Finite Difference Methods: Autumn 2 0 0 9

A U T U M N 2 0 0 9
FINITE DIFFERENCE METHODS
Numerical Methods in Finance (Implementing Market Models)

COMPUTATIONAL FINANCE
MSc
©Finbarr Murphy 2007
Lecture Objectives
 Introduction to Finite Difference Methods
 Forward - Explicit Finite
 Backward - Implicit
 Central – Crank-Nicolson
 Hedge Sensitivities
MSc
Agenda
Page
1
Explicit Finite Difference Methods 2
2
Implicit Finite Difference Methods 18
3
Crank-Nicholson 25
Hedge Sensitivities 29
MSc
3
Explicit Finite Difference Methods

 Finite difference methods are based on the
conversion of PDE’s to difference equations
 The life of the option is divided into N equally spaced

intervals
 We first consider a backward difference method or

the explicit finite difference methods
 First a recap in deriving

MSc
4

 Given a function, f(x), its derivative is given by the
limit
f ( x + h) − f ( x )
f ' ( x) = lim
h →0 h
 The second order derivative is given by
f ( x + h) − 2 f ( x ) + f ( x − h)
f " ( x) = lim
h →0 h2
MSc
5

 Recall the Black Scholes PDE from week 1
∂C ∂C 1 2 2 ∂ 2C
+ rS + σ S − rC = 0
∂t ∂S 2 ∂S 2
 Rearranging and setting x = ln(S)
∂C 1 2 2 ∂ 2C ∂C
− = σ S +v − rC
∂t 2 ∂x 2
∂x
 We note that S, v and σ are constants

MSc
6

 Note the first and second order partial differential
equations in the B-S PDE.
 Also note that the definition of the second order

derivative includes f(x-h), f(x) and f(x+h)
 This suggests a trinomial type grid
f(x+h)
f(x)
f(x-h)
MSc
7

 We now divide time and space into discrete intervals
Δt and Δx respectively
 In grid terms, we discretise the B-S PDE as
 ∂C/∂t = ΔC/Δt
j+2
j+1
Ci+1,j+1
j
Ci,j Ci+1,j
j-1
Ci+1,j-1
MSc
j-2 8
i-1 i i+1 i+2 i+3

 The PDE becomes
Ci +1, j − Ci , j 1 2 Ci +1, j +1 − 2Ci +1, j + Ci +1, j −1 Ci +1, j +1 − Ci +1, j −1

− = σ +v − rC i +1, j
∆t 2 ∆x 2
2∆x
j+2
j+1
Ci+1,j+1
j
Ci,j Ci+1,j
j-1
Ci+1,j-1
MSc
j-2 9
i-1 i i+1 i+2 i+3

 Rewriting
Ci , j = pu Ci +1, j +1 + pmCi +1, j + pd Ci +1, j −1

 σ2 v 
pu = ∆t  + 
 2∆x 2∆x 
2
σ 2
Pm = 1 − ∆t 2 − r∆t
∆x
 σ 2
v 
pd = ∆t  − 
 2∆x 2∆x 
2
MSc
10

 We will look at a specific example to help our
understanding
 European Call
 Current Asset Price, S0 = 100
 Maturity, T = 1 year
 Volatility, σ = 20%
 Continuous interest rate, r = 6%
 Continuous dividend yield, δ = 3%
 Number of steps, N = 3
 Timestep, Δt = T/N = 1/3
 Space step, Δx = 0.2
MSc
11

 Some preliminary calculations
 v = r - δ - ½σ2 = 0.01
 pu = 0.1750
 pd = 0.6467
 pd = 0.1583
MSc
12

 Some preliminary calculations Ci+2,j+1 = puCi+3,j+2 + pmCi+3,j+1 + pdCi+3,j =
22.9243
Si+3,j+3 = 182.21 CCi+i+3,j+ = max(0,S

32 = 82.21 i+3,j+2
3,j+ -K)
= max(0,149.18-100) = 49.18
j+2
Si+3,j+2 = 149.18 Ci+3,j+2 = 49.18
j+1 Ci+1,j+1
Si+3,j+1 = 122.14 Ci+3,j+1 = 22.14
j
Ci,j Ci+1,j
Si+3,j = 100.00 Ci+3,j = 0.00
j-1 Si+3,j-2 = Se(-N. Δx)
Ci+1,j-1
Si+3,j-1 = 81.87 Ci+3,j-1 = 0.00
100e(-2x 0.2 )
= 67.03
j-2 Si+3,j-2 = Se(-N. Δx)
Si+3,j-2 = 67.03 Ci+3,j-2 == 100e

