A general option pricing framework for affine fractionally integrated models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article studies the impact of fractional integration on volatility modelling and option pricing. We propose a general discrete-time pricing framework based on affine multi-component volatility models that admit ARCH(∞) representations. This not only nests a large variety of option pricing models from the literature, but also allows for the introduction of novel covariance-stationary long-memory affine GARCH pricing models. Using an infinite sum characterization of the log-asset price’s cumulant generating function, we derive semi-explicit expressions for the valuation of European-style derivatives under a general variance-dependent stochastic discount factor. Moreover, we carry out an extensive empirical analysis using returns and S&P 500 options over the period 1996–2019. Overall, we find that once the informational content from options is incorporated into the parameter estimation process, the inclusion of fractionally integrated dynamics in volatility is beneficial for improving the out-of-sample option pricing performance. The largest improvements in the implied volatility root-mean-square errors occur for options with maturities longer than one year, reaching 28% and 18% when compared to standard one- and two-component short-memory models, respectively.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".