Finite-Horizon Exercise and Time Decay in American Puts
Summary
This question compares a perpetual American put’s exercise threshold under Black–Scholes assumptions with the value of waiting for a finite period. The author argues that, from a price above the perpetual threshold, there should be some horizon for which waiting to hit that threshold beats immediate exercise, using a limiting argument as the horizon grows.
The accepted response rejects the proposed claim as stated. It invokes a finite-maturity optimal exercise boundary that lies above the perpetual boundary and moves with time to maturity; near expiry, the boundary approaches the strike. Starting at that finite-horizon boundary, immediate exercise is preferable to continuing for any shorter stopping time, which contradicts a universal claim that waiting dominates for every horizon. The discussion gives a qualitative boundary argument, not a detailed proof or numerical illustration, and does not examine variations in rates or volatility.
Key ideas
- The setup assumes constant strike, interest rate, and volatility in a Black–Scholes framework.
- The perpetual put has an exercise boundary below the strike.
- The response uses the finite-horizon exercise boundary to challenge the proposed waiting-value claim.
- Near expiry, the stated finite-horizon boundary approaches the strike, making immediate exercise preferable at that boundary.
Tags
Full text
# Black-Scholes American Put Option
# Black-Scholes American Put Option
Here is my question: This is a question about Black-Scholes model, but it may be applicable to more complicated models. Throughout the discussion, the strike price $K$, interest rate $r$ and volatility $\sigma$ will be assumed to be constant. The thing we are interested in is the time decay of the option.
First consider a perpetual American put problem. This has an optimal exercising level which I will call $b$ and this is given by $b=\frac{K}{1+\sigma^2/2r}$
Now consider any $x>b$, this $x$ is a level, for which it would not be optimal to exercise in a perpetual option. In this case, does this necessarily mean, there exist a $T$ such that $t\in (0,T)$, the equation below holds
$\mathbb{E}_x e^{-r(t\hat{}\tau_b)}(K-X_{t\hat{}\tau_b})^+ > (K-x)^+$
here $\tau_b$ denotes the first hitting time of level $b$.
I think I have shown this is the case for some $t$. Here is my proof:
Denote $V(x)=\mathbb{E}_x e^{-r\tau_b}(K-X_{\tau_b})^+$. It is widely known that $V(x)>(K-x)^+$. Assume the statement above is false, then
$\mathbb{E}_x e^{-r(t\hat{}\tau_b)}(K-X_{t\hat{}\tau_b})^+ \leq (K-x)^+$ for all $t>0$.
Then we can take the limit as $t\uparrow\infty$ on the left-hand side and apply the dominated convergence theorem, we see that
$V(x)\leq (K-x)^+$
Contradicting the inequality $V(x)>(K-x)^+$
However, I have struggled to show $\mathbb{E}_x e^{-r(t\hat{}\tau_b)}(K-X_{t\hat{}\tau_b})^+ > (K-x)^+$ for small value of $t$. I believe this conjecture is true for all $t>0$ but struggled to prove it. Anyone has any ideas?
## Answer by Lost1 (score 1, accepted)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/4652
I had some thought about this. This assertion is false. The reason is the following.
Consider a finite horizon problem with the time to maturity $t$, then there exists an optimal stopping boundary $B(t)$, such that if the stock price is at this level, we should exercise the option. Notice, this $B(t)>b$ and it is an increasing function of $t$.
If we start our process, at $B(t)$ with amount of time $t$ left to run, then since we started at the optimal stopping boundary so $(K-x)^+ > \mathbb{E}_{B(t)} (K-X_\tau)^+$ for any stopping time $\tau<t$.
In fact, the result I asked for is totally ridiculous, because as $t$ goes to $0$, $B(t) \uparrow K$. For small times, it is a lot better to stay where you are than let the process run on.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.