Skip to content
All library documents

Correcting the Cash Position in a Binomial Put Replication

Article Quant Q&A · Author: user2521987

Summary

The document reviews a one-period binomial replication for a put and diagnoses an error in the cash position. The stock holding is calculated from the difference between the option payoffs in the up and down states. The cash amount must then be chosen so that the replicating portfolio matches an option payoff in a state, accounting for stock dividends and interest over the period.

The response substitutes the computed stock holding into the up-state payoff equation and discounts the residual cash requirement. It reports a corrected cash amount and resulting put premium, which differ from the questioner’s figures. The lesson is about implementing replication consistently with the stated state payoffs and carrying rates. The example supplies one set of inputs, but does not discuss alternative conventions, parameter assumptions, or broader option pricing methods.

Key ideas

  • The stock position in a binomial replicating portfolio is determined by the payoff difference across states.
  • The cash position is found by matching the portfolio to an option payoff in a state.
  • The cash balance must account for the risk-free rate over the period.
  • Dividend treatment must be consistent between the stock payoff and the replication equations.

Tags

Full text
# Calculating the annual return on an option using a replicating porfolio


# Calculating the annual return on an option using a replicating porfolio












I am self-studying and encountered the following problem:

My idea was to calculate the price of the put using a replicating portfolio, then use the formula:

$$Pe^{\gamma h} = S\Delta e^{\alpha h} + \beta e^{rh}$$ to solve for $\gamma$, where $P$ is the put premium, $\alpha$ is the continuously compounded return on the stock, $\beta$ is the amount lent in the replicating portfolio, and $\gamma$ is the continuously compounded return on the option.

In this case $$\Delta = \frac{P_u - P_d}{S(u - d)}e^{-\delta h} = \frac{0 - 11.84485}{60.41285 - 33.15522}e^{0\cdot1} = -0.4345506$$ and

$$\beta = \frac{uP_d - dP_u}{u - d}e^{-rh} = \frac{1.40495(11.84485) - 0.77105(0)}{1.40495 - 0.77105}e^{-0.04\cdot1} = 26.22307,$$

giving a put premium of $$P = \Delta\cdot{}S + \beta = -0.4345506\cdot43 + 26.22307 = 7.53739.$$

Since I did not arrive at the same put premium as the textbook, I stopped here. I'm not sure where I am making my mistake at.

I know my formula for $\beta$ is correct because:

A successful replicating portfolio must satisfy: $P_d = \Delta S_d e^{\delta h} + \beta e^{rh}$ and $P_u = \Delta S_u e^{\delta h} + \beta e^{rh}$.

Then $\Delta = \frac{(P_d - \beta e^{rh})}{S_d}e^{-\delta h}$ and $\Delta = \frac{(P_u - \beta e^{rh})}{S_u}e^{-\delta h}$.

Therefore $(P_d - \beta e^{rh})e^{-\delta h} S_u = (P_u - \beta e^{rh})e^{-\delta h} S_d$.

Noting that $S_u = S_0\cdot u$ and $S_d = S_0 \cdot d$, we can eliminate $S_0$ and write

$P_d e^{-\delta h} u - \beta e^{rh}e^{-\delta h} u = P_u e^{-\delta h}d - \beta e^{rh - \delta h} d$

This implies that $P_d u e^{-\delta h} - P_u d e^{-\delta h} = \beta(e^{rh}e^{-\delta h}u - e^{rh}e^{-\delta h}d)$.

Hence $\beta = \frac{(P_d u - P_u d)e^{-\delta h}}{(u - d)e^{rh}e^{-\delta h}} = \frac{P_d u - P_u d}{u - d}e^{-rh}$

## Answer by LocalVolatility (score 2, accepted)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/30129

Your computation of $\Delta$ is correct. However, your computation of the cash amount is wrong. You choose the cash amount $\beta$ that you need to initially lend or borrow such that in the up state, the following holds

\begin{equation} P_u = \Delta S_u e^{\delta h} + \beta e^{r h}. \end{equation}

We get

\begin{eqnarray} \beta & = & \left( P_u - \Delta S_u e^{\delta h} \right) e^{-r h}\\ & = & 0.4345506 \cdot 60.41285 \cdot e^{-0.04}\\ & = & 25.223067. \end{eqnarray}

Thus,

\begin{equation} P = \Delta S + \beta = 6.537391 \end{equation}

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.