IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why Are Derivative Warrants More Expensive Than Options? An Empirical Study


  • Li, Gang
  • Zhang, Chu


Derivative warrants typically have higher prices than do otherwise identical options. Using data from the Hong Kong market during 2002–2007, we show that the price difference reflects the liquidity premium of derivative warrants over options. Newly issued derivative warrants are much more liquid than options with similar terms. As a result, long-term derivative warrants are preferred by traders who trade frequently. In spite of their higher prices, short-term returns on long-term derivative warrants are, in fact, higher than the hypothetical short-term returns on options. The differences in price and liquidity measures decline as the contracts get closer to maturity.

Suggested Citation

  • Li, Gang & Zhang, Chu, 2011. "Why Are Derivative Warrants More Expensive Than Options? An Empirical Study," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(01), pages 275-297, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jfinqa:v:46:y:2011:i:01:p:275-297_00

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. repec:eee:jfinec:v:128:y:2018:i:1:p:38-65 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Adrian C. H. Lei, 2015. "Price and Volume Effects of Exchange‐Traded Barrier Options: Evidence from Callable Bull/Bear Contracts," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 35(11), pages 1042-1066, November.
    3. Hana Florianová, 2016. "Trading Strategies for Warrants," Proceedings of Economics and Finance Conferences 4206760, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    4. Baik, Bok & Kang, Hyoung-Goo & Kim, Young Jun, 2013. "Volatility arbitrage around earnings announcements: Evidence from the Korean equity linked warrants market," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 109-130.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:cup:jfinqa:v:46:y:2011:i:01:p:275-297_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Keith Waters). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.