Skip to content
All library documents

Finding Arbitrage and Equivalent Martingale Measures in a One-Period Market

Article Quant Q&A · Author: Rebellos

Summary

The document introduces a one-period market with a risk-free asset and two risky securities, then asks how to identify arbitrage and describe equivalent martingale measures. An investment vector represents the holdings of each security; multiplying those holdings by the asset prices gives the portfolio value in each state. The worked example chooses holdings whose initial cost and payoffs in two states are zero, while the payoff in the third state is positive. Since every state has positive probability, this portfolio meets the stated arbitrage conditions.

For a modified market in which one terminal price changes, the response says that proving no arbitrage requires ruling out every arbitrage portfolio, rather than merely failing to find one. It does not carry out that proof or describe the equivalent martingale measures. The exercise is therefore useful for clarifying portfolio holdings and constructing an arbitrage witness, but its treatment of the no-arbitrage and martingale-measure parts is incomplete.

Key ideas

  • A strategy vector specifies the number of units held in each security.
  • Portfolio value in a state is the dot product of holdings and asset prices.
  • The example portfolio costs zero initially, pays zero in two states, and pays positively in the third.
  • A no-arbitrage proof must rule out all portfolios satisfying the arbitrage conditions.
  • The response does not solve the equivalent martingale measure question.

Tags

Full text
# Showing that a market model has arbitrage and describing martingales


# Showing that a market model has arbitrage and describing martingales












This is an exercise which I came upon while studying an introduction to financial mathematics.

Exercise :

> Consider the finite sample space $\Omega = \{\omega_1,\omega_2,\omega_3\}$ and let $\mathbb P$ be a probability measure such that $\mathbb P[\{\omega_1\}] > 0$ for all $i=1,2,3$. We define a financial market of one period which is consisted by the probability space $(\Omega,\mathcal{F},\mathbb P)$ with $\mathcal{F} := 2^\Omega$ and the securities $\bar{S} = (S^0,S^1,S^2)$ which are consisted of the zero-risk security $S^0$ and two securities $S^1,S^2$ which have risk. Their values at the time $t=0$ are given by the vector $$\bar{S}_0 = \begin{pmatrix} 1\\2\\7 \end{pmatrix}$$ while their values at time $t=1$, depending whether the scenario $\omega_1,\omega_2$ or $\omega_3$ happens, are given by the vectors $$\bar{S}_1(\omega_1) = \begin{pmatrix} 1\\3\\9\end{pmatrix}, \quad \bar{S}_1(\omega_2) = \begin{pmatrix} 1\\1\\5\end{pmatrix}, \quad \bar{S}_1(\omega_3) = \begin{pmatrix} 1\\5\\10 \end{pmatrix}$$ (a) Show that this financial market has arbitrage. (b) Let $S_1^2(\omega_3) = 13$ while the other values remain the same as before. Show that this financial market does not have arbitrage and describe all the equivalent martingale measures.

Attempt :

(a) We have that a value process is defined as :

$$V_t = V_t^\bar{\xi} = \bar{\xi}\cdot \bar{S}_t = \sum_{i=0}^d \xi_t^i\cdot \bar{S}_t^i, \quad t \in \{0,1\}$$

where $\xi = (\xi^0, \xi) \in \mathbb R^{d+1}$ is an investment strategy where the number $\xi^i$ is equal to the number of pieces from the security $S^i$ which are contained in the portfolio at the time period $[0,1], i \in \{0,1,\dots,d\}$.

Now, I also know that to show that a market has arbitrage, I need to show the following :

$$V_0 \leq 0, \quad \mathbb P(V1 \geq 0) = 1, \quad \mathbb P(V_1 > 0) > 0$$

I understand that the different $S$ vectors will be plugged in to calculate $V_t$ but I really can't comprehend $\xi$. What would the $\xi$ vector be ?

Any help for me to understand what $\xi$ really is based on the problem and how to complete my attempt will be much appreciated.

For (b), showing that it does not have arbitrage is similar to (a) as I will just show that one of these conditions will not hold. What about the martingale stuff though ? It's a mathematical substance we really haven't been into so, if possible, I would really appreciate an elaborations.

## Answer by Daneel Olivaw (score 2, accepted)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/42593

The parameter $\xi$ represents your strategy, namely the quantity you hold in your portfolio of each security $S^0$, $S^1$ and $S^2$. Consider the following strategy: $${\xi}=(\xi^1,\xi^2,\xi^3)=(1.5,1,-0.5)$$ Then: $$\begin{align} & t=0: && \xi\bar{S}_0=\xi^0S_0^0+\xi^1S_0^1+\xi^2S_0^2 = 1.5+2-3.5=0 \\ & t=1: && \xi\bar{S}_1(\omega_1)=1.5+3-4.5=0 \\ &&& \xi\bar{S}_1(\omega_2)=1.5+1-2.5=0 \\ &&& \xi\bar{S}_1(\omega_3)=1.5+5-5=1.5>0 \end{align}$$ Thus: $$\xi\bar{S}_0=0, \quad \mathbb{P}(\xi\bar{S}_1\geq0)=1, \quad \mathbb{P}(\xi\bar{S}_1>0)>0$$

Hence the market has arbitrage.

For question b), you need to generalize to prove that there is no portfolio $\xi$ that allows arbitrage (instead of just finding a counterexample as in a).

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.