Pricing interest rate derivatives under stochastic volatility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to derive semi‐closed‐form solutions to a wide variety of interest rate derivatives prices under stochastic volatility in affine‐term structure models. Design/methodology/approach The paper first derives the Frobenius series solution to the cross‐moment generating function, and then inverts the related characteristic function using the Gauss‐Laguerre quadrature rule for the corresponding cumulative probabilities. Findings This paper values options on discount bonds, coupon bond options, swaptions, interest rate caps, floors, and collars, etc. The valuation approach suggested in this paper is found to be both accurate and fast and the approach compares favorably with some alternative methods in the literature. Research limitations/implications Future research could extend the approach adopted in this paper to some non‐affine‐term structure models such as quadratic models. Practical implications The valuation approach in this study can be used to price mortgage‐backed securities, asset‐backed securities and credit default swaps. The approach can also be used to value derivatives on other assets such as commodities. Finally, the approach in this paper is useful for the risk management of fixed‐income portfolios. Originality/value This paper utilizes a new approach to value many of the most commonly traded interest rate derivatives in a stochastic volatility framework.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".