IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2209.15037.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Quantitative Fundamental Theorem of Asset Pricing

Author

Listed:
  • Beatrice Acciaio
  • Julio Backhoff
  • Gudmund Pammer

Abstract

In this paper we provide a quantitative analysis to the concept of arbitrage, that allows to deal with model uncertainty without imposing the no-arbitrage condition. In markets that admit ``small arbitrage", we can still make sense of the problems of pricing and hedging. The pricing measures here will be such that asset price processes are close to being martingales, and the hedging strategies will need to cover some additional cost. We show a quantitative version of the Fundamental Theorem of Asset Pricing and of the Super-Replication Theorem. Finally, we study robustness of the amount of arbitrage and existence of respective pricing measures, showing stability of these concepts with respect to a strong adapted Wasserstein distance.

Suggested Citation

  • Beatrice Acciaio & Julio Backhoff & Gudmund Pammer, 2022. "Quantitative Fundamental Theorem of Asset Pricing," Papers 2209.15037, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2209.15037
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2209.15037
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. J. Michael Harrison & Stanley R. Pliska, 1981. "Martingales and Stochastic Integrals in the Theory of Continous Trading," Discussion Papers 454, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    2. Harrison, J. Michael & Kreps, David M., 1979. "Martingales and arbitrage in multiperiod securities markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 381-408, June.
    3. Kreps, David M., 1981. "Arbitrage and equilibrium in economies with infinitely many commodities," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 15-35, March.
    4. Harrison, J. Michael & Pliska, Stanley R., 1981. "Martingales and stochastic integrals in the theory of continuous trading," Stochastic Processes and their Applications, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 215-260, August.
    5. Sara Biagini & Bruno Bouchard & Constantinos Kardaras & Marcel Nutz, 2017. "Robust Fundamental Theorem for Continuous Processes," Post-Print hal-01076062, HAL.
    6. Julio Backhoff-Veraguas & Daniel Bartl & Mathias Beiglböck & Manu Eder, 2020. "Adapted Wasserstein distances and stability in mathematical finance," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 601-632, July.
    7. Yuri Kabanov, 2009. "Markets with Transaction Costs. Mathematical Theory," Post-Print hal-00488168, HAL.
    8. Gaoyue Guo & Jan Obloj, 2017. "Computational Methods for Martingale Optimal Transport problems," Papers 1710.07911, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2019.
    9. Julio Backhoff-Veraguas & Daniel Bartl & Mathias Beiglbock & Manu Eder, 2019. "Adapted Wasserstein Distances and Stability in Mathematical Finance," Papers 1901.07450, arXiv.org, revised May 2020.
    10. Sara Biagini & Bruno Bouchard & Constantinos Kardaras & Marcel Nutz, 2017. "Robust Fundamental Theorem For Continuous Processes," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 963-987, October.
    11. B. Acciaio & M. Beiglböck & F. Penkner & W. Schachermayer, 2016. "A Model-Free Version Of The Fundamental Theorem Of Asset Pricing And The Super-Replication Theorem," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 233-251, April.
    12. Gerhold, Stefan & Gülüm, I. Cetin, 2019. "Peacocks nearby: Approximating sequences of measures," Stochastic Processes and their Applications, Elsevier, vol. 129(7), pages 2406-2436.
    13. Yan Dolinsky & H. Soner, 2014. "Robust hedging with proportional transaction costs," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 327-347, April.
    14. Erhan Bayraktar & Yuchong Zhang, 2016. "Fundamental Theorem of Asset Pricing Under Transaction Costs and Model Uncertainty," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 41(3), pages 1039-1054, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Patrick Cheridito & Matti Kiiski & David J. Promel & H. Mete Soner, 2019. "Martingale optimal transport duality," Papers 1904.04644, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2020.
    2. Matteo Burzoni & Marco Frittelli & Zhaoxu Hou & Marco Maggis & Jan Obłój, 2019. "Pointwise Arbitrage Pricing Theory in Discrete Time," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 44(3), pages 1034-1057, August.
    3. Huy N. Chau & Masaaki Fukasawa & Miklos Rasonyi, 2021. "Super-replication with transaction costs under model uncertainty for continuous processes," Papers 2102.02298, arXiv.org.
    4. Matteo Burzoni & Marco Frittelli & Zhaoxu Hou & Marco Maggis & Jan Ob{l}'oj, 2016. "Pointwise Arbitrage Pricing Theory in Discrete Time," Papers 1612.07618, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2018.
    5. Huy N. Chau & Masaaki Fukasawa & Miklós Rásonyi, 2022. "Super‐replication with transaction costs under model uncertainty for continuous processes," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(4), pages 1066-1085, October.
    6. Blanchard, Romain & Carassus, Laurence, 2020. "No-arbitrage with multiple-priors in discrete time," Stochastic Processes and their Applications, Elsevier, vol. 130(11), pages 6657-6688.
    7. Sergey Badikov & Mark H. A. Davis & Antoine Jacquier, 2018. "Perturbation analysis of sub/super hedging problems," Papers 1806.03543, arXiv.org, revised May 2021.
    8. Jovanovic, Franck & Schinckus, Christophe, 2016. "Breaking down the barriers between econophysics and financial economics," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 256-266.
    9. W. Schachermayer, 1994. "Martingale Measures For Discrete‐Time Processes With Infinite Horizon," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(1), pages 25-55, January.
    10. Shuoqing Deng & Xiaolu Tan & Xiang Yu, 2020. "Utility Maximization with Proportional Transaction Costs Under Model Uncertainty," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 45(4), pages 1210-1236, November.
    11. Fontana, Claudio & Runggaldier, Wolfgang J., 2021. "Arbitrage concepts under trading restrictions in discrete-time financial markets," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 66-80.
    12. Keith A. Lewis, 2019. "A Simple Proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Asset Pricing," Papers 1912.01091, arXiv.org.
    13. Tahir Choulli & Jun Deng & Junfeng Ma, 2015. "How non-arbitrage, viability and numéraire portfolio are related," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 719-741, October.
    14. Teemu Pennanen & Ari-Pekka Perkkio, 2016. "Convex duality in optimal investment and contingent claim valuation in illiquid markets," Papers 1603.02867, arXiv.org.
    15. Erhan Bayraktar & Gu Wang, 2018. "Quantile Hedging in a semi-static market with model uncertainty," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 87(2), pages 197-227, April.
    16. Matteo Burzoni & Frank Riedel & H. Mete Soner, 2021. "Viability and Arbitrage Under Knightian Uncertainty," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(3), pages 1207-1234, May.
    17. Ariel Neufeld & Antonis Papapantoleon & Qikun Xiang, 2023. "Model-Free Bounds for Multi-Asset Options Using Option-Implied Information and Their Exact Computation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(4), pages 2051-2068, April.
    18. Teemu Pennanen & Ari-Pekka Perkkiö, 2018. "Convex duality in optimal investment and contingent claim valuation in illiquid markets," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 733-771, October.
    19. Carassus, Laurence, 2023. "No free lunch for markets with multiple numéraires," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    20. Martin Glanzer & Georg Ch. Pflug & Alois Pichler, 2017. "Incorporating statistical model error into the calculation of acceptability prices of contingent claims," Papers 1703.05709, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2019.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2209.15037. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.