# American Institute of Mathematical Sciences

July  2021, 17(4): 1729-1752. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020042

## A lattice method for option evaluation with regime-switching asset correlation structure

Received  January 2016 Revised  January 2017 Published  July 2021 Early access  March 2020

Fund Project: The first authors are supported by the Adam Smith Business School of the University of Glasow

This paper develops a lattice method for option evaluation in the presence of regime shifts in the correlation structure of assets, aiming at investigating whether the option prices reflect such shifts. We try to investigate whether option prices reflect switches in the correlation between the underlying asset of an option and risk-free rates.We develop and test two models.In the first model we allow all the parameters to follow a regime-switching process while in the second model, in order to isolate the regime-switching correlation effect on the option prices, we allow only the correlation to follow a regime-switching process. We use pentanomial lattices to represent the evolution of the regime-switching underlying assets. This is then applied in our empirical analysis, which focuses on crude oil. We use grid- and patternsearch based techniques to fit our models. Our findings suggest that prices of market traded options reflect the regime-switches and that a model which considers these switches produces significantly more accurate results than a single-regime model. We demonstrate that there is an asymmetry between parameter values obtained from historical data (backward looking) and those that are implied by traded options (for- ward looking) by employing the Kim filter to estimate our model.

Citation: Christoforidou Amalia, Christian-Oliver Ewald. A lattice method for option evaluation with regime-switching asset correlation structure. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021, 17 (4) : 1729-1752. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020042
##### References:

