Skip to content
All library documents

Deriving the Black–Scholes PDE for a Dividend-Yielding Stock

Article Quant Q&A · Author: Idonknow

Summary

The document explains how a continuous dividend yield changes the Black–Scholes partial differential equation. The stock is modeled with a drift reduced by the yield, while the dividend-inclusive total-return asset is used to form a self-financing portfolio with the option. Applying Itô’s lemma and choosing positions that remove Brownian risk leads to a locally risk-free portfolio, whose return is set equal to the risk-free rate. The resulting equation has a reduced stock-delta coefficient, while the discounting term remains based on the risk-free rate.

A second derivation frames the dividend as cash received on the hedged stock position during the time interval. Both explanations show why the dividend contribution enters the hedge dynamics. The result assumes a continuous proportional yield, standard frictionless no-arbitrage pricing, and the stated diffusion model; it does not address discrete dividends or other market frictions.

Key ideas

  • A continuous dividend yield reduces the stock’s modeled price drift.
  • A dividend-paying stock can be represented through a total-return asset that reinvests its distributions.
  • The option and stock positions are selected to eliminate the portfolio’s Brownian risk.
  • The resulting risk-free portfolio earns the risk-free rate, producing the dividend-adjusted Black–Scholes equation.

Tags

Full text
# How to derive Black-Scholes equation with dividend?


# How to derive Black-Scholes equation with dividend?












> Question: The Black-Scholes equation without dividend is given by $$\frac{\partial V}{\partial t} + \frac{1}{2}\sigma^2S^2\frac{\partial^2 V}{\partial S^2} + rS \frac{\partial V}{\partial S} -rV = 0.$$ (I attempted to derive the equation in my previous post.) If we assume that 'with dividend rate $D$', then the Black-Scholes equation becomes $$\frac{\partial V}{\partial t} + \frac{1}{2}\sigma^2S^2\frac{\partial^2 V}{\partial S^2} + (r-D)S \frac{\partial V}{\partial S} -rV = 0.$$ How to derive this?

By working backwards and assuming derivation of my previous post, we should have $$d\Pi = \frac{\partial V}{\partial t} dt + \frac{\partial V}{\partial S} dS + \frac{1}{2}\sigma^2S^2\frac{\partial^2 V}{\partial S^2}dt - \Delta S - D\Delta Sdt.$$ But I do not understand why can we add the term in $d\Pi.$

