Candidate: Brownian motion
- Markovian
- "Tractable"(-ish, depending on how you transform it)
- Excess kurtosis = 0
- Market completeness (if number of hedging instruments >= number of sources of randomness)
Poisson
We've already met Gauss last time. Now we'll introduce a contemporary of him, Siméon Denis Poisson. While Brownian motion is a diffusion stochastic process (a random walk down the street), the Poisson process is a counting process that is associated with jumps. When we add a Poisson counting process to the diffusion equation, the stochastic differential equation becomes a jump-diffusion equation that allows for jumps, or "gapping up/down". Why is this desirable or required? Just talk to any trader, and they'll tell you that price jump is a reality, especially for markets with substantial close hours (i.e. the majority of the markets other than FX, S&P futures...). So instead of a random walk down the street, perhaps after all it is more like parkour down the street?
You Jump, I Jump
What are the advantages of modeling asset prices with a jump-diffusion process over a diffusion only process?
Candidate: Jump-diffusion Process
- Markovian
- Not tractable (unless under restrictive assumptions)
- Excess kurtosis > 0
- Market incomplete (unless under restrictive assumptions)
The implementation of jump-diffusion model can be challenging. The numerical calibration is of course more computationally intensive, but the more subtle and fundamental issue is this: how do we identify jumps? When there is a "sudden" gap in the time series, how can one be sure that it is NOT just an extreme value, yet still being drawn from the good old Gaussian distribution?
No comments:
Post a Comment