It has been well documented in the market microstructure literature that observed asset prices can diverge from their equilibrium values due to market microstructure noises (e.g. illiquidity, price discreteness and non-synchronous transactions). In markets where the microstructure noise effect is material, it will be ill-advised to ignore its presence. In the specific context of option pricing models, ignoring microstructure noise could non-trivially inflate one's estimate for the "true" asset volatility. Since the asset volatility plays a key role in the option pricing models, one is then likely to produce misleading estimates for option prices.
In the past two decades, the study of option pricing has made rapid development, which highlights the importance of stochastic volatility for option pricing. In particular, the affine stochastic volatility model has attracted a great deal of attention in the finance literature, because the model can provide computational tractability that leads to closed-form solution for European option. At the same time, many studies have found that the affine stochastic volatility model is not sufficient to describe the dynamics of the underlying asset and option prices, and provide strong evidence to support the non-affine stochastic volatility models, such as the GARCH diffusion model, which can characterize more realistic volatility paths and volatility distributions and significantly improving asset allocation and option pricing.
In this paper, the problem of the pricing of Shanghai 50ETF options is considered under the non-affine stochastic volatility model in the presence of market microstructure noises. Firstly, based on a power series expansion method, an approximation formula to price European options under the non-affine stochastic volatility model is obtained. Secondly, by applying the Kalman filter, the microstructure noises in the observed Shanghai 50ETF prices are filtered. Then based on the data of the filtered Shanghai 50ETF efficient prices and iVX volatility index, an efficient importance sampling-based maximum likelihood (EIS-ML) method is proposed to estimate jointly the objective and risk-neutral parameters of the non-affine stochastic volatility model. Finally, our model and approach is illustrated using 5-minute high-frequency data on the Shanghai 50ETF options. The empirical results demonstrate that the microstructure noises have an important effect on option pricing. The option pricing performance of the model can be improved when the microstructure noises are considered. The non-affine stochastic volatility model outperforms the Black-Scholes model regardless of whether the microstructure noises are considered, which implies that the specification of non-affine volatility plays an important role on option pricing. The non-affine stochastic volatility model without considering the microstructure noises outperforms the Black-Scholes model with microstructure noises, which demonstrates that the inclusion of non-affine volatility has a larger effect on option pricing than that of the microstructure noises.
WU Xin-yu, LI Xin-dan, MA Chao-qun
. Non-affine Option Pricing in the Presence of Microstructure Noises: An Empirical Study Based on the High-frequency Shanghai 50ETF Options Data[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2017
, 25(12)
: 99
-108
.
DOI: 10.16381/j.cnki.issn1003-207x.2017.12.011
[1] Aït-Sahalia Y,Mykland P,Zhang LaN. A tale of two time scales:Determining integrated volatility with noisy high-frequency data[J]. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 2005, 100(472):1394-1411.
[2] Bandi F, Russell J. Separating microstructure noise from volatility[J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 2006, 79(3):655-692.
[3] Duan J C, Fulop A. Estimating the structural credit risk model when equity prices are contaminated by trading noises[J]. Journal of Econometrics, 2009, 150(2):288-296.
[4] Huang S J, Yu Jun. Bayesian analysis of structural credit risk models with microstructure noises[J]. Journal of Economic Dynamic & Control, 2010, 34(11):2259-2272.
[5] Kwon T Y, Lee Y. Estimating structural credit risk models when market prices are contaminated with noise[J]. Applied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry, 2016, 32(1):18-32.
[6] Andersen T G, Bollerslev T, Meddahi N. Realized volatility forecasting and market microstructure noise[J]. Journal of Econometrics, 2011, 160(1):220-234.
[7] 赵树然, 姜亚萍, 任培民. 高频波动率矩阵估计的比较分析——基于有噪非同步的金融数据[J]. 中国管理科学, 2015, 23(10):19-29.
