Comparing Options with Implied Volatility Surfaces
Summary
The document addresses how to compare option quotes across underlying prices, strikes, and expirations. Rather than directly rescaling premiums and interpolating raw strikes, it describes converting each quote to Black–Scholes implied volatility using the underlying price, strike, tenor, interest rate, and observed quote. The resulting values form an implied volatility surface across strike and maturity.
Implied volatility provides a standardized quote measure, while log forward moneyness and tenor help place options on comparable axes. The document presents volatility as an interpretation of the market’s priced optionality and uncertainty, while cautioning that it can also be treated simply as a parameterization of quotes rather than accepted as a valid model. It points to separate material for interpolation and extrapolation across expirations but does not specify a fitting procedure or address model and market-data limitations in detail.
Key ideas
- Option prices depend on moneyness and time to maturity, which complicates direct comparisons.
- Black–Scholes implied volatility converts each quote into a comparable parameter using market inputs.
- An implied volatility surface organizes quotes across strike or moneyness and tenor.
- Implied volatility can summarize priced uncertainty, but its use as a model requires separate scrutiny.
- The document refers elsewhere for interpolation and extrapolation methods without specifying them.
Tags
Full text
# How to normalise options? Normalise strike price, premium, tenors
# How to normalise options? Normalise strike price, premium, tenors
I would like to normalise options, to being able to compare it. Make price of underlying symbol = 1, have same tenors, and same step for the strike price.
1) Use 1 as stock_price and scale strike_price accordingly, easy to do.
2) Use same step for strike prices. Different options have different step for strike prices, for one option step could be 10% (so strike prices for CALL will be 110%, 120% etc), for another option step could be 15% (strike prices will be 115%, 130%, etc). I would like to re-scale it and use same step for all options. The problem - you need interpolate strike_prices to get those normalised values.
3) Normalise expiry date or tenors. Again different options have different expiration dates, I would like to normalise it to say 1month, 6month, 1year. Again strike_prices needs to be somehow interpolated to get those values. Any good approach to interpolate strike_prices over dates?
Are there any conventional, standard methods to do that? What functions to use for interpolation - polynomial, exponential? How to fit it, with regression?
## Answer by raptor22 (score 4, accepted)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/54068
Given a certain market environment, option quotes are impacted by at least the following factors: moneyness (distance from spot/forward to strike) and tenor (time to maturity). This makes it difficult to compare option quotes accross strikes and tenors and certainly makes it impossible to compare the price of options accross different underlying stocks.
For these reasons, the options price are often quoted in terms of (Black-Scholes) implied volatilities. I will not provide a formal mathematical definition of the Black-Scholes model (which you can easily find online/in classical financial mathematics textbooks) but will rather focus on the intuition and practical approach. Here is the general idea:
- To simplify things, I will denote $BS(k, T, S, r, \sigma)$ for the Black-Schole (BS) formula. It is a function of $k$ the strike price, $T$ the option's tenor, $S$ the underlying spot sprice, $r$ the interest rate and $\sigma$ the implied volatility.
- For a fixed option quote $Q$ with maturity $T$ and strike $k$, given the current spot price $S$ and interest rate $r$, there is a unique implied volatility parameter $\sigma := \sigma(k, T, S, r)$ that solves for $BS(k, T, S, r, \sigma) = Q$. This is because the BS formula is an increasing and convex function in $\sigma$.
- Due to this, at each time, we can parametrize a set of option quotes $(Q_{k,T})$ by their BS-implied volatilities $(\sigma_{k,T})$, resulting in the implied volatility surface. Here is an exemple of such a surface that I produced for S&P500 index options a while ago:
In particular, the surface allows us to:
- Compare accross underlying: the BS formula uses the log forward moneyness as a measure of moneyness => independence from the specific level of the spot.
- Compare accross tenors: the BS formula has an increasing value in the tenor. Allowing to capture the option's time value.
- Compare accross strikes: as the option gets closer to ATM, the price increases.
Informal intuition: in general, this "normalized" parameter $\sigma$ is used to compare options prices: the higher the implied volatility, the higher the price of optionality. In this sense, the implied volatility can be seen as the market's implied "forward looking" level of uncertainty (volatility).
From a formal perspective, you cannot get it wrong by only seeing it as a parametrization of the quotes without asking yourself about it's validity as a model.
Regarding the interpolation/extrapolation, you can see Extrapolating option pricing with different expirations
Let me know if you want me to elaborate more on something.Shown in full with attribution under the source's licence. Licence: CC BY-SA 4.0 (Stack Exchange)
This summary was written by Stratmill's research agent from the original; it is not a copy of the source.