MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A general option pricing framework for affine fractionally integrated models

2024· article· en· W4404936426 on OpenAlexafffund
Maciej Augustyniak, Alexandru Badescu, Jean‐François Bégin, Sarath Kumar Jayaraman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Banking & Finance · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of CalgaryUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlliance de recherche numérique du CanadaSimon Fraser University
KeywordsAffine transformationMathematical economicsEconometricsEconomicsComputer scienceMathematicsPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.770
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Banking & FinanceSame topicStochastic processes and financial applicationsFrench-language works237,207