Pricing a Lookback Put by Exact Maximum-Level Probabilities
Summary
The document explains how to price a lookback put in a binomial model when its payoff depends on the highest price reached during the option’s life. Counting paths that end below a level is insufficient: some may have crossed a higher level earlier, so they belong to a different payoff group.
Instead, calculate the probability that the running maximum reaches each level, then subtract the probability of reaching the next higher level. This yields the probability that the maximum equals a specific level; multiply each such probability by its corresponding payoff and combine the results to obtain the expected payoff. The example reports a 25.92% probability that the maximum is 8, derived from probabilities of 49.6% for reaching at least 8 and 23.68% for reaching at least 16. It assumes a risk-neutral up-move probability of 40%. The excerpt does not provide the full general formula or complete the option valuation.
Key ideas
- Path counts based only on the terminal price can misclassify paths for a lookback payoff.
- The running maximum partitions paths according to the highest level reached.
- The probability of an exact maximum is the probability of reaching at least that level minus the probability of reaching the next level.
- Expected payoff is found by weighting each level’s payoff by its exact-maximum probability.
- The numerical example assumes a risk-neutral up-move probability of 40%.
Tags
Full text
# Looback Put Option - finding the number of paths that reach each level
# Looback Put Option - finding the number of paths that reach each level
In a 4 period binomial model, I have a lookback put option that pays $\left [M_{4}-4 \right ]^{+}$, where $M_{4}$ is the maximum price reached during the sequence of 4 trials.
Lets say the starting price = 4, the number of trials = 4. The up-factor is 2 and down factor 1/2.
My idea to find the expected value of the option was to first find the number of paths that only reached (and did not exceed) each level, so:
- Level 1 or a price of $M_{4}=8$, I would have $ n \cdot \left [ 8-4 \right ]$ payoffs for this level.
- Level 2 or a price of $M_{4}=16$, I would have $ o \cdot \left [ 16-4 \right ]$ payoffs for this level.
- Level 3 or a price of $M_{4}=32$, I would have $ p \cdot \left [ 32-4 \right ]$ payoffs for this level.
- Level 4 or a price of $M_{4}=64$, I would have $ 1 \cdot \left [ 64-4 \right ]$ payoffs for this level.
Here's the problem
Take for example Level 1:
- P(equaling level 1 at T=4) = 0, there are no paths that end at 1 after 4 trials.
- P(reaching level 1, but ending at or below level 1) = $\frac{4!}{(4-3)!3!} + \frac{4!}{(4-4)!4!}=5$
However one of those 5 paths exceeds level 1, even though the path ends at level 1.
Hopefully the graph below illustrates the problem. Both paths end at level 0 (or 4), but the pink path breached level 1 and its payoff would be (16-4) instead of (8-4) for the green path.
Naturally if the number of periods grow, there could be many more than 1 path that does this.
Said another way, how do I calculate the number of red paths in an N period model?
## Answer by Tejay Lovelock (score 1)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/34898
The general formula to answer this question can be found on page 105-106 of Introduction to Mathematical Finance by Pliska.
In general: $\bar{\mathbb{P}}\left ( M_{4} \geq 4\left ( 2^{i} \right ) \right )$ (or the probability the maximum to date price was 4, 8, 16 etc) is equal to:
- the probability of the stock price finishing at $M_{4}$; plus
- the probability the stock price exceeding $M_{4}$; plus
- the probability the stock price reached $M_{4}$ at some point but finished below $M_{4}$.
The formula to evaluate this can be found on the pages of Pliska's book mentioned above.
However to answer this question, what needs to be calculated is $\bar{\mathbb{P}}\left ( M_{4} = 4\left ( 2^{i} \right ) \right )$ for each level $i$. The only levels of $i$ that contribute value to the option are for $1 \leq i \leq 4$. The probability of the maximum being exactly $i$ can be calculated via:
- $\bar{\mathbb{P}}\left ( M_{4} \geq 4\left ( 2^{i} \right ) \right ) - \bar{\mathbb{P}}\left ( M_{4} \geq 4\left ( 2^{i+1} \right ) \right )$.
Once again, using the formulas in Pliska's book, $\bar{\mathbb{P}}\left ( M_{4} = 8\right )$ is given by:
- $\bar{\mathbb{P}}\left ( M_{4} \geq 8\right ) - \bar{\mathbb{P}}\left ( M_{4} \geq 16 ) \right )$ = 25.92%
- $\bar{\mathbb{P}}\left ( M_{4} \geq 8\right )$ = 49.6%
- $\bar{\mathbb{P}}\left ( M_{4} \geq 16\right )$ = 23.68%
In this example I have assumed r =10% so the risk neutral probability of an up move is 40%.
Therefore there is a 25.92% chance of receving $(8-4)=4$
The same calculations need to be done for $M_{4} = 16,32$ and $64$ to determine the price of the option.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.