Pricing a Squared-Stock Log Payoff with a Tradable Numeraire
Summary
The document examines a Black–Scholes claim paying the squared terminal stock price times its logarithm. It compares three valuation approaches: risk-neutral expectation using a lognormal moment, changing to the stock as numeraire, and attempting to use the squared stock price as numeraire. The first two calculations agree, while the third omits an exponential factor.
The answer identifies the issue: a numeraire must be a tradable asset, and the squared stock price is not itself tradable. It suggests instead using the time-t value of a claim that pays the squared stock price at maturity; that discounted conditional expectation is tradable and can serve as the numeraire. The document gives a conceptual correction but does not work through the resulting stochastic differential equation or complete the pricing calculation. Its discussion assumes the Black–Scholes setting and does not address market frictions or alternative models.
Key ideas
- A numeraire change requires a tradable asset as the numeraire.
- The squared stock price is not directly a tradable asset.
- The discounted conditional value of a squared-stock terminal claim can provide a tradable numeraire.
- Risk-neutral and stock-numeraire calculations provide a cross-check for the payoff valuation.
Tags
Full text
# Computing Derivative Security with Change of Numeraire
# Computing Derivative Security with Change of Numeraire
Under Black-Scholes, price a contract worth $S_T^{2}log(S_T)$ at expiration.
This is a question from Joshi's Quant Book (an extension question).
Ok, so I solved this with 3 different methods to make sure I understood the concepts. Unfortunately 2 of the 3 methods give the same answer but the 3rd one does not (although it is only off by a factor). I'm curious where I am going wrong and which solution is correct (provided one of them is indeed correct).
Let $V_0$ be the value of our derivative security.
Method 1: Pricing under the Risk-Neutral Measure
$V_0 = e^{-rT}\tilde{E}(S_T^{2}log(S_T))$ where expectation is taken under the risk-neutral measure.
Here, I just compute the expectation directly with the help of the moment generating function as follows:
Under the risk-neutral measure,
$S(t) = e^{ln(S_0) + (r-0.5\sigma^2)t + \sigma(W_t - W_0)}$
Define a random variable $X \sim N(ln(S_0) + (r-0.5\sigma^2)T, \sigma^2T)$.
Setting $log(S_T) = X$ and $S_T = e^X$, we have:
Then, $V_0 = e^{-rT}\tilde{E}(Xe^{2X})$.
Now, we use the mgf of X to compute this expectation.
$M_X(s) = \tilde{E}(e^{sX})$ and so by differentiating with respect to s and evaluating at $s=2$, we obtain:
$M_X'(2) = \tilde{E}(Xe^{2X}) = (ln(S_0) + (r + 1.5\sigma^2)T)S_0^2e^{(2r+\sigma^2)T}$
(Here, I use that for $X \sim N(\nu, \lambda^2)$, we have $M_X(s) = e^{s\nu + 0.5s^2\lambda^2}$ and thus $M_X'(2) = (\nu + 2\lambda^2)e^{2\nu + 2\lambda^2})$
Hence, $V_0 = e^{-rT}\tilde{E}(Xe^{2X}) = (ln(S_0) + (r + 1.5\sigma^2)T)S_0^2e^{(r+\sigma^2)T}$.
Method 2: Using the stock as numeraire.
Here, $V_0 = S_0 \hat{E}(S_Tlog(S_T))$ where expectation is taken under the stock measure.
Under the stock measure,
$S(t) = e^{ln(S_0) + (r+0.5\sigma^2)t + \sigma(W_t - W_0)}$
Define a random variable $X \sim N(ln(S_0) + (r+0.5\sigma^2)T, \sigma^2T)$.
Setting $log(S_T) = X$ and $S_T = e^X$, we have:
Then, $V_0 = S_0\hat{E}(Xe^{X})$.
Using the same process as in Method 1, I get the exact same answer.
(the only difference in the process is that I evaluate the mgf at 1 for the first derivative instead of 2 and multiply by $S_0$ at the end instead of $e^{-rT}$).
Method 3: Using the squared stock as numeraire.
Here, $V_0 = S_0^2 E^\star(log(S_T))$ where expectation is taken under the associated measure.
Under this change of measure with Radon-Nikodym Derivate $Z(t) = d\hat{P}/d\tilde{P} = e^{-rt}S_t^2/S_0^2$, I determined that the drift term is $(r+2\sigma^2)$ for the stock process $S_t$. Since the diffusion term is unaffected by change in measure, we have:
$dS_t = (r+2\sigma^2)S_tdt + \sigma S_tdW^\star_t$
Thus, $S(t) = e^{ln(S_0) + (r+1.5\sigma^2)t + \sigma(W_t - W_0)}$
Recall we wish to compute $V_0 = S_0^2 E^\star(log(S_T))$.
Define a random variable $X \sim N(ln(S_0) + (r+1.5\sigma^2)T, \sigma^2T)$.
Setting $log(S_T) = X$ we have:
Then, $V_0 = S_0^2\hat{E}(X) = S_0^2(ln(S_0) + (r + 1.5\sigma^2)T)$
So, here I am missing that $e^{(r+\sigma^2)T}$ term.
So, what am I doing wrong? And which is correct?
Thank you in advance!
## Answer by Frido (score 4, accepted)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/78186
Hint:
I think you need to use a tradable as numeraire. So the money market and the stock price are tradables. But $S_t^2$ is not a tradable. How to solve this:
Notice that for $t\in[0,T]$ the claim $E_t \left[ e^{-r(T-t)}S_T^2 \right]$ is a tradable, and in particular $S_T^2 = E_T \left[ S_T^2 \right]$.
So, you need to write down the SDE for $E_t \left[ e^{-r(T-t)} S_T^2 \right]$ and use that as numeraire.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.