[8] 刘志东, 严冠. 基于半鞅过程的中国股市随机波动、跳跃和微观结构噪声统计特征研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2016, 24(5):18-30.
[9] 史永东, 李君初. 基于双指数跳跃扩散模型的外汇期权定价实证研究[J]. 金融学季刊, 2009, 5(1):15-38.
[10] Heston S L. A closed-form solution for options with stochastic volatility with applications to bond and currency options[J]. Review of Financial Studies, 1993, 6(2):327-343.
[11] Christoffersen P, Jacobs K, Mimouni K. Volatility dynamics for the S&P 500:Evidence from realized volatility, daily returns, and option prices[J]. Review of Financial Studies, 2010, 23(8):3141-3189.
[12] Hansis A. Affine versus non-affine stochastic volatility and the impact on asset allocation[R]. Working Paper, 2010.
[13] Drimus G G. Options on realized variance by transform methods:A non-affine stochastic volatility model[J]. Quantitative Finance, 2012, 12(11):1679-1694.
[14] Ferriani F, Pastorello S. Estimating and testing non-affine option pricing models with a large unbalanced panel of options[J]. Econometrics Journal, 2012, 15(2):171-203.
[15] Kaeck A, Alexander C. Volatility dynamics for the S&P 500:Further evidence from non-affine, multi-factor jump diffusions[J]. Journal of Banking & Finance, 2012, 36(11):3110-3121.
[16] Durham G B. Risk-neutral modeling with affine and nonaffine models[J]. Journal of Financial Econometrics, 2013, 11(4):650-681.
[17] Shi Guangping, Liu Xiaoxing, Tang Pan. Pricing options under the non-affine stochastic volatility models:An extension of the high-order compact numerical scheme[J]. Finance Research Letters, 2016, 16:220-229.
[18] 吴鑫育, 周海林, 汪寿阳, 等. 基于GARCH扩散模型的权证定价[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2012, 32(3):449-457.
[19] 吴鑫育, 杨文昱, 马超群, 等. 基于非仿射随机波动率模型的期权定价研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2013, 21(1):1-7.
[20] Bollerslev T, Gibson M, Zhou Hao. Dynamic estimation of volatility risk premia and investor risk aversion from option-implied and realized volatilities[J]. Journal of Econometrics, 2011, 160(1):235-245.
[21] Broadie M, Chernov M, Michael J. Model specification and risk premia:Evidence from futures options[J]. Journal of Finance, 2007, 62(3):1453-1490.
[22] Chernov M, Ghysels E. A study towards a unified approach to the joint estimation of objective and risk neutral measures for the purpose of options valuation[J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 2000, 56(3):407-458.
[23] Garcia R, Lewis M A, Pastorello S, et al. Estimation of objective and risk-neutral distributions based on moments of integrated volatility[J]. Journal of Econometrics, 2011, 160(1):22-32.
[24] Lewis A L. Option valuation under stochastic volatility[M]. CA, USA:Finance Press,2000.
[25] Ait-Sahalia Y, Kimmel R. Maximum likelihood estimation of stochastic volatility models[J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 2007, 83,(2):413-452.
[26] Kanniainen J, Lin Binghuan, Yang Hanxue. Estimating and using GARCH models with VIX data for option valuation[J]. Journal of Banking & Finance, 2014, 43:200-211.
[27] 吴恒煜, 朱福敏, 温金明. 带杠杆效应的无穷纯跳跃Levy过程期权定价[J]. 管理科学学报, 2014, 17(8):74-94.
[28] Black F, Scholes M. The pricing of options and corporate liabilities[J]. Journal of Political Economy, 1973, 81(3):637-654.
[29] Richard J F, Zhang Wei. Efficient high-dimensional importance sampling[J]. Journal of Econometrics, 2007, 127(2):1385-1411.
[30] Duan J C, Yeh C Y. Jump and volatility risk premiums implied by VIX[J]. Journal of Economic Dynamics & Control, 2010, 34(11):2232-2244.