Pricing a Cash-or-Nothing Call in Black–Scholes
Summary
The document derives the time-t value of a cash-or-nothing call that pays one unit when the stock finishes above the strike. Under the risk-neutral Black–Scholes model, the payoff indicator is not independent of current information because the terminal stock price depends on the known current stock price. Instead, condition on the current price and use the independent Brownian increment from t to maturity. The conditional probability of finishing above the strike is the standard normal cumulative probability N(d2), so discounting it gives the binary option value.
A second derivation treats the binary payoff as the limit of a call spread whose strikes approach one another. This makes the binary value the negative derivative of the European call price with respect to strike. Both approaches yield the same formula. The result assumes the stated Black–Scholes dynamics and a unit cash payout; other payout conventions, dividends, or model assumptions would require adjustments.
Key ideas
- The terminal payoff indicator is not independent of current information because it depends on the current stock price.
- The future Brownian increment is independent of information available at time t.
- Conditioning on the current stock price gives a risk-neutral exercise probability of N(d2).
- Discounting that probability gives the value of a unit cash-or-nothing call.
- A binary call can also be represented as the limiting value of a narrow call spread.
Tags
Full text
# Binary Option in B-S model - technical question
# Binary Option in B-S model - technical question
I want to price Binary Option in Black-Scholes model.
The payoff is of the form $f(S_{T})=I_{\{S_{T}-K>0\}}$.
If we assume that $t=0$ this is easy, because then we have
$C_{0}=\mathbb{E}^{*}\left[e^{-rT}I_{\{S_{T}-K>0\}}|F_{0}\right]=e^{-rT}\mathbb{E}^{*}\left[I_{\{S_{T}-K>0\}}\right]=e^{-rT}Q(S_{T}>K)=\ldots$
But how to derive a price at any time $t\in[0,T]$?
For any $t\in[0,T]$ we have something like this:
$C_{t}=\mathbb{E}^{*}\left[e^{-r(T-t)}I_{\{S_{T}-K>0\}}|F_{t}\right]=e^{-r(T-t)}\mathbb{E}^{*}\left[I_{\{S_{T}-K>0\}}|F_{t}\right]=?$
How to compute $\mathbb{E}^{*}\left[I_{\{S_{T}-K>0\}}|F_{t}\right]$?
My attempt:
$S_{T}=S_{t}e^{(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^{2})(T-t)+\sigma(W^{*}_{T}-W^{*}_{t})}$
I know that $W^{*}_{T}-W^{*}_{t}$ is independent with respect to $F_{t}$ (generated by Brownian Motion).
Does $I_{\{S_{T}-K>0\}}$ is independent with respect to $F_{t}$? Why (if yes)?
If yes $\mathbb{E}^{*}\left[I_{\{S_{T}-K>0\}}|F_{t}\right]=\mathbb{E}^{*}\left[I_{\{S_{T}-K>0\}}\right]=Q(S_{T}-K>0)=\ldots$
## Answer by Gordon (score 6, accepted)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/24688
$I_{\{S_{T}-K>0\}}$ is NOT independent of $\mathcal{F}_{t}$, since \begin{align*} S_T=S_t \, e^{(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2)(T-t) + \sigma (W_T^*-W_t^*)}, \end{align*} where $S_t \in \mathcal{F}_t$, though $e^{(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2)(T-t) + \sigma (W_T^*-W_t^*)}$ is independent of $\mathcal{F}_t$. However, since $W_T^*-W_t^*$ is independent of $\mathcal{F}_t$, you are able to compute \begin{align*} \mathbb{E}^{*}\left(I_{\{S_{T}-K>0\}}|F_{t}\right) &= Q(S_{T}-K>0 \mid \mathcal{F}_t)\\ &=Q\left(\sigma (W_T^*-W_t^*) \ge \ln\frac{K}{S_t} -(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2)(T-t) \mid \mathcal{F}_t\right)\\ &=Q\left(\frac{W_T^*-W_t^*}{\sqrt{T-t}} \ge \frac{\ln\frac{K}{S_t} -(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2)(T-t)}{\sigma \sqrt{T-t}} \mid \mathcal{F}_t\right)\\ &=1-N\left( \frac{\ln\frac{K}{S_t} -(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2)(T-t)}{\sigma \sqrt{T-t}}\right)\\ &=N(d_2), \end{align*} since $\frac{W_T^*-W_t^*}{\sqrt{T-t}}\sim N(0, 1)$ is independent of $\mathcal{F}_t$, while $\frac{\ln\frac{K}{S_t} -(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2)(T-t)}{\sigma \sqrt{T-t}}$ is $\mathcal{F}_t$ measurable. Here, $$d_2 = \frac{\ln\frac{S_t}{K} + (r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2) (T-t)}{\sigma \sqrt{T-t}}$$
## Answer by BS. (score 5)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/24837
You can also infer the value of your binary option from the value of a European call option with the same strike and time-to-maturity by going long on a call with strike $K$ and time-to-maturity $\tau$, and short on a call with strike $K+\Delta K$ and the same time-to-maturity. If you hold $\frac{1}{\Delta K}$ of that portfolio, then as $\Delta K$ goes to zero, your total payoff becomes closer to the payoff of the binary option.
