WilliamY Joined 12/19/08 Messages 72 Points 28 7/29/09 #1 Where can I download classical papers? Thanks.
Andy Nguyen Joined 5/2/06 Messages 11,954 Points 273 7/29/09 #2 It's Rubinstein, not Rubenstein. You can easily find the pdf version online or QuantNetwork - Financial Engineering Forum - Downloads - Unscrambling the binary code
It's Rubinstein, not Rubenstein. You can easily find the pdf version online or QuantNetwork - Financial Engineering Forum - Downloads - Unscrambling the binary code
WilliamY Joined 12/19/08 Messages 72 Points 28 7/29/09 #3 Thanks again Andy. On the first page, how did d, one plus the payout rate, and r enter the log? The textbook risk neutral approach has them outside the log. What's the expression for S in terms of r and d?
Thanks again Andy. On the first page, how did d, one plus the payout rate, and r enter the log? The textbook risk neutral approach has them outside the log. What's the expression for S in terms of r and d?
doug reich Some guy Joined 4/23/08 Messages 684 Points 28 7/29/09 #4 WilliamY said: Thanks again Andy. On the first page, how did d, one plus the payout rate, enter the option formula? The textbook risk neutral approach does not have the d term. Click to expand... Only because they take d=0; this is a more general case.
WilliamY said: Thanks again Andy. On the first page, how did d, one plus the payout rate, enter the option formula? The textbook risk neutral approach does not have the d term. Click to expand... Only because they take d=0; this is a more general case.
WilliamY Joined 12/19/08 Messages 72 Points 28 7/29/09 #5 doug reich said: Only because they take d=0; this is a more general case. Click to expand... I suppose you meant d = 1 + 0. However, I went over the derivation again but I don't understand why is d and r in the log term and not outside of it?
doug reich said: Only because they take d=0; this is a more general case. Click to expand... I suppose you meant d = 1 + 0. However, I went over the derivation again but I don't understand why is d and r in the log term and not outside of it?
WilliamY Joined 12/19/08 Messages 72 Points 28 7/29/09 #6 Never mind. I think I figured it out. I reread the start of the paper carefully and it says, "... the underlying asset return can be assumed to follow a lognormal random walk." The SDE should be: ($dS=\sigma SdW+[\log(d)-\log(r)]Sdt$) Thanks for your time Doug.
Never mind. I think I figured it out. I reread the start of the paper carefully and it says, "... the underlying asset return can be assumed to follow a lognormal random walk." The SDE should be: ($dS=\sigma SdW+[\log(d)-\log(r)]Sdt$) Thanks for your time Doug.