Fundamental Theorems of Asset Pricing: Existence and Uniqueness
Summary
The discussion distinguishes the first and second fundamental theorems of asset pricing. In the account provided, the first connects absence of arbitrage with the existence of a linear valuation rule that assigns zero value to traded cash flows. The second says that this rule is unique when the market is complete. Separating the results helps clarify that no-arbitrage existence and completeness-based uniqueness are different claims.
The answer describes a broad setting for the existence statement, assuming trades can be combined, scaled, and mirrored so that traded cash flows form a linear space. It also points to a discrete-time proof that can reveal an arbitrage when one exists, and names a graduate asset-pricing text as a reference. This is an overview, not a formal theorem statement with full definitions or proof. The precise assumptions and theorem versions depend on the market model, especially when changing the trading and admissibility framework.
Key ideas
- The first fundamental theorem relates absence of arbitrage to existence of a linear pricing rule.
- The second theorem relates market completeness to uniqueness of that rule.
- The answer's existence claim assumes traded cash flows can be combined, scaled, and mirrored.
- A discrete-time proof can also help identify an arbitrage when one exists.
- The post summarizes results but does not give formal definitions or a full proof.
Tags
Full text
# Fundamental Theorem of Asset Pricing (FTAP)
# Fundamental Theorem of Asset Pricing (FTAP)
In the spirit of canonical questions please state here versions of the FTAP in the following form (please only one theorem by answer) :
- Necessary definitions (or a direct link to definitions)
- Hypothesys and Context (such as existence or not of transaction costs, discrete time setting, etc...)
- Statement of the Theorem
- Reference(s) for a proof
The motivation is coming from the fact there are several versions of this theorems and having one place regrouping those differents versions would be nice.
Regards
## Answer by Keith A. Lewis (score 10)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/870
I teach Derivative Securities in the mathematical finance program at NYU and was rather surprised to learn that there is no proof of the FTAP that is accessible to masters level students. So I wrote this. It is a simple proof for the discrete time case.
One bonus of the proof of the one period case is that it tells you how to find the arbitrage if one exists.
## Answer by Dimitris (score 8)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/762
This question requires a comprehensive answer, perhaps beyond the confines of my input box :) Suffices here to state the following:
The First Fundamental Theorem of Asset Pricing states that in an arbitrage-free market, there exists a ("net") present value function, that is, a linear valuation rule whose value is zero when evaluated in any traded cash-flow.
This is an existence theorem, and it does not depend on the theoretical or "real" form of the market. It does not depend on discrete or continuous time modeling, as it does not depend on whether there are transaction costs, trading constraints, or missing markets. All we need to have is the assumption that we can undertake two or more trades simultaneously, that we can scale them up, and that for every given trade, we can have its "mirror" in the market - that is, that we have a linear vector space of traded cashflows.
The Second Fundamental Theorem of Asset Pricing states that when an arbitrage-free market is "complete", the linear valuation rule is unique.
It is also true that these two separate theorems with different implications, are more often than not, presented in a fused form. This can be confusing. Proofs of these facts are virtually in every graduate asset pricing book. My favourite one is Duffie's 'Dynamic Asset Pricing Theory'.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.