A comparison of biased simulation schemes for stochastic volatility models
Using an Euler discretization to simulate a mean-reverting CEV process gives rise to the problem that while the process itself is guaranteed to be nonnegative, the discretization is not. Although an exact and efficient simulation algorithm exists for this process, at present this is not the case for the CEV-SV stochastic volatility model, with the Heston model as a special case, where the variance is modelled as a mean-reverting CEV process. Consequently, when using an Euler discretization, one must carefully think about how to fix negative variances. Our contribution is threefold. Firstly, we unify all Euler fixes into a single general framework. Secondly, we introduce the new full truncation scheme, tailored to minimize the positive bias found when pricing European options. Thirdly and finally, we numerically compare all Euler fixes to recent quasi-second order schemes of Kahl and Jackel, and Ninomiya and Victoir, as well as to the exact scheme of Broadie and Kaya. The choice of fix is found to be extremely important. The full truncation scheme outperforms all considered biased schemes in terms of bias and root-mean-squared error.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 10 (2010)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/RQUF20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RQUF20|
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.:
- Darrell Duffie & Jun Pan & Kenneth Singleton, 2000.
"Transform Analysis and Asset Pricing for Affine Jump-Diffusions,"
Econometric Society, vol. 68(6), pages 1343-1376, November.
- Darrell Duffie & Jun Pan & Kenneth Singleton, 1999. "Transform Analysis and Asset Pricing for Affine Jump-Diffusions," NBER Working Papers 7105, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Cox, John C & Ingersoll, Jonathan E, Jr & Ross, Stephen A, 1985. "A Theory of the Term Structure of Interest Rates," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 53(2), pages 385-407, March.
- Heston, Steven L, 1993. "A Closed-Form Solution for Options with Stochastic Volatility with Applications to Bond and Currency Options," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 6(2), pages 327-43.
- Christian Kahl & Peter Jackel, 2006. "Fast strong approximation Monte Carlo schemes for stochastic volatility models," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(6), pages 513-536.
- Griselda Deelstra & Freddy Delbaen, 1998. "Convergence of discretised stochastic interest rate: processes with stochastic drift term," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/7584, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
- Heston, Steven L & Nandi, Saikat, 2000. "A Closed-Form GARCH Option Valuation Model," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 13(3), pages 585-625.
- Leif Andersen & Vladimir Piterbarg, 2007. "Moment explosions in stochastic volatility models," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 29-50, January.
- Alfonsi Aurélien, 2005. "On the discretization schemes for the CIR (and Bessel squared) processes," Monte Carlo Methods and Applications, De Gruyter, vol. 11(4), pages 355-384, December.
- Peter Christoffersen & Kris Jacobs, 2004. "Which GARCH Model for Option Valuation?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(9), pages 1204-1221, September.
- Bates, David S, 1996. "Jumps and Stochastic Volatility: Exchange Rate Processes Implicit in Deutsche Mark Options," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 9(1), pages 69-107.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:quantf:v:10:y:2010:i:2:p:177-194. 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: (Michael McNulty)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.