Interpreting Black–Scholes N(d1) and N(d2)
Summary
The document explains several interpretations of the normal cumulative distribution terms in the Black–Scholes call price. Under risk-neutral pricing, the call payoff can be split into an asset payoff when the option finishes in the money and a cash payment when it does. The answer relates the two terms to in-the-money probabilities under different probability measures: the ordinary risk-neutral measure and a stock-numeraire measure. It also connects them to the call’s delta and strike sensitivity, and to asset-or-nothing and cash-or-nothing digital option values.
For the probability involving the cash payoff, the derivation uses the normally distributed log of the terminal stock price, standardizes the strike threshold, and obtains the corresponding normal probability. The asset-payoff expectation is described as typically requiring a change of numeraire, though the response does not work through that calculation in full. These interpretations depend on the Black–Scholes assumptions and the stated measures; the distribution terms are not interchangeable standalone probabilities without their associated discounting or numeraire factors.
Key ideas
- The call payoff separates into an asset payoff and a cash payoff when the option finishes in the money.
- The N(d2) term corresponds to the in-the-money probability under the risk-neutral measure, with discounting for the cash digital value.
- The N(d1) term arises under a stock-numeraire measure and is tied to the call delta.
- The terms also price cash-or-nothing and asset-or-nothing digital calls when combined with their respective factors.
- The derivation uses the normal distribution of log terminal prices under Black–Scholes assumptions.
Tags
Full text
# Where can I find a clear explanation (brief derivation) of N(d1) and N(d2)?
# Where can I find a clear explanation (brief derivation) of N(d1) and N(d2)?
Where can I find a good explanation (perhaps with a brief derivation) of N(d1) and N(d2) from Black-Scholes? Just trying to understand the general idea about these 2 probability functions and how they work...
(Thinking they probably work by trying to predict the probability of the cost or profit part of the BS equation by estimating the probability of being at a particular point of a normal distribution but I don't know how that is being achieved)
## Answer by Kevin (score 16, accepted)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/46858
There are several interpretations for $\Phi(d_1)$ and $\Phi(d_2)$. As you know, \begin{align*} C(t,S_t)=S_te^{-q(T-t)}\Phi(d_1) -Ke^{-r(T-t)}\Phi(d_2). \end{align*}
### Exercise Probabilities
We can show that \begin{align*} \mathbb{Q}_S[\{S_T\geq K\}]&=e^{-q(T-t)}\Phi(d_1), \\ \mathbb{Q}[\{S_T\geq K\}] &=e^{-r(T-t)}\Phi(d_2). \end{align*} Thus, $\Phi(d_i)$ may be seen as probabilities of the option being in the money at maturity $T$. Here, $\mathbb{Q}$ is the equivalent martingale measure using a risk-free bank account as numeraire and $\mathbb{Q}_S$ uses the stock as numeraire. As you hedge the call option with trading into the stock and a bond, it is intuitive to have these exercise probabilities here.
### Hedging Statistics
Alternatively, \begin{align*} \Delta = \frac{\partial C(t,S_t)}{\partial S_t} =e^{-q(T-t)}\Phi(d_1), \\ \kappa = \frac{\partial C(t,S_t)}{\partial K} =e^{-r(T-t)}\Phi(d_2). \end{align*} If you recall the idea of a dynamic $\Delta$ hedge, this interpretation of $\Phi(d_1)$ tells you how much you need to invest in the stock in order to hedge the call. In this sense, $\kappa$ tellls you the cost of such a hedge.
### Price of Binary (Digital) Options
You can see $\Phi(d_1)$ and $\Phi(d_2)$ also as prices of binary options
- $S_te^{-q(T-t)}\Phi(d_1)$ refers to the price of a European-style asset-or-nothing call option,
- $e^{-r(T-t)}\Phi(d_2)$ to the price of a European-style cash-or-nothing call option.
### Derivation
By risk-neutral pricing, \begin{align*} C(t,S_t) &= e^{-r(T-t)}\mathbb{E}^\mathbb{Q}[\max\{S_T-K,0\}\mid\mathcal{F}_t]\\ &= e^{-r(T-t)}\mathbb{E}^\mathbb{Q}[(S_T-K)\mathbb{1}_{\{S_T\geq K\}}\mid\mathcal{F}_t]\\ &= e^{-r(T-t)}\left(\mathbb{E}^\mathbb{Q}[S_T\mathbb{1}_{\{S_T\geq K\}}\mid\mathcal{F}_t] - K\mathbb{E}^\mathbb{Q}[\mathbb{1}_{\{S_T\geq K\}}\mid\mathcal{F}_t]\right). \end{align*} From here, you can immediately see the decomposition into exercise probabilities and binary options.
The first expectation is typically solved by a change of numeraire. In order to compute the second probability, note that \begin{align*} \mathbb{E}^\mathbb{Q}[\mathbb{1}_{\{S_T\geq K\}}\mid\mathcal{F}_t] &= \mathbb{Q}[\{S_T\geq K\}\mid\mathcal{F}_t] \\ &= \mathbb{Q}[\{\ln(S_T)\geq \ln(K)\}\mid\mathcal{F}_t]. \end{align*} Since $\ln(S_T)\mid\mathcal{F}_t\sim N\left(\ln(S_t)+\left(r-q-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2\right)(T-t),\sigma^2 (T-t)\right)$, you have for $Z\sim N(0,1)$, \begin{align*} \mathbb{Q}[\{\ln(S_T)\geq \ln(K)\}] &= \mathbb{Q}\left[\left\{\ln(S_t)+\left(r-q-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2\right)(T-t)+\sigma \sqrt{T-t} Z\geq \ln(K)\right\}\right] \\ &= \mathbb{Q}\left[\left\{Z\geq \frac{\ln(K)-\ln(S_t)-\left(r-q-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2\right)(T-t)}{\sigma \sqrt{T-t}}\right\}\right] \\ &= \mathbb{Q}\left[\left\{Z\geq -\frac{\ln\left(\frac{S_t}{K}\right)+\left(r-q-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2\right)(T-t)}{\sigma \sqrt{T-t}}\right\}\right] \\ &= 1-\mathbb{Q}\left[\left\{Z\leq-\frac{\ln\left(\frac{S_t}{K}\right)+\left(r-q-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2\right)(T-t)}{\sigma \sqrt{T-t}}\right\}\right] \\ &= 1-\Phi\left(-\frac{\ln\left(\frac{S_t}{K}\right)+\left(r-q-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2\right)(T-t)}{\sigma \sqrt{T-t}}\right) \\ &= \Phi\left(\frac{\ln\left(\frac{S_t}{K}\right)+\left(r-q-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2\right)(T-t)}{\sigma \sqrt{T-t}}\right) \\ &= \Phi(d_2). \end{align*}
Of course, you can take simply the log-normal density and compute the expectation as integral. There are many more ways to derive the famous Black-Scholes formula...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.