Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze different behaviors between long-term options’ implied volatilities and realized volatilities. Design/methodology/approach This paper uses a widely adopted short interest rate model that describes a stochastic process of the short interest rate to capture interest rate risk. Price a long-term option by a system of two stochastic processes to capture both underlying asset and interest rate volatilities. Model capital charges according to the Basel III regulatory specified approach. S&P 500 index and relevant data are used to illustrate how the proposed model works. Coup with the low interest rate scenario by first choosing an optimal time segment obtained by a multiple change-point detection method, and then using the data from the chosen time segment to estimate the CIR model parameters, and finally obtaining the final option price by incorporating the capital charge costs. Findings Monotonic increase in long-term option implied volatility can be explained mainly by interest rate risk, and the level of implied volatility can be explained by various valuation adjustments, particularly risk capital costs, which differ from existing published literatures that typically explained the differences in behaviors of long-term implied volatilities by the volatility of volatility or risk premium. The empirical results well explain long-term volatility behaviors. Research limitations/implications The authors only consider the market risk capital in this paper for demonstration purpose. Dealers may price the long-term options with the credit risk. It appears that other than the market risks such as underlying asset volatility and interest rate volatility, the market risk capital is a main nonmarket risk factor that significantly affects the long-term option prices. Practical implications Analysis helps readers and/or users of long-term options to understand why long-term option implied equity volatilities are much higher than observed. The framework offered in the paper provides some guidance if one would like to check if a long-term option is priced reasonable. Originality/value It is the first time to analyze mathematically long-term options’ volatility behavior in comparison with historically observed 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".