Skip to content
All library documents

How Option Prices Produce a Stock’s Implied Volatility

Article Quant Q&A · Author: Izzy

Summary

The document explains that a stock’s quoted implied volatility is inferred from option prices, rather than being a direct forecast of a one-standard-deviation move. Under Black–Scholes with constant volatility, one could estimate historical volatility from returns, but that single number often does not represent current market pricing because volatility varies over time and across option strikes and maturities.

In practice, options with different strikes and expiries imply different volatilities, forming a volatility surface. The responses describe approaches that use at-the-money options or combine information across multiple options, sometimes weighting calls and puts, to produce an overall quote. Surface construction and calibration are model-dependent, and the discussion mentions local and stochastic volatility as ways to represent variation beyond the constant-volatility assumption. It does not specify a universal vendor methodology, so a displayed stock figure may depend on the data and aggregation choices used.

Key ideas

  • Implied volatility is backed out from option market prices using a pricing model.
  • Constant-volatility Black–Scholes does not capture variation across time, strikes, and maturities.
  • Market-implied volatility quotes across options form a volatility surface.
  • An overall stock volatility figure may aggregate at-the-money or broader call and put data.
  • The document describes possible approaches but gives no single standard calculation used by all software.

Tags

Full text
# How do they calculate stocks implied volatility?


# How do they calculate stocks implied volatility?












I know the construction of `Black-Scholes` model and how do we solve it for an `Implied Volatility`. But in general, which option price do software use to come up with Implied Vol for Overall Stock?

Let's say $AMZN?(When I look up for a symbol, it says AMZN has IV of 44%). I have an assumption that it doesn't have to do with option prices, rather it just an expected move in terms of 1 Standard Deviation.

## Answer by oliversm (score 2)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/27886

It might be worth noting that in the standard Black-Scholes model the implied volatility $\sigma$ is assumed to be a positive non-zero constant. If this were the case then we could simply look at the stock $S$, look at the historical data, and then compute the log-returns on some arbitrary time scale, and then compute the standard deviation, and we would have the volatility.

Unfortunately, the assumption of using a constant volatility is not great, and we find that volatility tends to change over time, (as well as be different on different timescales!). (Furthermore it is not normally distributed, but we can ignore that caveat for now). This leads to stochastic volatility models (e.g. the Heston Model).

Another complication is that the market data is to an extent inconsistent. What I mean by this is that in an ideal world if we took the value of any call option and computed the value of the implied volatility that corresponds to the market price, then we would get the same value regardless of the strike or maturity of the call option. However, in reality we observe that the volatility varies with the strike and maturity, and we instead have a volatility surface. We can then use an extension of the Black-Scholes model and have $\sigma \to \sigma(S,t)$, which is a local volatility model. How we compute volatilities from these surfaces is fairly involved, but a example of how to "calibrate" from market data is the Dupire Equation.

In reality what is normally done is to take some weighted average of a local volatility surface computed from call options (as these are the most liquid). This is then averaged again with put options to improve the consistency of the result. (We could then again take a moving average such as an EWMA over the past and calibrate this further with a stochastic volatility model if we so wished).

Hopefully this demonstrates that in theory there is only one value for the implied volatility, but that in reality this is not the case, and that there are multiple approaches to computing a value for the implied volatility, (each hopefully giving a similar answer which doesn't permit any arbitrage).

## Answer by Alex C (score 1)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/27778

It comes from options. A common way to do it is from ATM (at the money) put and call and the Black Scholes formula. There are also other ways that use a larger number of options and more complicated maths.

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.