Importance Sampling in Longstaff–Schwartz American Option Pricing
Summary
The document explains how to apply importance sampling to Longstaff–Schwartz least-squares Monte Carlo pricing for an American option. Simulated stock paths use a drift shifted from the risk-neutral process to generate more paths in relevant payoff regions. A likelihood ratio from the change of measure then reweights the discounted payoff so the estimate targets the original pricing measure.
The response emphasizes that the likelihood ratio is path-specific and must be evaluated at each simulated path’s optimal stopping time. Longstaff–Schwartz is first used on the drifted paths to estimate continuation values and identify exercise times; the final price averages the discounted exercise payoff multiplied by the likelihood ratio at that time. The discussion gives the mathematical rationale through a change of measure but reports no numerical validation or guidance for choosing the drift shift. It also notes deterministic rates in its setup, so broader models may require additional treatment.
Key ideas
- Importance sampling changes the simulated drift while retaining the target pricing measure through likelihood-ratio weighting.
- Longstaff–Schwartz estimates continuation values and exercise times on paths simulated under the shifted measure.
- Weight each path’s discounted exercise payoff using the likelihood ratio evaluated at its stopping time.
- The likelihood ratio uses the Brownian path under the modified measure and must match the chosen sign convention.
- The explanation assumes deterministic interest rates and gives no empirical comparison of sampling choices.
Tags
Full text
# Importance Sampling for pricing options with longstaff and schwartz
# Importance Sampling for pricing options with longstaff and schwartz
I have been asking this similar question before. However, I really want to be concrete and get and concrete explanation.
I have been reading the paper by Moreni and try to implement the same methodology based on least-square monte carlo for both European and American put options. They payoff function for both these puts is given by $f(t,S_t)=\max(K-S(t),0)$. The only difference is that for American case, we have payoffs in different times from simulations depending on the optimal stopping time.
As usual we have the underlying stock price as geometric brownian motion:
$dS_t = r S_t dt + \sigma S_t dW_t$.
Moreni introduces the change of drift in the underlying:
$dS_t = (r+\theta\sigma )S_t dt + \sigma S_t dW_t$.
When simulating from the drifted process, we have to multiply the PAYOFF functions with the likelihood ratio defined as $L_\theta=\exp\{-\theta W_t+\frac{1}{2}\theta^2 t\}$
so we have $f(t,S_t)=\max(K-S(t),0)\cdot\exp\{-\theta W_t+\frac{1}{2}\theta^2 t\}$
instead of just $f(t,S_t)=\max(K-S(t),0)$
The idea is of course to use negative values for $\theta$ so we get more "in-the money paths".
But when I try to use these modified payoffs with the Longstaff and schwartz algorithm, I don't get any relevant results. The price gets extremly biased whichever value i use for $\theta$. My question is, should the estimated continuation values in least-square method also be modified with the likelihood ratio? In that case how? Or as mentioned in the article, ONLY the payoff functions be multiplied by the likelihood ratio??
Thank you for your patience
PS* Added by request the steps that I use:
- Generate $N$-scenarios of the drifted with $\theta$ geometric brownian motion
- Save all the standard normal values $Z_t$ from the GBM for use in the likelihood ratio.
- Create the likelihood ratio using the $Z_t$'s and for some value $\theta$
- Use the likelihood ratio and set $f(t,S_t)=\max(K-S(t),0)\cdot\exp\{-\theta W_t-\frac{1}{2}\theta^2 t\}$ for all paths
- Now run the Least-square algorithm from $t=T$ down to $t=0$ to calculate all the continuation values and optimal stopping times.
- Take average of all the scenarios.