If you denote by $V_t$ the value of your binary option, and $C_t \left(\tau ,K \right)$ the value of a European call option with strike $K$ and expiring at $t+\tau$, then it is easy to see the following :
$$V_t = \lim_{\Delta K \to 0} \frac{1}{\Delta K} \left( C_t\left(\tau,K\right)-C_t\left(\tau,K+\Delta K\right) \right)$$
Basically the value of the binary option is the opposite of the partial derivative of the price of a European call option of the same strike and time-to-maturity with respect to the strike, ie :
$$V_t = - \frac{\partial C_t}{\partial K} \left( \tau, K \right)$$ $$=-\frac{\partial}{\partial K} \left( e^{-q\tau} S_t \mathcal{N}\left( d_1 \right) - e^{-r \tau} K \mathcal{N}\left( d_2 \right) \right)$$ $$=e^{-r\tau} \mathcal{N} \left( d_2 \right)$$
## Answer by Leon (score 3)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/24832
I think that I found correct answer to my question.
We have the following theorem:
Theorem. If $X$ is independent of $\mathcal{G}$, $Y$ is $\mathcal{G}$ - measurable and $\phi(x,y)$ is bounded function then:
$$E\left[\phi(X,Y)|\mathcal{G}\right]=E\left[\phi(X,y)\right]$$
In my problem I want to calculate the following formula:
$C_{t}=\mathbb{E}^{*}\left[e^{-r(T-t)}I_{\{S_{T}-K>0\}}|F_{t}\right]=e^{-r(T-t)}\mathbb{E}^{*}\left[I_{\{S_{T}-K>0\}}|F_{t}\right]=\ldots $
so if i rewrite $S_{T}$ as $S_{T}=S_{t}e^{(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^{2})(T-t)+\sigma(W^{*}_{T}-W^{*}_{t})}$ i will get something like this:
$$S_{T}=Y\cdot e^{(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^{2})(T-t)+\sigma\cdot X}$$
where $Y$ is $F_{t}$ - measurable and $X$ is independent of $F_{t}$.
Moreover, we can define $\phi(x,y)=I_{\{y\cdot e^{C+D\cdot x}-K>0\}}$ which is bounded.
It means that using the above theorem we get:
$$\ldots=e^{-r(T-t)}\mathbb{E}^{*}\left[I_{\left\{S_{t}e^{(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^{2})(T-t)+\sigma(W^{*}_{T}-W^{*}_{t})}-K>0\right\}}|F_{t}\right]$$ $$=e^{-r(T-t)}\mathbb{E}^{*}\left[I_{\left\{S_{t}e^{(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^{2})(T-t)+\sigma(W^{*}_{T}-W^{*}_{t})}-K>0\right\}}\right]$$ $$=e^{-r(T-t)}Q\left(S_{t}e^{(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^{2})(T-t)+\sigma(W^{*}_{T}-W^{*}_{t})}-K>0\right)=\ldots$$
and this is what we want.
> Comments.
You are basically correct. For any two independent random variables $X$ and $Y$, the theorem says that \begin{align*} E\big(\phi(X, Y) \mid \mathcal{G} \big) = E\big(\phi(X, y) \,\big)\, |_{y=Y}. \end{align*} Here, for the conditional expectation, \begin{align*} \mathbb{E}^*\bigg(I_{\big\{S_{t}e^{(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^{2})(T-t)+\sigma(W^*_{T}-W^*_{t})}-K>0\big\}} \mid \mathcal{F}_{t}\bigg) &= \mathbb{E}^*\bigg( I_{\big\{s\,e^{(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^{2})(T-t)+\sigma(W^*_{T}-W^*_{t})}-K>0\big\}} \bigg)\,\Big|_{s=S_t}\\ &= N(d_2). \end{align*}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.