Assume that the evolution of a stock price is geometric Brownian Motion
dS=μSdt+σSdW(t)
where S is the stock price at time t (current time). It says in my book that "under the risk-neutral probability measure, the drift of stock price μ becomes the risk-free interest rate r" and it writes
dS=rSdt+σSdW∗(t).
where
W∗ is a B.M. under RNP
Q (risk neutral probability).
Is the above equation definitely correct? Is there a justification for this?
Yes, you may as well take this as the definition of the risk-neutral probability Q.
I will now try to give you some intuition for that kind of construction.
Assume the risk-free interest rate r is constant and that the world ends at time T. Suppose you have a security B=Bt which is riskless, i.e. which follows the dynamics dB/B=rdt
so that, since
dB/B=dlnB, you can easily see that
Bt=B0ert. In other words, the process
Bt grows at the same speed of the risk-free rate. For this security, the price at time zero is
B0, which coincides with the discounted value of its expected payoff:
e−rTE[BT]=e−rTE[B0erT]=e−rTB0erT=B0.
Now consider a stock which is risky, as it follows the dynamics dS/S=μdt+σdW
with
μ>r and
σ constant and
dW, a standard Brownian Motion, being the source of risk. This time the process
S grows in expectation with speed
μ, and its discounted expected payoff
e−rTE[ST]=e−rTS0eμT=S0e(μ−r)T>S0
is bigger that its current value
S0. Why is it so? Well, because there's some risk involved in holding
S, so that its price should be lower w.r.t. a riskless security! This way the investor who buys the stock at time
0 will be compensated for bearing this risk, i.e. he will pocket a
risk premium. The risk-neutral probability
Q is the one which gives the right price when you look at the discounted expected payoff, i.e.
S0=e−rTEQ[ST].
If you followed my reasoning so far, it should now be clear that
Q is that probability for which
dS/S=rdt+σdWQ
with
dWQ being a Brownian Motion under
Q.
No comments:
Post a Comment