Skip to content
All library documents

Estimating Expected Growth in the Black–Scholes Model

Article Quant Q&A · Author: John Smith

Summary

The document explains how to interpret and estimate the expected growth parameter μ in a geometric Brownian motion. Under a real-world probability measure, μ represents the expected stock return. If returns are assumed stationary, it can be estimated by averaging observed returns; with consecutive logarithmic returns, the estimate reduces to total log price change divided by elapsed time, expressed as a year fraction. The text also mentions annualizing an average of daily returns.

The document distinguishes this estimate from option pricing: μ drops out of the standard Black–Scholes option formulas. Under a risk-free measure, the drift is the risk-free rate, while the real-world drift is unknown and must be estimated from data or a historically calibrated model. The discussion notes that stationarity is questionable and that the resulting estimate can be unstable. Other answers offer differing interpretations of drift, including an expected-price-growth calculation and a no-arbitrage argument, so the material is explanatory rather than a settled estimation procedure.

Key ideas

  • Under the real-world measure, μ is the expected stock return and can be estimated from historical returns.
  • For consecutive logarithmic returns, average growth is total log price change divided by elapsed time.
  • Under the risk-free measure, the drift is the risk-free rate.
  • The historical estimate depends on a stationarity assumption and may be highly unstable.
  • The standard Black–Scholes option formulas do not depend on μ.

Tags

Full text
# Expected Growth


# Expected Growth












The model assumption of the Black-Scholes formula has two parameters for the geometric Brownian motion, the volatility $\sigma$ and the expected growth $\mu$ (which disappears in the option formulae). How can this parameter $\mu$ be estimated?

## Answer by egoroff (score 5, accepted)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/274

As you said, $\mu$ is the expected return that is the expected value (mathematical expectation) of the random variable "stock return" under the objective probability measure. Assuming that returns are stationary*, the obvious way to estimate it is to compute a large number $N$ of returns $R_i$, then to average them. You also want to annualize this average (multyply by 252).

Now if you are using consecutive periods, and logarithmic returns, this simply amounts to computing the overall return $\log S_{T_N} / S_{T_0}$ and dividing it by the time lapse $T_N-T_0$ (in year fraction).

(*) : This is a dubious hypothesis, and the estimate will indeed be very unstable.

## Answer by dragunov (score 2)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/252

I take it that μ is the drift of the long-term equilibrium price.

let's take a lognormal model as an example,

dS = μ x dt + σ x S x dz

where:

S= spot, t = time, T-t = length of time μ = drift rate, σ = volatility, dz= random variable,

In order to solve for μ, you might first want to look for the expected spot price:

given X = ln(S),

dX = ((μ - σ)dt)/2 + σdz

This allows us to solve for X,

ST = St e ^((μσ^2/2)(T-t) -σdz)

Taking the expected value of both Sides:

E[ST] = S e ^(μ(T-t))

This equation can be used to look for your expected growth, μ

## Answer by shabbychef (score 0)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/253

The drift term, $\mu$ is assumed to follow from the 'no-arbitrage' assumption. That is, if $\mu$ were greater than the risk-free rate, one would borrow at the risk-free rate, invest in the stock, and collect the difference. If the stock may be freely borrowed, and $\mu$ is less than the risk free rate, one would short the stock and invest in the risk-free rate, and collect the difference.

## Answer by quant_dev (score 0)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/320

In the risk-free measure, $\mu$ is equal to the risk-free rate. In the real-world measure, $\mu$ is uknown and must be estimated using statistical methods: either directly from historical data, or from a model calibrated to historical data. Note that, in general, there is nothing preventing you from using today's (or past) prices as inputs to this model. For example, no-arbitrage relationships ought to hold in both "worlds".

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.