## Answer by Quantuple (score 3, accepted)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/27608
Assuming deterministic interest rates, the price of an American call option struck at $K$ and expiring at $T$ is given by $$ V_0 = \text{sup}_{\tau \in \mathcal{T}[0,T]} \mathbb{E}_0^\mathbb{Q}\left[ e^{-r\tau} \max(S_{\tau}-K, 0) \right] $$ where $\mathcal{T}[0,T]$ denotes a family of stopping times with values in $[0,T]$ and where, under the risk-neutral measure $\mathbb{Q}$, we assume $(S_t)_{t\geq 0}$ is a GBM $$ \frac{dS_t}{S_t} = r dt + \sigma dW_t^{\mathbb{Q}} $$
Doing importance sampling boils down to computing the above price by simulating paths and computing the expectation not under the risk-neutral measure $\mathbb{Q}$, but rather, under a modified measure $\mathbb{Q}^\theta$ which you have in your case chosen such that $$ \frac{dS_t}{S_t} = (r+\sigma\theta) dt + \sigma dW_t^{\mathbb{Q}^\theta} \tag{1}$$
which implicitly shapes the Radon-Nikodym derivative (see Girsanov theorem) $$ \left. \frac{d\mathbb{Q}}{d\mathbb{Q}^\theta} \right\vert_{\mathcal{F}_t} = \mathcal{E}\left(-\theta W_t^{\mathbb{Q}^\theta}\right) = \exp\left(-\theta W_t^{\mathbb{Q}^\theta} - \frac{1}{2}\theta^2 t \right) := L(\theta,t) \tag{2}$$ which defines what you refer to as the likelihood ratio.
Using a change of measure argument (+ optimal sampling theorem), one can then claim that \begin{align} V_0 &= \text{sup}_{\tau \in \mathcal{T}[0,T]} \mathbb{E}_0^\mathbb{Q}\left[ e^{-r\tau} \max(S_{\tau}-K, 0) \right] \\ &= \text{sup}_{\tau \in \mathcal{T}[0,T]} \mathbb{E}_0^\mathbb{Q^\theta}\left[ e^{-r\tau} \max(S_{\tau}-K, 0) L(\theta,\tau) \right] \end{align} where in the last equality above, $S_{\tau}$ (and the expectation) are simulated (taken) under $\mathbb{Q}^\theta$.
So what you should do is:
- Generate $N$ stock price paths under the modified measure $\mathbb{Q}^\theta$ using the SDE (1)
- Apply the Longstaff-Schwartz algorithm (Least Squares Monte Carlo) to obtain, for each simulated path $n=1,...,N$ the value of the discounted exercise value at the optimal stopping time $\tau^{(n)}$ $$ e^{-r\tau^{(n)}} \max( S_{\tau^{(n)}}-K, 0 ) $$ (under the hood, the LS algorithm identifies optimal stopping times by approximating continuation values through polynomial regressions relying on cross-sectional information and working backwards in time).
- Once you have that, it is straightforward to compute the Monte Carlo estimator: \begin{align} V_0 &= \text{sup}_{\tau \in \mathcal{T}[0,T]} \mathbb{E}_0^\mathbb{Q^\theta}\left[ e^{-r\tau} \max(S_{\tau}-K, 0) L(\theta, \tau) \right] \\ &\approx \frac{1}{N} \sum_{n=1}^N \left( e^{-r\tau^{(n)}} \max( S_{\tau^{(n)}}-K, 0 ) \right) \times L(\theta, \tau^{(n)}) \end{align} with see (2) $$ L(\theta,\tau^{(n)}) = \exp\left(-\theta W_{\tau^{(n)}}^{\mathbb{Q}^\theta} - \frac{1}{2}\theta^2 \tau^{(n)} \right) $$ and by definition of a Wiener process (i.e. standard Brownian motion) $$ W_{\tau^{(n)}}^{\mathbb{Q}^\theta} = \sum_{ i : 0 \leq t_i \leq \tau^{(n)} } Z_i \sqrt{t_{i+1}-t_i},\ \ \ Z_i \sim N(0,1)\ \ \text{i.i.d.} $$
notice how the likelihood ratio $L(\theta,n)$ should be computed for each individual path $n=1,...,N$ depending on the optimal stopping time for that path $\tau^{(n)}$.
## Answer by M. Jeunesse (score 0)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/27605
I would suggest to use :
$$f(t,S^\theta_t)=\max(K-S^\theta_t,0)\exp(-\theta W_t\color{red}{\mathbf{-}}\frac{1}{2}\theta^2t)$$
where $dS^\theta_t=(r+\sigma\theta)S^\theta_t dt + \sigma S^\theta_t dW_t$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.