## Answer by Gordon (score 4, accepted)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/48867

We assume that the stock price process $\{S_t,\,t>0\}$ satisfies, under the real-world probability measure $P$, an SDE of the form \begin{align*} dS_t=S_t\big((\mu-q)dt+\sigma dW_t\big), \end{align*} where $\{W_t, \, t >0\}$ is a standard Brownian motion. Here, we need to consider the total return asset $e^{qt}S_t$, that is, the asset with the dividend payments invested in the same underlying stock. We consider a locally risk-free self-financing portfolio of the form \begin{align*} \pi_t =\Delta_t^1 \big(e^{qt}S_t\big) + \Delta_t^2 V_t, \end{align*} where $V_t$ is the option price. Then, \begin{align*} d\pi_t &= \Delta_t^1 d\big(e^{qt}S_t\big) + \Delta_t^2 dV_t\\ &= \Delta_t^1 e^{qt}\big(q S_t dt + dS_t \big) + \Delta_t^2\left(\frac{\partial V}{\partial t}dt + \frac{\partial V}{\partial S}dS_t + \frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial^2 V}{\partial S^2} \sigma^2S_t^2 dt\right)\\ &=\left[\mu\Delta_t^1 e^{qt} S_t + \Delta_t^2\left(\frac{\partial V}{\partial t} + (\mu-q) S_t \frac{\partial V}{\partial S} + \frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial^2 V}{\partial S^2} \sigma^2S_t^2 \right)\right]dt \\ &\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\quad + \left(\sigma\Delta_t^1 e^{qt}S_t + \sigma \Delta_t^2 S_t \frac{\partial V}{\partial S}\right)dW_t. \end{align*} Since $\pi_t$ is locally risk-free, we assume that $\pi_t$ earns the risk-free interest rate $r$, that is, \begin{align*} d\pi_t = r \pi_t dt, \end{align*} Then, \begin{align*} &\left[\mu \Delta_t^1 e^{qt} S_t + \Delta_t^2\left(\frac{\partial V}{\partial t} + (\mu-q) S_t \frac{\partial V}{\partial S} + \frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial^2 V}{\partial S^2} \sigma^2S_t^2 \right)\right]dt \\ &\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad + \left(\sigma\Delta_t^1 e^{qt} S_t + \sigma \Delta_t^2 S_t \frac{\partial V}{\partial S}\right)dW_t= r \pi_t dt. \end{align*} Consequently, \begin{align*} \sigma\Delta_t^1 e^{qt}S_t + \sigma \Delta_t^2 S_t \frac{\partial V}{\partial S}=0, \tag{1} \end{align*} and \begin{align*} \mu e^{qt} \Delta_t^1 S_t + \Delta_t^2\left(\frac{\partial V}{\partial t} + (\mu-q) S_t \frac{\partial V}{\partial S} + \frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial^2 V}{\partial S^2} \sigma^2S_t^2 \right) = r(\Delta_t^1 e^{qt}S_t + \Delta_t^2 V_t). \end{align*} From $(1)$, \begin{align*} \Delta_t^1 = -e^{-qt} \Delta_t^2 \frac{\partial V}{\partial S}. \end{align*} Then, \begin{align*} -\mu \Delta_t^2 S_t \frac{\partial V}{\partial S}+ \Delta_t^2\left(\frac{\partial V}{\partial t} + (\mu-q) S_t \frac{\partial V}{\partial S} + \frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial^2 V}{\partial S^2} \sigma^2S_t^2 \right) = r\Big(-\Delta_t^2 S_t\frac{\partial V}{\partial S} + \Delta_t^2 V_t\Big), \end{align*} or \begin{align*} \Delta_t^2\left(\frac{\partial V}{\partial t} -q S_t \frac{\partial V}{\partial S} + \frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial^2 V}{\partial S^2} \sigma^2S_t^2\right) &= r\Delta_t^2\Big(-\frac{\partial V}{\partial S} S_t + V_t\Big). \tag{2} \end{align*} Canceling the term $\Delta_t^2$ from both sides of $(2)$, we obtain the Black–Scholes equation of the form \begin{align*} \frac{\partial V}{\partial t} + (r-q) S_t \frac{\partial V}{\partial S} + \frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial^2 V}{\partial S^2} \sigma^2S_t^2 -rV = 0. \end{align*}

## Answer by Turquoise Hexagon Sun (score 2)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/48861

The only difference in the derivation when you have a dividend-yield paying stock lies in the value of the Riskless Portfolio $\Pi_t$.

The financial meaning here is the key: to delta-hedge your option you buy a quantity $\Delta$ of the stock $S$, and only the stock is paying you the dividend, so you have to add this contribution in time to your hedge. The change in value of the stock is therefore: $$ dS=(\mu-q)Sdt+\sigma S dW. $$ We short a quantity $\Delta$ of the stock \begin{equation} \Pi=V-\Delta S. \end{equation} In the interval $dt$ the portfolio variation is therefore given by: \begin{equation} d\Pi= dV - \Delta dS - q \Delta S dt. \end{equation} The last term $ qS\Delta dt$ denotes the value added to the portfolio due to the dividend yield.

Now, for the Ito's Lemma the value of $dV$ is: $$ dV= \left( \frac{\partial V}{\partial t} + \frac{1}{2}\sigma^2S^2\frac{\partial^2 V}{\partial S^2} \right) dt + \frac{\partial V}{\partial S} dS. $$ Finally you use the no arbitrage condition which states that a riskless portfolio has the same value as a riskless zero-coupon bond, i.e. $d\Pi=r\Pi dt$. Substituting you finally obtain: $$ \frac{\partial V}{\partial t} + \frac{1}{2}\sigma^2S^2\frac{\partial^2 V}{\partial S^2} + (r-q)S \frac{\partial V}{\partial S} -rV = 0 $$ where you can see directly the additional $q$ term to the hedging due to the dividend yield.

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.