show all references

##### References:
Binomial tree
Pentanomial tree
Sensitivity of Call Option value to Transition Probabilities
Sensitivity of Call Option Value to the Regime Parameters
Sensitivity of option price to the regime resistance of the two regimes
Sensitivity of Option Price to the regime switching correlation
 Jump Probability Underlying Asset Price Up $\pi_{u}$ $S_{u}$ Horizontal $\pi_{0}$ $S$ Down $\pi_{d}$ $S_{d}$
 Jump Probability Underlying Asset Price Up $\pi_{u}$ $S_{u}$ Horizontal $\pi_{0}$ $S$ Down $\pi_{d}$ $S_{d}$
 Event Probability Underlying Asset Price Asset 1 Asset 2 $E_{1}$ $\pi_{1}$ $S_{p}u_{p}$ $S_{b}u_{b}$ $E_{2}$ $\pi_{2}$ $S_{p}u_{p}$ $S_{b}d_{b}$ $E_{3}$ $\pi_{3}$ $S_{p}d_{p}$ $S_{b}d_{b}$ $E_{4}$ $\pi_{4}$ $S_{p}d_{p}$ $S_{b}u_{b}$ $E_{5}$ $\pi_{5}$ $S_{p}$ $S_{b}$
 Event Probability Underlying Asset Price Asset 1 Asset 2 $E_{1}$ $\pi_{1}$ $S_{p}u_{p}$ $S_{b}u_{b}$ $E_{2}$ $\pi_{2}$ $S_{p}u_{p}$ $S_{b}d_{b}$ $E_{3}$ $\pi_{3}$ $S_{p}d_{p}$ $S_{b}d_{b}$ $E_{4}$ $\pi_{4}$ $S_{p}d_{p}$ $S_{b}u_{b}$ $E_{5}$ $\pi_{5}$ $S_{p}$ $S_{b}$
 Strike Price Market Price Predicted by Lattice Predicted by BS 16 4.9 3.881616 3.9936 17 2.85 3.127282 3.0613 18 2.35 2.373772 2.2162 19 1.65 1.629733 1.5029 20 0.95 0.949999 0.9500 21 0.4 0.399999 0.5587 22 0.2 0.200003 0.3059 23 0.2 0.136097 0.1565 24 0.1 0.105053 0.0750 25 0.15 0.088113 0.0339 Sum of absolute differences 1.110163 2.573241
 Strike Price Market Price Predicted by Lattice Predicted by BS 16 4.9 3.881616 3.9936 17 2.85 3.127282 3.0613 18 2.35 2.373772 2.2162 19 1.65 1.629733 1.5029 20 0.95 0.949999 0.9500 21 0.4 0.399999 0.5587 22 0.2 0.200003 0.3059 23 0.2 0.136097 0.1565 24 0.1 0.105053 0.0750 25 0.15 0.088113 0.0339 Sum of absolute differences 1.110163 2.573241
 Strike Price Market Price Predicted by Lattice Predicted by BS 16 5 4.4153631 4.3208036 17 3.8 3.7998973 3.5464351 18 2.45 2.3996588 2.8585724 19 2.25 1.9270998 2.2636265 20 1.6 1.5997621 1.7622281 21 1.35 1.3087541 1.3499542 22 0.95 1.0205032 1.0186664 23 1.05 1.1713058 0.7580323 24 0.6 0.6000609 0.5569055 25 0.5 0.4960518 0.4043912 Sum of absolute differences 0.4890502 1.1145081
 Strike Price Market Price Predicted by Lattice Predicted by BS 16 5 4.4153631 4.3208036 17 3.8 3.7998973 3.5464351 18 2.45 2.3996588 2.8585724 19 2.25 1.9270998 2.2636265 20 1.6 1.5997621 1.7622281 21 1.35 1.3087541 1.3499542 22 0.95 1.0205032 1.0186664 23 1.05 1.1713058 0.7580323 24 0.6 0.6000609 0.5569055 25 0.5 0.4960518 0.4043912 Sum of absolute differences 0.4890502 1.1145081
 Strike Price Market Price Predicted by Lattice Predicted by BS 16 5 4.4153631 4.3208036 17 3.8 3.7998973 3.5464351 18 2.45 2.3996588 2.8585724 19 2.25 1.9270998 2.2636265 20 1.6 1.5997621 1.7622281 21 1.35 1.3087541 1.3499542 22 0.95 1.0205032 1.0186664 23 1.05 1.1713058 0.7580323 24 0.6 0.6000609 0.5569055 25 0.5 0.4960518 0.4043912 Sum of absolute differences 0.4890502 1.1145081
 Strike Price Market Price Predicted by Lattice Predicted by BS 16 5 4.4153631 4.3208036 17 3.8 3.7998973 3.5464351 18 2.45 2.3996588 2.8585724 19 2.25 1.9270998 2.2636265 20 1.6 1.5997621 1.7622281 21 1.35 1.3087541 1.3499542 22 0.95 1.0205032 1.0186664 23 1.05 1.1713058 0.7580323 24 0.6 0.6000609 0.5569055 25 0.5 0.4960518 0.4043912 Sum of absolute differences 0.4890502 1.1145081
 Strike Price Predicted 16 4.9 1.625144372 17 2.85 1.269327353 18 2.35 0.940833993 19 1.65 0.626509398 20 0.95 0.420399871 21 0.4 0.245524212 22 0.2 0.158808617 23 0.2 0.079890983 24 0.1 0.045583587 25 0.15 0.023566284
 Strike Price Predicted 16 4.9 1.625144372 17 2.85 1.269327353 18 2.35 0.940833993 19 1.65 0.626509398 20 0.95 0.420399871 21 0.4 0.245524212 22 0.2 0.158808617 23 0.2 0.079890983 24 0.1 0.045583587 25 0.15 0.023566284