0.00(-3x 0.2 )
= 54.88
MSc
i-1 i i+1 i+2 i+3

13
Si+3,j-3 = 54.88 Ci+3,j-3 = 0.00

 Stability and Convergence
 Let C be the exact solution to the PDE
 Let O be the exact solution to the finite

difference equation
 C-O is the discretisation error and is caused by
the approximation of partial derivatives with
finite differences
 A finite difference method is convergent if the

discretisation error tends to zero as space and
time steps tend to zero
MSc
14

 Stability and Convergence
 Let Õ represent the actual numerical solution to

the finite difference equation
 C- Õ is the round-off error and is caused by the

approximation of partial derivatives with finite
differences
 A finite difference method is stable if the round-

off error is small and is bounded

MSc
15

 We need to think about reasonable values for the
space step Δx
 Our finite difference procedure must be based on a

stable system that converges
 Look at the formulae for pm, note that high

volatilities could cause pm to become negative,
clearly an undesirable step
 Similar possibilities exist for pu and pd
 To ensure stability and convergence, we must set

∆x ≥ σ 3∆t
MSc
16

 Let’s assume we expect the asset price to be with 3
standard deviations above or below the current price at
option maturity
 Further, a reasonable number of asset price values might

be 100
 This means we can set Δx to
∆x = 6σ T / 100 = 0.015
 Applying the stability and convergence condition, we

have
2
1  ∆x 
∆t ≤   = 0.0012
3 σ 
MSc
17

 This means we will have 833 time steps per year
MSc
18
Agenda
Page
1
2
3
Crank-Nicholson 25
MSc
19
Implicit and Crank-Nicolson Finite Differences

 The explicit finite method looks at forward
differences and converts the B-S PDE to
Ci +1, j − Ci , j 1 2 Ci +1, j +1 − 2Ci +1, j + Ci +1, j −1 Ci +1, j +1 − Ci +1, j −1

− = σ +v − rC i +1, j
∆t 2 ∆x 2
2∆x
j+2
j+1
Ci+1,j+1
j
Ci,j Ci+1,j
j-1
Ci+1,j-1
MSc
j-2 20
i-1 i i+1 i+2 i+3

 The implicit finite method looks at central
differences and converts the B-S PDE to
Ci +1, j − Ci , j 1 2 Ci , j +1 − 2Ci , j + Ci , j −1 Ci , j +1 − Ci , j −1
− = σ +v − rC i , j
∆t 2 ∆x 2
2∆x
j+2
j+1
Ci,j+1
j
Ci,j Ci+1,j
j-1
Ci,j-1
j-2
i-1 i i+1 i+2 i+3
MSc
21

 This gives us
1 σ v 
2
pu = − ∆t  2 + 
2  ∆x ∆x 
σ 2
Pm = 1 + ∆t 2 + r∆t
∆x
1 σ 2
v 
pd = − ∆t  2 − 
2  ∆x ∆x 
MSc
22

 But we don’t have an individual option price at
time step i as is the case for explicit finite
difference methods
 We use the following boundary conditions
Ci , N j − Ci , N j −1 = λU
Ci , − N j +1 − Ci , − N j = λL
 λU and λD are upper and lower boundary conditions

determined by the type of option
MSc
23

 For example, a call option
 We use the following boundary conditions
λU = Si , N j − Si , N j −1
λL = 0
 To see this more clearly, consider a 1-step
calculator
MSc
24

 For example, a call option
j+2
C0,1
j=1
λU = { C1,0
C0.0
j=0
j=-1
λL = {
C0,-1
i-1 i=0 i=1 i+2
MSc
25
Agenda
Page
1
2
3
Crank-Nicholson 25
MSc
26
Crank-Nicolson Finite Differences

 The Crank-Nicolson method has a faster
convergence than implicit or explicit methods
 It is an average of the implicit and explicit

methods
 It is a “fully cantered method”

MSc
27

 The Crank-Nicolson method centres the finite
differences at imaginary time-steps (i+½)
j+2
j+1
Ci,j+1 Ci+1,j+1
j
Ci,j Ci+1,j
j-1
Ci,j-1 Ci+1,j-1
j-2
i-1 i i+1 i+2 i+3
MSc
28

 The PDE becomes
Ci +1, j − Ci , j 1 2  ( Ci +1, j +1 − 2Ci +1, j + Ci +1, j −1 ) + ( Ci , j +1 − 2Ci , j + Ci , j −1 ) 

