MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308122994 · doi:10.3390/jrfm15110504

Efficient Pricing of Spread Options with Stochastic Rates and Stochastic Volatility

2022· article· en· W4308122994 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alexis Levendis, Eben Maré

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStochastic volatilityMonte Carlo methodFast Fourier transformGeometric Brownian motionEconometricsValuation of optionsBrownian motionFourier transformHeath–Jarrow–Morton frameworkVolatility (finance)MathematicsComputer scienceAlgorithmStatisticsDiffusion process

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spread options are notoriously difficult to price without the use of Monte Carlo simulation. Some strides have been made in recent years through the application of Fourier transform methods; however, to date, these methods have only been applied to specific underlying processes including two-factor geometric Brownian motion (gBm) and three-factor stochastic volatility models. In this paper, we derive the characteristic function for the two-asset Heston–Hull–White model with a full correlation matrix and apply the two-dimensional fast Fourier transform (FFT) method to price equity spread options. Our findings suggest that the FFT is up to 50 times faster than Monte Carlo and yields similar accuracy. Furthermore, stochastic interest rates can have a material impact on long-dated out-of-the-money spread options.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicStochastic processes and financial applicationsFrench-language works237,207