 [1] Zhuo Jin, Linyi Qian. Lookback option pricing for regime-switching jump diffusion models. Mathematical Control & Related Fields, 2015, 5 (2) : 237-258. doi: 10.3934/mcrf.2015.5.237 [2] Kun Fan, Yang Shen, Tak Kuen Siu, Rongming Wang. On a Markov chain approximation method for option pricing with regime switching. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2016, 12 (2) : 529-541. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2016.12.529 [3] Fuke Wu, George Yin, Zhuo Jin. Kolmogorov-type systems with regime-switching jump diffusion perturbations. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2016, 21 (7) : 2293-2319. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2016048 [4] Mourad Bellassoued, Raymond Brummelhuis, Michel Cristofol, Éric Soccorsi. Stable reconstruction of the volatility in a regime-switching local-volatility model. Mathematical Control & Related Fields, 2020, 10 (1) : 189-215. doi: 10.3934/mcrf.2019036 [5] Jiaqin Wei. Time-inconsistent optimal control problems with regime-switching. Mathematical Control & Related Fields, 2017, 7 (4) : 585-622. doi: 10.3934/mcrf.2017022 [6] Wensheng Yin, Jinde Cao, Yong Ren. Inverse optimal control of regime-switching jump diffusions. Mathematical Control & Related Fields, 2021  doi: 10.3934/mcrf.2021034 [7] Engel John C Dela Vega, Robert J Elliott. Conditional coherent risk measures and regime-switching conic pricing. Probability, Uncertainty and Quantitative Risk, 2021, 6 (4) : 267-300. doi: 10.3934/puqr.2021014 [8] Jun Li, Fubao Xi. Exponential ergodicity for regime-switching diffusion processes in total variation norm. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2022  doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2021309 [9] Zhuo Jin, George Yin, Hailiang Yang. Numerical methods for dividend optimization using regime-switching jump-diffusion models. Mathematical Control & Related Fields, 2011, 1 (1) : 21-40. doi: 10.3934/mcrf.2011.1.21 [10] Ping Chen, Haixiang Yao. Continuous-time mean-variance portfolio selection with no-shorting constraints and regime-switching. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2020, 16 (2) : 531-551. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2018166 [11] Yinghui Dong, Kam Chuen Yuen, Guojing Wang. Pricing credit derivatives under a correlated regime-switching hazard processes model. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2017, 13 (3) : 1395-1415. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2016079 [12] Chao Xu, Yinghui Dong, Zhaolu Tian, Guojing Wang. Pricing dynamic fund protection under a Regime-switching Jump-diffusion model with stochastic protection level. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2020, 16 (6) : 2603-2623. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2019072 [13] Jiaqin Wei, Zhuo Jin, Hailiang Yang. Optimal dividend policy with liability constraint under a hidden Markov regime-switching model. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2019, 15 (4) : 1965-1993. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2018132 [14] Jiapeng Liu, Ruihua Liu, Dan Ren. Investment and consumption in regime-switching models with proportional transaction costs and log utility. Mathematical Control & Related Fields, 2017, 7 (3) : 465-491. doi: 10.3934/mcrf.2017017 [15] Tak Kuen Siu, Yang Shen. Risk-minimizing pricing and Esscher transform in a general non-Markovian regime-switching jump-diffusion model. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2017, 22 (7) : 2595-2626. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2017100 [16] Kehan Si, Zhenda Xu, Ka Fai Cedric Yiu, Xun Li. Open-loop solvability for mean-field stochastic linear quadratic optimal control problems of Markov regime-switching system. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021074 [17] Lin Xu, Rongming Wang, Dingjun Yao. Optimal stochastic investment games under Markov regime switching market. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2014, 10 (3) : 795-815. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2014.10.795 [18] Nguyen Huu Du, Nguyen Thanh Dieu, Tran Dinh Tuong. Dynamic behavior of a stochastic predator-prey system under regime switching. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2017, 22 (9) : 3483-3498. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2017176 [19] Hongfu Yang, Xiaoyue Li, George Yin. Permanence and ergodicity of stochastic Gilpin-Ayala population model with regime switching. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2016, 21 (10) : 3743-3766. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2016119 [20] Rui Wang, Xiaoyue Li, Denis S. Mukama. On stochastic multi-group Lotka-Volterra ecosystems with regime switching. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2017, 22 (9) : 3499-3528. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2017177

2020 Impact Factor: 1.801