Deriving Geometric Brownian Motion with Itô’s Lemma
Summary
The document explains where the drift adjustment in the closed-form solution of geometric Brownian motion comes from. Starting with a stock price whose proportional change has constant drift and volatility, the derivation applies Itô’s lemma to the logarithm of the price. The second derivative term contributes a volatility correction because the squared Brownian increment is of order time.
This yields a log-price change with drift reduced by half the variance rate and a Brownian increment scaled by volatility. Integrating over the time interval and exponentiating recovers the familiar expression for the stock price. The response gives the key calculation and identifies the Itô calculus rule behind the adjustment. It is a compact derivation and does not discuss extensions such as time-varying parameters, jumps, or the distinction between real-world and risk-neutral drift.
Key ideas
- Applying Itô’s lemma to the logarithm of the stock price produces a volatility correction to the drift.
- The quadratic variation of Brownian motion contributes the variance term in the log-price dynamics.
- Integrating the log-price equation over time and exponentiating gives the geometric Brownian motion solution.
- The derivation assumes the constant drift and volatility specified in the starting model.
Tags
Full text
# Close form solution for Geometric Brownian Motion
# Close form solution for Geometric Brownian Motion
I have a very fundamental problem, please help me out. I am little confused with the derivation for the close form solution for the Geometric Brownian Motion, from the very fundamental stock model: $$\begin{equation} dS(t)=\mu S(t)dt+\sigma S(t)dW(t) \end{equation} $$ The close form of the above model is following: $$ \begin{equation} S(T)=S(t)\exp((\mu-\frac1 2\sigma^2)(T-t)+\sigma(W(T)-W(t))) \end{equation} $$
I believe this is quite straightforward for most of you guys, but I really dont know how did you get the $(\mu-\frac 1 2 \sigma^2)$ term. It is clear for me the other way round (from bottom to top), but I fail to derive directly from the top to bottom. I checked some material online, it was saying something with the drift term, which some terms are artificially added during the derivation.
Your answer and detailed explanation will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance!
## Answer by Malick (score 0)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/32582
To get this term you need to take the log of S and to use Ito’s lemma, you can find a detailed explanation in this answer.
## Answer by Jan Sila (score -1)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/28273
Have you come across Ito lemma / Ito calculus?. As Gordon suggests: divide the top equation by St, so you get $\frac{dS_t}{S_t}$ and we look at 'by intuition' what does $dln(S_t)$ look like in the Ito world.
> Ito states: $df(W,t)=\frac{\partial{f}}{\partial{W}}dW+\frac{\partial{f}}{\partial{t}}dt+\frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial^{2}f}{\partial{W^{2}}}dW^{2}$
Now from Ito: $d ln(S_t)=\frac{1}{S_t}dS_t - \frac{1}{2}\cdot \frac{1}{S_t^{2}}\cdot dS_t^{2} = \mu dt+\sigma dW_t-\frac{\sigma^2}{2}dt=(\mu-\frac{\sigma^2}{2})dt+\sigma dW_t$
We use in the second equality that $dS_t^{2}=\mu^{2}S_t^{2}d_t^{2}+2\mu\sigma dt\cdot dW_t+\sigma^{2}dW^{2}_t=\sigma^{2}dW^{2}_t=\sigma^{2}dt$ and substitute the original equation for $dS_t$.
From that it follows that
> $ln(S_T)-ln(S_t)=ln(\frac{S_T}{S_t})=(\mu-\frac{\sigma^2}{2})(T-t)+\sigma(W_T-W_t)$ Then by taking $exp(x)$ of both sides of the last equality and multiply by $S_t$ you get the final formula.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.