Deriving the General Change-of-Numeraire Measure
Summary
The document derives a change-of-numeraire Radon–Nikodym derivative for two positive assets. It assumes the ratio of their prices is a martingale under the original measure, uses that ratio to define a density process with expectation one, and constructs the new measure by weighting probabilities with the terminal density. A conditional-expectation identity then relates the value of a claim discounted by one numeraire under the new measure to its value discounted by the other under the original measure.
The derivation also gives the density process at an intermediate time and expresses the measure change from that time to the horizon as a ratio of terminal and current densities. A bond-numeraire example motivates the question, while the general proof applies beyond that special case. The key assumptions are positive asset prices and the martingale property of their price ratio; the result does not establish those assumptions for any particular market model.
Key ideas
- A positive price ratio that is a martingale under the original measure defines a density process for changing measures.
- The terminal density has expectation one, so it can weight events to construct the new probability measure.
- Conditional expectations of a claim discounted by either numeraire are related by the corresponding measure change.
- The density for a change between an intermediate time and the horizon is the terminal density divided by its value at the intermediate time.
Tags
Full text
# Change of Numeraire formula
# Change of Numeraire formula
The general change of Numeraire formula gives the following Radon-Nikodym derivative:
$$ \frac{dN_2}{dN_1}(t)|\mathcal{F}_{t_0}=\frac{N_1(t_0)N_2(t)}{N_1(t)N_2(t_0)} $$
I am able to derive this Radon-Nikodym for specific examples, such as changing from the risk-neutral measure $Q$ to the T-Forward Measure associated with a zero-coupon bond $P(t_0,t)$: in this case, we have under $Q$:
$$ \frac{S_0}{N_Q(t_0)=1}=\mathbb{E}^Q\left[\frac{S_t}{N_Q(t)=e^{rt}}|\mathcal{F}_{t_0}\right] $$
So that:
$$ (i) S_0 = \mathbb{E}^Q\left[S_t\frac{N_Q(t_0)=1}{N_Q(t)=e^{rt}}|\mathcal{F}_{t_0}\right] $$
Under the T-forward Bond numeraire:
$$ \frac{S_0}{N_{P}(t_0)=P(t_0,t)}=\mathbb{E}^{P_t}\left[\frac{S_t}{N_P(t)=1}|\mathcal{F}_{t_0}\right]$$
So that:
$$(ii) S_0 = P(t_0,t)\mathbb{E}^{P_t}\left[\frac{S_t}{N_P(t)=1}|\mathcal{F}_{t_0}\right]$$
Equating (i) to (ii) we get:
$$\mathbb{E}^Q\left[S_t\frac{N_Q(t_0)}{N_Q(t)}|\mathcal{F}_{t_0}\right]=N_P(t_0)\mathbb{E}^{P_t}\left[\frac{S_t}{N_P(t)}|\mathcal{F}_{t_0}\right]$$
Since $N_P(t)$ at time $t$ is by definition constant (equal to one), it is easy to take it out of the expectation and group all the Numeraire terms on the LHS, so that:
$$ \mathbb{E}^Q\left[S_t\frac{N_Q(t_0)N_P(t)}{N_Q(t)N_P(t_0)}|\mathcal{F}_{t_0}\right]=\mathbb{E}^{P_t}\left[S_t|\mathcal{F}_{t_0}\right] $$
And the result follows be inspection.
Note: in general, the numeraire $N_2(t)$ would not be a constant at time $t$, as is the case for the numeraire associated with the T-forward maturing bond. So it would not be possible to take $N_2(t)$ out of the expectation $\mathbb{E}_{t_0}^{N_2}[]$ as in the case above. It would therefore not be so straight forward to group all the numeraire terms and deduce the Radon-Nikodym derivative by inspection.
Question: How can the change of Numeraire Radon-Nikodym formula be derived or proved in the general case? (not thinking about specific numeraires as in the case above).
## Answer by Daneel Olivaw (score 5, accepted)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/55497
We work on a probability space $(\Omega,\mathcal{N},\mathfrak{F})$ with filtration $(\mathfrak{F}_t)_{0\leq t\leq T}$ and $\mathfrak{F}_T:=\mathfrak{F}$. Let $\xi$ be a $\mathfrak{F}_T$-mesurable contingent claim, and $N_t$ and $M_t$ two assets with positive prices. We assume the process $M_t/N_t$ is a martingale under the probability measure $\mathcal{N}$. Define for $0\leq t\leq T$ the process: $$Z_t:=E^\mathcal{N}\left(\left.\frac{N_0M_T}{N_TM_0}\right|\mathfrak{F}_t\right) = \frac{N_0M_t}{N_tM_0}$$ We notice that $E^\mathcal{N}(Z_t)=1$ for all $t$ per the martingale property. Therefore the random variable $Z:=Z_T$ is a valid Radon-Nikodym derivative and $Z_t$ its associated process: $$Z_t=\left.\frac{d\mathcal{M}}{d\mathcal{N}}\right|_{\mathfrak{F}_t}$$ We can define a new probability measure $\mathcal{M}$ as follows: $$\mathcal{M}(E):=\int_EZ(\omega)d\mathcal{N}(\omega)=E^\mathcal{N}(1_{E}Z)$$ Now define the $\mathfrak{F}_T$-measurable random variable: $$Y:=\frac{\xi}{M_T}$$ Per Lemma 5.2.2 in Shreve (2004): $$\begin{align} \tag{1} E^\mathcal{M}\left(\left.Y\right|\mathfrak{F}_t\right) & = \frac{1}{Z_t}E^\mathcal{N}\left(\left.YZ_T\right|\mathfrak{F}_t\right) \\[6pt] & = \frac{1}{E^\mathcal{N}\left(\left.\frac{M_T}{N_T}\right|\mathfrak{F}_t\right)} E^\mathcal{N}\left(\left.\frac{\xi}{N_T}\right|\mathfrak{F}_t\right) \end{align}$$ That is: $$\begin{align} M_tE^\mathcal{M}\left(\left.\frac{\xi}{M_T}\right|\mathfrak{F}_t\right) =N_tE^\mathcal{N}\left(\left.\frac{\xi}{N_T}\right|\mathfrak{F}_t\right) \end{align}$$ As an addenda, notice that we can make the following construct based on Equation $(1)$: $$ \left.\frac{d\mathcal{M}}{d\mathcal{N}}\right| _{\mathfrak{F}_t}^{\mathfrak{F}_T} := \frac{N_tM_T}{N_TM_t} = \frac{N_tM_0}{N_0M_t}\frac{N_0M_T}{N_TM_0} = \frac{Z_T}{Z_t} $$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.