Forward Contract Valuation Compared with Daily Futures Marking
Summary
The document distinguishes the value of an un-margined forward from the daily cash flows of a marked-to-market futures contract. For a forward, the change in the comparable forward price represents a payoff at maturity; the value before maturity is that difference discounted over the remaining term. It also gives an equivalent expression using the underlying spot price and the present value of the delivery price.
For a futures contract, daily variation margin transfers the day’s price change directly, leaving the position reset to zero value at each business-day close. Those interim cash flows can earn or incur interest, so the cash-flow path differs from waiting for a forward’s maturity payoff. The answer is a concise conceptual distinction rather than a full pricing treatment: it does not discuss how interest rates, collateral terms, or contract-specific settlement conventions affect forward and futures pricing.
Key ideas
- An un-margined forward’s value reflects the forward-price change discounted to the valuation date.
- Daily futures variation margin transfers price changes as cash flows.
- After daily settlement, a futures position has zero value at the close of business.
- Interest on interim margin cash flows can distinguish futures outcomes from a forward payoff.
Tags
Full text
# Mark to market forward contract
# Mark to market forward contract
(All prices are in $)
Say that at time $t=0$, $A$ goes long a forward contract with maturity $T$ on an underlying asset $X$ with forward price 100 \$, that is, $A$ agrees to buy $X$ for 100 \$ at time $T$. At initialisation, the actual value of the forward contract is equal to $0$.
Suppose, we are now at time $t$ where $0<t<T$, and we want to determine the fair value of the forward contract. Say that at time $t$, the forward price for the same underlying with same maturity is for example 110 \$. This means that $A$ has gained since the market tells that $X$ can now be bought for 110 \$ at time $T$ instead of 100\$. Therefore $A$ would actually make a profit of 10 \$ at time $T$ and discounting back to time $t$, the contract value is $10e^{-r(T-t)}$ where $r$ is the risk-free rate for period $T-t$. Generally speaking, if $F_0$ is the forward price at $t=0$, then the forward contract's value at time $t$ is $S_t-F_0e^{-r(T-t)}$. So basically the time $t$ value of the forward contract is $(F_t-F_0)e^{-r(T-t)}$ where $F_t$ is the time $t$ forward price.
Now, why is this not exactly the same than mark-to-market? If you mark-to-market at time $t$, then party $B$ (the party that shorted the contract) has to give 10 \$ to A and the new contract will be as if it were a forward with forward price 110 \$. I would expect that $B$ has to pay $10e^{-r(T-t)}$ to $A$ rather than 10 \$, because the actual loss on the forward contract is reflected on maturity and has thus to be discounted?
Say that the forward price keeps increasing over the life of the contract and that $A$ always gets a positive amount added to it's margin. For example, the forward price was 100 (day 0), 110 (day 1), 120 (day 2) and 130 (day 3 of maturity, so 130 is the spot price of $X$). If there was no concept of margin, then $A$ would have a pay-off of $130-100 = 30$. With the concept of margin, $A$ has gained 10 \$ over the last three days, but the 10 \$ gained on the margin after day 1 has in the mean time accrued at the risk-free rate so I would expect the pay-off with the margining to result in a slightly higher result then if it was not margined?
Can someone explain me where I mix up the concept?
## Answer by dm63 (score 5)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/38927
There are two types of contract (a) a forward contract and (b) a futures contract. In (a) there is no payment of margin on a daily basis. Its value is $(F_1-F_0)e^{-r(T-t)}$ as you describe. In (b) there is a direct payment of $F_1-F_0$ on each day and the value of the contract is always zero at the close of business. Does that answer your question?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.