricing in Finance
When does equality and when does strict inequality hold true in ()?
Case I (S > SF(t)) : We already know from 6.1.1 that in this case the equality sign applies.
Case I (S SF(t)) : We claim that in this case strict inequality holds true.
The proof is easy for D0 = 0: Inserting PA = K S into the Black-Scholes equation yields
PA
t
+1
2
2S2
2PA
S2
+ (rD0)SPA
S
rPA = (rD0)S r(K S) = rK < 0 .
The proof for D0 > 0 is much more involved. It can be shown that SF(t) min(K, rK/D0)
which implies for PA = K S
PAt
+1
2
2S2
2PAS2
+ (rD0)SPAS
rPA = D0S rK < D0SF(t) rK min(D0K, rK) rK 0 .
A similar reasoning applies in case of an American call option:
Equality holds true for 0 S < SF(t), whereas strict inequality applies for S SF(t). In the
latter case, one has to use SF(t) max(K, rK/D0).
8/22/2019 Pricing of American Options
9/14
University of Houston/Department of Mathematics
Dr. Ronald H.W. HoppeNumerical Methods for Option Pricing in Finance
Theorem 6.1 (LCP for American options)
The price of an American option satisfies the LCP
(V
t+
1
2
2 S2
2V
S2+ (rD0) S
V
S r V) 0 ,
V (S) 0 ,
(
V
t +
1
2 2
S2
2V
S2 + (rD0) S
V
S r V) (V(S)) = 0,
where(S) =
(K S)+ , put option(SK)+ , call option
.
The final condition is V(S, T) = (S) and the boundary conditions are
V(0, t) = K , limS
V(S, t) = 0 for a put option ,
V(0, t) = 0 , limS
V(S, t) = O(S) for a call option .
8/22/2019 Pricing of American Options
10/14
University of Houston/Department of Mathematics
Dr. Ronald H.W. HoppeNumerical Methods for Option Pricing in Finance
6.2 Finite Difference Approximation of the Black-Scholes Inequality
6.2.1 Transformation of the Linear Complementarity ProblemAs for the Black-Scholes equation, we perform the transformations
x = ln(S
K) , =
1
2
2 (T t) ,
u(x, ) =1
Kexp(
1
2(k0 1)x +
1
4(k0 1)
2+ k) V(S, t) ,
where k := 2r2
and k0 =2(rD0)2
, and obtain the transformed linear complementarity problem
u
2u
x2 0 , u f 0 , (
u
2u
x2)(u f) = 0 ,
where f(x, ) := exp(12(k0 1)x +14(k0 1)
2+ k)(Kexp(x))K . The initial condition is u(x, 0) = f(x, 0),
and the boundary conditions are given by
limx
(u(x, ) f(x, )) = 0 , limx+
u(x, ) = 0 for a put option ,
limx
u(x, ) = 0 , limx+
(u(x, ) f(x, )) = 0 for a call option .
8/22/2019 Pricing of American Options
11/14
University of Houston/Department of Mathematics
Dr. Ronald H.W. HoppeNumerical Methods for Option Pricing in Finance
6.2.2 Finite Difference Approximation
Discretizing the transformed linear complementarity by finite differences in time and space inexactly the same way as in case of the transformed Black-Scholes equation (cf. Chapter 5),
we obtain the finite-dimensional linear complementarity problem: Find uj+1h lRN1 such that
Ah()uj+1h b
jh 0 , u
j+1h f
j+1h 0 , (Ah()u
j+1h b
jh)(u
j+1h f
j+1h ) = 0 ,
where bjh := Bh()ujh + d
jh , f
j+1h := (f(x1, j+1), ..., f(xN1, j+1))
T, and
djh :=
(1 ) kh2 u(a, j) + k
h2 u(a, j+1)
0
0(1 ) kh2 u(+a, j) +
kh2 u(+a, j+1)
.
The matrices Ah(), Bh() are given as in Chapter 5 (with = 1).
8/22/2019 Pricing of American Options
12/14
University of Houston/Department of Mathematics
Dr. Ronald H.W. HoppeNumerical Methods for Option Pricing in Finance
6.2.3 The discrete LCP and constrained Quadratic Programming (QP)
Dropping the indices h,j as well as the dependence on , the discrete LCP reads as follows:
Find u lRN1 such that
() Au b 0 , u f 0 , (Au b)(u f) = 0 .
Introducing the quadratic objective functional
J(v) := 12
vTAv bTv , v lRN1 ,
and the closed, convex setK := { v lRN1 | vi fi , 1 i N 1 } ,
the discrete LCP () represents the first order necessary optimality conditions (Karush-Kuhn-
Tucker conditions) of the constrained quadratic programming problem
() J(u) = min J(v) .v K
Since A is symmetric, positive definite, the LCP () is also sufficient for a minimizer of ().
8/22/2019 Pricing of American Options
13/14
University of Houston/Department of Mathematics
Dr. Ronald H.W. HoppeNumerical Methods for Option Pricing in Finance
6.3 Numerical Solution of the Constrained QP
6.3.1 Method of Projected Successive Over-Relaxation (PSOR)Using the min-function, the LCP () can be equivalently written as the problem
() min (Au b,u f) = 0 .
As we know from Numerische Mathematik I, the SOR method is based on a triangular decom-
position of the spd matrix A lRN1N1 according to A = D LU, where D := diag(A) and
L resp. U represent the lower resp. upper triangular part ofA.
Then, () is equivalent to
min (uD1(Lu + Uu + b),u f) = 0 u = max (D1(Lu + Uu + b), f) .
This equivalence motivates to solve the LCP by the following projected SOR method:
Given u(0) lRN1 and 1 < < 2, compute u(+1), 0, according to
z()i = a
1ii (bi
i1
j=1aij u
(+1)j
N1
j=i+1aij u
()j ) , 1 i N 1 ,
u(+1)i = max (u
()i + (z
()i u
()i ), fi) , 1 i N 1 .
8/22/2019 Pricing of American Options
14/14
University of Houston/Department of Mathematics
Dr. Ronald H.W. HoppeNumerical Methods for Option Pricing in Finance
6.3.2 Active Set Strategy
For w lR
N1
we denote byIAC(w) := {1 i N 1 | wi = fi} , IIN(w) := {1, ..., N 1} \ IAC(w)
the active set and the inactive set, respectively.
Then, the active set strategy for the solution of the constrained QP () proceeds as follows:
Step 1 (Initialization): Choose u(0) lRN1 and determine IAC
(u(0)) and IIN
(u(0)).
Step 2 (Iteration Loop): For 0 compute:
Step 2.1: Set u(+1)i = fi, i IAC(u
()), and compute u(+1)i , i IIN(u
()), as the solution of the
reduced linear system
jIIN(u()
)
aij u(+1)
j = fi
jIAC(u()
)
aij fj , i IIN(u()) .
Step 2.2: Determine IV(u(+1)) := {i IAC(u
(+1)) |N1
j=1 aij u(+1)
j < fi} and define
IAC(u(+1)) := IAC(u
(+1)) \ IV(u(+1)) , IIN(u
(+1)) := {1, ..., N 1} \ IAC(u(+1)) .
Step 2.3: IfIAC(u(+1)) = IAC(u
()), then STOP, else set := + 1 and go to Step 2.1.