Long and Short Volatility: Delta Hedging and Option Gamma
Summary
The note clarifies that buying volatility is not always identical to buying an option, although vanilla options generally rise in value when implied volatility rises, all else equal. For a long option delta-hedged under a Black–Scholes model, it gives a relation in which cumulative profit and loss depends on gamma and the difference between realized variance and the variance used to price the option. This links a vanilla option’s exposure to volatility with its hedge and the path of the underlying.
The note cautions that exotic options can have more complex exposure. A knock-in option may benefit from volatility both to activate the contract and to move the underlying toward a larger payoff. An up-and-out call can benefit from movement toward its strike while being harmed by volatility that triggers the barrier; its gamma can change sign. The derivation assumes a European payoff, a constant model volatility, and delta hedging, so it is not a universal rule for every option or trading setup.
Key ideas
- Vanilla option values generally increase with implied volatility when other inputs are held constant.
- For a long delta-hedged option, the stated model relates profit and loss to gamma and realized variance relative to implied variance.
- A knock-in option can gain from volatility both through barrier activation and movement toward a larger payoff.
- An up-and-out call can have mixed volatility exposure because movement can help reach the strike but also trigger the knockout barrier.
- The derivation relies on a Black–Scholes framework and does not establish a universal volatility rule for exotic options.
Tags
Full text
# What does is mean by buy(long) volatility or sell(short) volatility in option trading specifically?
# What does is mean by buy(long) volatility or sell(short) volatility in option trading specifically?
I often hear this term quite lot from traders, what does it really mean?
And some additional question: In option trading, is "buying vol" equivalent to "buying option" (no matter it's call, put or even straddle)? on the other hand, is "selling vol" equivalent to "selling option" (no matter it's call, put or even straddle)?
## Answer by siou0107 (score 5)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/49957
Not necessarily. It is true for vanilla options : all else being equal, their price increases with implied volatility, and if you delta-hedge them the residual P&L is a function of the difference between realised and implied volatility (variance). This is expressed in the so-called Black-Scholes robustness formula : for a long, delta-hedged option position, we have
$$\text{P&L} = \frac{1}{2}\int_0^T{e^{rt}\Gamma_tS_t^2\left(\sigma_t^2 - \tilde{\sigma}^2 \right)dt}$$ where $\sigma_t$ is the realised volatility (squared return) and $\tilde{\sigma}$ is your implied volatility (used to compute option price and gamma).
However, when you talk about more exotic instruments (e.g., digital or barrier options), this becomes more subtle. Take an out-of-the money knock-in option : you are totally long volatility, since you need 1) to knock in and 2) the spot to move the furthest away from the strike so that you get the biggest payoff
Now take an out-of the money up-and-out call : you want high volatility near the strike, to get into the money, but once in the money you want low volatility not to trigger the knockout barrier. Thus, you are not uniformly long or short volatility. In fact, such options have a gamma that changes sign.
Proof Suppose you just bought a European option with terminal payoff $g(S_T)$ considering a BS model with constant volatility $\tilde{\sigma}$, and delta-hedged it on the basis of that model. The PDE satisfied by your model's price $p^M(t,S_t)$ is: $$\frac{\partial p^M}{\partial t}\left(t, S_t\right) + rS_t\frac{\partial p^M}{\partial x}\left(t, S_t\right) + \frac{1}{2}\tilde{\sigma}^2S_t^2 \frac{\partial^2 p^M}{\partial x^2}\left(t, S_t\right) - rp^M(t,S_t) = 0$$ $$\Leftrightarrow \frac{\partial p^M}{\partial t}\left(t, S_t\right) + rS_t\frac{\partial p^M}{\partial x}\left(t, S_t\right) = rp^M(t,S_t) - \frac{1}{2} \tilde{\sigma}^2S_t^2 \frac{\partial^2 p^M}{\partial x^2}\left(t, S_t\right)$$ $$p^M(T, x) = g(x)$$ (If it is not the case, your model is arbitrageable.) The value of your hedging portfolio (stock and cash) has the following dynamics: $$dV_t = \frac{\partial p^M}{\partial x}\left(t, S_t\right)dS_t + r\left[ V_t - S_t \frac{\partial p^M}{\partial x}\left(t, S_t\right)\right]dt$$
If you apply Itô's lemma to $p^M$, you get: $$dp^M(t,S_t) = \frac{\partial p^M}{\partial t}\left(t, S_t\right) dt + \frac{\partial p^M}{\partial x}\left(t, S_t\right) dS_t + \frac{1}{2} \frac{\partial^2 p^M}{\partial x^2}\left(t, S_t\right) d\langle S \rangle_t = \left[\frac{\partial p^M}{\partial t}\left(t, S_t\right) + \frac{1}{2} \sigma_t^2S_t^2\frac{\partial^2 p^M}{\partial x^2}\left(t, S_t\right)\right]dt + \frac{\partial p^M}{\partial x}\left(t, S_t\right) dS_t$$
If you denote by $Z_t := p^M\left(t, S_t\right) - V_t$ the value of the hedging P&L, you have $$dZ_t = \left[\frac{\partial p^M}{\partial t}\left(t, S_t\right) + \frac{1}{2} \sigma_t^2S_t^2\frac{\partial^2 p^M}{\partial x^2}\left(t, S_t\right)\right]dt - r\left[ V_t - S_t \frac{\partial p^M}{\partial x}\left(t, S_t\right)\right]dt$$ $$Z_0 = 0$$ The initial condition corresponds to the assumption that you invest the whole premium $p^M\left(0, S_0\right)$ into the hedging portfolio $V_0$. You replace the terms that you have in your model PDE and get: $$dZ_t = \left[rp^M(t, S_t) + \frac{1}{2} \left(\sigma_t^2 - \tilde{\sigma}^2\right)S_t^2\frac{\partial^2 p^M}{\partial x^2}\left(t, S_t\right)\right]dt - rV_tdt = \left[rZ_t + \frac{1}{2} \left(\sigma_t^2 - \tilde{\sigma}^2\right)S_t^2\frac{\partial^2 p^M}{\partial x^2}\left(t, S_t\right) \right]dt$$ Since $p^M\left(T, S_T\right) = g\left(S_T\right)$, the final P&L is: $$\frac{1}{2}\int_0^T{e^{rt}\Gamma_tS_t^2\left(\sigma_t^2 - \tilde{\sigma}^2 \right)dt}$$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.