− = σ   + ...
∆t 2  2∆x 2

 ( Ci +1, j +1 − Ci +1, j −1 ) + ( Ci , j +1 − Ci , j −1 )   C i +1, j +C i , j 
v  − r  
 4∆x   2 
 With the same boundary conditions
Ci , N j − Ci , N j −1 = λU
Ci , − N j +1 − Ci , − N j = λL
MSc
29
Agenda
Page
1
2
3
Crank-Nicholson 25
MSc
30
Hedge Sensitivities
 Computing the hedge sensitivities is as important
as the calculation of the option price
 Hedge sensitivities include

 Sensitivity to the underlying asset price (delta)
 Sensitivity to Delta (gamma)
 Sensitivity to interest rates (rho)
 Sensitivity to volatility (vega)
 Sensitivity to time (Theta)
MSc
31
Hedge Sensitivities
 As an example, sensitivity to the underlying stock
price, delta can be approximated by the equation
∂C C0 , j +1 − C0, j −1
∆= ≈
∂S S 0 , j +1 − S 0, j −1
MSc
32
Recommended Texts
 Required/Recommended
 Clewlow, L. and Strickland, C. (1996) Implementing derivative
models, 1st ed., John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
— Chapter 3
 Additional/Useful
 Brandimarte, P. (2006) Numerical methods in finance and
economics: A matlab-based introduction, 2nd Revised ed.,
John Wiley & Sons Inc.
— Chapter 9, P475-85
 Hull, J. (2005) Options, futures and other derivatives, 6th ed.,

Prentice Hall
— Chapters 17, P419-430
MSc
33

Finite Difference Methods: Autumn 2 0 0 9

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Finite Difference Methods: Autumn 2 0 0 9

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A U T U M N 2 0 0 9

FINITE DIFFERENCE METHODS

Numerical Methods in Finance (Implementing Market Models)

Explicit Finite Difference Methods

 The life of the option is divided into N equally spaced

 We first consider a backward difference method or

 First a recap in deriving

Explicit Finite Difference Methods

Explicit Finite Difference Methods

 Rearranging and setting x = ln(S)

 We note that S, v and σ are constants

Explicit Finite Difference Methods

 Also note that the definition of the second order

 This suggests a trinomial type grid

Explicit Finite Difference Methods

 In grid terms, we discretise the B-S PDE as

Explicit Finite Difference Methods

Ci +1, j − Ci , j 1 2 Ci +1, j +1 − 2Ci +1, j + Ci +1, j −1 Ci +1, j +1 − Ci +1, j −1

Explicit Finite Difference Methods

Ci , j = pu Ci +1, j +1 + pmCi +1, j + pd Ci +1, j −1

Explicit Finite Difference Methods

Explicit Finite Difference Methods

Explicit Finite Difference Methods

Si+3,j+3 = 182.21 CCi+i+3,j+ = max(0,S

j-1 Si+3,j-2 = Se(-N. Δx)

Si+3,j-2 = 67.03 Ci+3,j-2 == 100e

i-1 i i+1 i+2 i+3

Explicit Finite Difference Methods

 Let C be the exact solution to the PDE

 Let O be the exact solution to the finite

 A finite difference method is convergent if the

Explicit Finite Difference Methods

 Let Õ represent the actual numerical solution to

 C- Õ is the round-off error and is caused by the

 A finite difference method is stable if the round-

off error is small and is bounded

Explicit Finite Difference Methods

 Our finite difference procedure must be based on a

 Look at the formulae for pm, note that high

 Similar possibilities exist for pu and pd

 To ensure stability and convergence, we must set

Explicit Finite Difference Methods

 Further, a reasonable number of asset price values might

 This means we can set Δx to

 Applying the stability and convergence condition, we

Explicit Finite Difference Methods

Implicit and Crank-Nicolson Finite Differences

Ci +1, j − Ci , j 1 2 Ci +1, j +1 − 2Ci +1, j + Ci +1, j −1 Ci +1, j +1 − Ci +1, j −1

Implicit and Crank-Nicolson Finite Differences

Implicit and Crank-Nicolson Finite Differences

Implicit and Crank-Nicolson Finite Differences

 We use the following boundary conditions

 λU and λD are upper and lower boundary conditions

Implicit and Crank-Nicolson Finite Differences

 We use the following boundary conditions

Implicit and Crank-Nicolson Finite Differences

Crank-Nicolson Finite Differences

 It is an average of the implicit and explicit

 It is a “fully cantered method”

Crank-Nicolson Finite Differences

Crank-Nicolson Finite Differences

Ci +1, j − Ci , j 1 2  ( Ci +1, j +1 − 2Ci +1, j + Ci +1, j −1 ) + ( Ci , j +1 − 2Ci , j + Ci , j −1 ) 