This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

The Foresight Bias in Monte-Carlo Pricing of Options with Early

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Christian Fries

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In this paper we investigate the so called foresight bias that may appear in the Monte-Carlo pricing of Bermudan and compound options if the exercise criteria is calculated by the same Monte-Carlo simulation as the exercise values. The standard approach to remove the foresight bias is to use two independent Monte-Carlo simulations: One simulation is used to estimate the exercise criteria (as a function of some state variable), the other is used to calculate the exercise price based on this exercise criteria. We shall call this the numerical removal of the foresight bias. In this paper we give an exact definition of the foresight bias in closed form and show how to apply an analytical correction for the foresight bias. Our numerical results show that the analytical removal of the foresight bias gives similar results as the standard numerical removal of the foresight bias. The analytical correction allows for a simpler coding and faster pricing, compared to a numerical removal of the foresight bias. Our analysis may also be used as an indication of when to neglect the foresight bias removal altogether. While this is sometimes possible, neglecting foresight bias will break the possibility of parallelization of Monte-Carlo simulation and may be inadequate for Bermudan options with many exercise dates (for which the foresight bias may become a Bermudan option on the Monte-Carlo error) or for portfolios of Bermudan options (for which the foresight bias grows faster than the Monte-Carlo error). In addition to an analytical removal of the foresight bias we derive an analytical correction for the suboptimal exercise due to the uncertainty induced by the Monte-Carlo error. The combined correction for foresight bias (biased high) and suboptimal exercise (biased low) removed the systematic bias even for Monte-Carlo simulations with very small number of paths.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://129.3.20.41/eps/fin/papers/0511/0511002.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by EconWPA in its series Finance with number 0511002.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length: 27 pages
Date of creation: 03 Nov 2005
Date of revision: 08 Nov 2005
Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpfi:0511002

Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 27
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://129.3.20.41

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (EconWPA).

Related research
Keywords: Monte Carlo; Bermudan; Early Exercise; Regression; Least Square Approximation of Conditional Expectation; Least Square Monte Carlo; Longstaff-Schwartz; Perfect Foresight; Foresight Bias;

Find related papers by JEL classification:
C15 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: General - - - Statistical Simulation Methods
G13 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Contingent Pricing; Futures Pricing

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Longstaff, Francis A & Schwartz, Eduardo S, 2001. "Valuing American Options by Simulation: A Simple Least-Squares Approach," Review of Financial Studies, Oxford University Press for Society for Financial Studies, vol. 14(1), pages 113-47.
  2. Philip Protter & Emmanuelle Clément & Damien Lamberton, 2002. "An analysis of a least squares regression method for American option pricing," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 6(4), pages 449-471. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? All the bibliographic data shown here has been contributed by volunteers, thereby helping to keep this service free.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-17.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.