Option Valuation with Normal Mixture GARCH Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The class of mixture GARCH models introduced by Haas, Mittnik and Paollela (2004) and Alexander and Lazar (2006) provides a better alternative for fitting financial data than various other GARCH models driven by the normal or skewed t-distribution. In this paper we propose different option pricing methodologies when the underlying stock dynamic is modeled by an asymmetric normal mixture GARCH model with K volatility components. Since under GARCH models the market is incomplete there are an infinite number of martingale measures one can use for pricing. For our mixture setting we analyze the impact of three risk-neutral candidates: a generalized local risk neutral valuation relationship, an Esscher transform and an extended Girsanov principle. We investigate the out-of-sample performance of an asymmetric GARCH model with a mixture density of two normals for Call options written on the S&P 500 Index. The performance under all three transformations is quite impressive when compared to the benchmark GARCH model with normal driving noise. The overall improvement is explained not only by the skewness and leptokurtosis exhibited by the innovation mixture distribution, but also by the richer parametrization used in modeling the dynamics of the multi-component conditional volatility.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".