Discounting Bond Cash Flows with Forward Rates of Different Tenors
Summary
The document explains how a bond’s cash flows can be valued using a sequence of forward rates. Each coupon is discounted by multiplying the accumulation factors for the forwards that span from today to that coupon’s payment date. By no-arbitrage, this product is equivalent to discounting with the spot rate for the same maturity, so the forward-rate expression is another representation of the term structure.
The answer clarifies that forward periods need not be fixed by coupon frequency. For semiannual coupon dates, the first cash flow uses the six-month spot rate, while a later cash flow can be discounted through successive six-month forwards. The same maturity discount factor could instead be built from shorter quarterly forwards. The explanation is conceptual and does not resolve conventions such as annualization, day counts, or compounding details; those must match the rates and cash-flow schedule used in an actual valuation.
Key ideas
- A bond’s cash flows can be discounted with spot rates or equivalent forward-rate accumulation factors.
- No-arbitrage links a maturity spot rate to the product of forwards over the intervening periods.
- Forward periods can align with coupon intervals, but they do not have to.
- Rate compounding and time conventions must be consistent when applying the formula.
Tags
Full text
# How does this formula for the price of a bond in terms of forward rates work?
# How does this formula for the price of a bond in terms of forward rates work?
I am currently reading Chapter 3 of Tuckman's 'Fixed Income Securities' and it states that we can write the price of a bond using its term structure in terms of forward rates but with periods of unspecified length as follows:
$P = \frac{c}{1+f(1)}$$+\frac{c}{(1+f(1))(1+f(2))}$+...+$\frac{1+c}{1+f(1))(1+f(2))...(1+f(T))}$, where $c$ is the coupon and $f(1),f(2)...$ equal forward rates.
But I am not sure how the 'periods of unspecified length' reconcile with the equation above - from what I know, where f(t) = the forward rate from year t-0.5 to year t and assuming semiannual compounding:
$P = \frac{c}{2}[\frac{1}{1+\frac{f(0.5)}{2}}+\frac{1}{(1+\frac{f(0.5)}{2})(1+\frac{f(1)}{2})}+...+\frac{1}{(1+\frac{f(0.5)}{2})(1+\frac{f(1)}{2})...(1+\frac{f(T)}{2})}]+\frac{1}{(1+\frac{f(0.5)}{2})(1+\frac{f(1)}{2})...({1+\frac{f(T)}{2}})}$.
Answers would be very much appreciated!
## Answer by KevinT (score 4, accepted)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/59828
Assume today is $t$, and the 1st coupon pays at time $T_1$, the 2nd one at $T_2$, etc. Then your term structure of spot rates would be $R_1 = R(T_1) = f(t,T_1)$ for the 1st maturity, and $R_2 = R(T_2)$ for the 2nd maturity, and so on... Note that by no arbitrage $1+R_2 = (1+f(t,T_1)) (1+ f(T_1,T_2))$. Here I denote by $f(x, y)$ today's value of a forward rate which is valid from $x$ to $y$ (you could (or should) of course write this in a cleaner fashion as $f(t,x,y)$ to indicate it's the time $t$ observed forward, but let's keep the notation simple to illustrate your point of the interval length from $x$ to $y$). Thus, in brief, your term structure can be equivalently written in terms of forward rates.
In a concrete example: say coupons occur every 6 months. Then you discount your first coupon cashflow with the current 6m spot rate (which is $f(0m,6m)$) by dividing through $1+R_{6m}$. The second one you discount at the 12m spot rate, dividing through $1+R_{12m}$, which - by the logic described above - can be written as $(1+f(0m,6m))(1+f(6m,12m))$. And so on.
So this connects to @noob2's comment, which indicates that each of the individual forwards is more likely to be of the "same unit" length (namely 6m in my example). The link to coupon frequency is not a 1:1 mapping, i.e., you could also express the 12m rate in terms of the quarterly forwards 0x3, 3x6, 6x9, and 9x12, but still use this term structure to value coupons that occur semi-annually.
HTH.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.