Real-World and Risk-Neutral Expectations for Forward LIBOR
Summary
The document asks whether a forward LIBOR expression derived from a zero-coupon bond price under a risk-neutral measure can be reused when the bond value is instead defined as an expectation under the real-world measure. The response sketches two ways to think about the difference: a utility-based argument involving concavity and Jensen’s inequality, and a change-of-measure relation that links expectations through the density between the measures.
These approaches emphasize that a real-world expectation and a pricing-measure expectation need not coincide, and that their difference depends on preferences or on the relationship between the stochastic discount factor and the measure-change density. The discussion is conceptual rather than a complete derivation of a usable forward-rate formula. In particular, the utility argument’s notation and assumptions are compressed, and applying the expectation identity requires careful specification of the random variable and measure-change density. Readers should not treat the sketch as a general proof that one measure’s rate formula transfers unchanged to the other.
Key ideas
- A bond value defined under the real-world measure is conceptually distinct from one defined under a risk-neutral measure.
- Concavity in a utility-based setup can create a Jensen gap between expectations.
- A change of measure relates expectations through the Radon–Nikodym density.
- The response is a sketch and does not fully establish a general forward-rate formula.
Tags
Full text
# Instantaneous Forward LIBOR rate formula under the real-world measure: A fundamental question
# Instantaneous Forward LIBOR rate formula under the real-world measure: A fundamental question
We know how the formula of an instantaneous forward LIBOR rate looks like:
\begin{eqnarray} L(t, t, T) = \frac{1}{\Delta}\left(\frac{1}{P(t, T)} -1\right) \end{eqnarray} where $P(t, T)$ stands for the zero-coupon bond price at time $t$, with $T$ being the maturity time (the time at which our contract is terminated). Mathematically, the corresponding relation is given by:
\begin{eqnarray} P(t, T) = \mathbb{E}^{\mathbb{Q}}[D(t, T) | \mathcal{F}_t] \end{eqnarray} where the expectation is taken with respect to a risk-netral measure equivalent to the real-world measure $\mathbb{P}$, and $D(t, T)$ is the discount factor between $t$ and $T$ (Let's say it is characterized by a CIR model).
My question here is: what if we want to write a formulation for the instantaneous forward LIBOR rate under the real-world measure $\mathbb{P}$. More precisely, suppose that we specify by $P^{A}(t, T)=\mathbb{E}^{\mathbb{P}}[D(t, T)| \mathcal{F}_t]$ the actuarial value of a zero-coupon bond at time t with maturity time T, and $\Delta = T-t$. Then, is it still possible to write down
\begin{eqnarray} L(t, t, T) = \frac{1}{\Delta}\left(\frac{1}{P^{A}(t, T)} -1\right) \end{eqnarray}
Please let me know what you think. Thank you in advance.
## Answer by Arshdeep (score 1)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/63869
I will show you two different treatments, the first from the classic utility theory and the other from financial economics.
- Consider a risk averse market operating on a concave, monotonic and increasing utility function. Under some regularity (Von-Neumann) conditions, this is without loss of generality. Such a utility function, is unique upto a linear transformation. Then,
$E_Q(X)=P(t,T)$ and
$U(P(t,T))=E_P(U(X))$ imply that
$U(E_Q(X))=E_P(U(X))$
Let $Y=U(X)$ so that $E_P(Y)=U(E_Q(U^{-1}(Y))$
Also $P_A(t,T)=E_P(Y)$
so that we need to relate $U(E_Q(U^{-1}(Y))$ and $E_Q(Y)$. Observe on account of U being concave,
$U(E_Q(U^{-1}(Y))>E_Q(U(U^{-1}(Y))=E_Q(Y)$
and thus the only relationship we can be sure of is:
$E_P(Y)>E_Q(Y)$ where the difference is the well known 'Jensen gap' which depends heavily on the market utility function. You can now plug $Y$ as the stochastic discount factor.
- The expectations under equivalent measures $Q$ and $P$ are related by:
$E_Q(X)=E_P(X)+cov(X,dQ/dP)$
where $dQ/dP$ is the Radon Nikodym derivative. You can plug $X$ as the stochastic discount factor and thus be able to express the LIBOR forward in terms of the $P$ measure expectation.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.