IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2508.16595.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Empirical Analysis of the Model-Free Valuation Approach: Hedging Gaps, Conservatism, and Trading Opportunities

Author

Listed:
  • Zixing Chen
  • Yihan Qi
  • Shanlan Que
  • Julian Sester
  • Xiao Zhang

Abstract

In this paper we study the quality of model-free valuation approaches for financial derivatives by systematically evaluating the difference between model-free super-hedging strategies and the realized payoff of financial derivatives using historical option prices from several constituents of the S&P 500 between 2018 and 2022. Our study allows in particular to describe the realized gap between payoff and model-free hedging strategy empirically so that we can quantify to which degree model-free approaches are overly conservative. Our results imply that the model-free hedging approach is only marginally more conservative than industry-standard models such as the Heston-model while being model-free at the same time. This finding, its statistical description and the model-independence of the hedging approach enable us to construct an explicit trading strategy which, as we demonstrate, can be profitably applied in financial markets, and additionally possesses the desirable feature with an explicit control of its downside risk due to its model-free construction preventing losses pathwise.

Suggested Citation

  • Zixing Chen & Yihan Qi & Shanlan Que & Julian Sester & Xiao Zhang, 2025. "Empirical Analysis of the Model-Free Valuation Approach: Hedging Gaps, Conservatism, and Trading Opportunities," Papers 2508.16595, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2508.16595
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2508.16595
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:2508.16595. 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.

    We have no bibliographic 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.

    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.