금리와의 상관관계가 선물 가격을 높이는 이유
기사 Quant Q&A · 저자: M00000001
요약
이 문서는 기초자산 가격이 확률적 금리와 양의 상관관계를 가질 때 선물 계약이 비교 가능한 선도 계약보다 비싸게 가격이 형성될 수 있는 이유를 설명합니다. 선물은 일일정산되므로 롱 포지션은 금리가 높을 때 이익을 받는 경향이 있고, 그 돈을 해당 금리로 운용할 수 있습니다. 손실은 금리가 낮을 때 발생하는 경향이 있어 증거금 납부에 필요한 현금을 더 저렴하게 조달할 수 있습니다. 이러한 현금흐름 시점의 차이는 선물을 더 매력적으로 만들어 비교 가능한 선도 계약보다 가격을 높일 수 있습니다.
두 번째 설명은 선물 포지션을 액면가 바스켓의 선도금리계약과 비교합니다. 선도 계약 손익은 할인되지만 선물 손익은 선형이므로, 금리가 오르거나 내려도 바스켓 가치가 증가할 수 있습니다. 그 결과 발생하는 볼록성 조정은 금리 변동성에 따라 달라지며 기초자산이 금리와 상관관계가 있는 다른 선물 및 선도 계약에도 적용됩니다. 선도 계약에 담보를 설정하면 차이가 사라질 수 있다고 주의하며, 결론은 계약의 담보 및 증거금 관례에 따라 달라집니다.
핵심 아이디어
- 선물의 일일정산 때문에 금리가 확률적으로 변동할 때 손익 발생 시점이 중요합니다.
- 기초자산이 금리와 양의 상관관계가 있으면 롱 선물 포지션은 금리가 높을 때 이익을 얻고 낮을 때 손실을 입는 경향이 있습니다.
- 선물과 선도의 손익 및 할인 방식 차이로 볼록성 조정이 발생합니다.
- 이 조정은 금리 변동성이 커질수록 커지며 금리 선물 외의 계약에도 영향을 줄 수 있습니다.
- 두 상품 모두 증거금으로 담보가 설정되면 선물과 선도의 가격 차이가 사라질 수 있습니다.
태그
전문
# Future Versus Forward Price When Underlying Asset Price Positively Correlated with Interest Rate # Future Versus Forward Price When Underlying Asset Price Positively Correlated with Interest Rate I'm reading a book called a Practical Guide to Quantitative Finance Interview, and cannot make sense of the solution for a particular question, so I really appreciate your advice: Question: What is the difference between futures and forwards? If the price of the underlying asset is strongly positively correlated with interest rates, and the interest rates are stochastic, which one has higher price? futures or forwards? Why? Solution: If the future price is positively correlated with the interest rate, Here is my first doubt: the question itself say underlying asset price instead of future price is positively correlated with interest rate, is it because future price is positively correlated with underlying price and future price is then positively correlated with interest rate? The increases of the future price tend to occur the same time when the interest rate is high. Because of the Mark to market feature. The investor who long the futures has an immediate profit that can be reinvested at a higher rate. The loss tends to occur when the interest rate is low, so that it can be financed at low rate. Here is my second doubt: I cannot make sense of the last sentence, when the interest rate is low, the loss tends to occur, what does it mean? It means lower than forward price or something else? Besides, what is the meaning of "can be financed at low rate"? ## Answer by McCabe (score 1, accepted) https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/50550 While the answer seems to be clear, the reason why this correlation to interest rates was important is due to the posting of margin. The book you're reading was written prior to Dodd-Frank, Swaps clearinghouses and collateral collection for all forward contracts. Today, presuming both products are collateralized via margin, there will be no difference in futures versus forward. FRAs are collateralized. ## Answer by siou0107 (score 1) https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/50524 For your first doubt: the futures price is proportional to the asset price, so they are perfectly correlated. For your second doubt: if futures price is positively correlated to interest rates, the buyer of a futures contract will (tend to) make a gain when interest rates are higher. The gain is immediately realised through margin calls, and invested at high rates. Similarly, they will tend to make a loss when interest rates are lower. The immediately realised loss must be financed (since you have to cash out the margin call), yet that financing is made at a low rate. That makes the futures contract attractive compared to the forward contract. Demand thus drives the futures price higher than the forward price. ## Answer by Phil H (score 1) https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/50525 The easiest way to understand this issue is to consider a basket holding opposite positions in the two derivatives. tl;dr: The futures have a linear profile whereas the forward is convex due to discounting, so there is a bias priced in by the market ### Building a simple, par basket So we are long some interest rate futures and short some Forward Rate Agreement (FRA) - the FRA is exactly correlated with interest rates, so what applies to that we can also apply to something with less correlation. We choose a FRA with the same fixing date as the future so they depend on the same number. Since FRA and entering a futures position are both par trades, we have a par (zero) value on the basket. So we set the notional amounts on the two trades such that they offset each other - the FRA pays out a discounted amount so its notional will be slightly to the future. This is then delta hedged at delivery; one trade will exactly pay for the other regardless of how interest rates move. ### Its value goes up when rates move in either direction Consider now what happens immediately after we construct the basket, as interest rates move. Suppose they go up in parallel by 10 bp: the futures position will move 10 bp up, netting us 10 x \$25 per tick = \$250 per future. What about the FRA? Its payoff is discounted at the real Libor rate, not at the rate we traded, so its payoff is now more heavily discounted. Note that we discount the payoff now because there is still time left before delivery; on the maturity date, the payoff will still match the futures position. For now, though, our basket has a net positive value. What about when rates go down by 10 bp? The reverse happens, and our futures position loses \$250 per contract, and the FRA value moves up (it will pay out at maturity). But rates are lower, so the payout suffers less discounting than when we set it up, and thus its value increases by more than the \$250. So our basket has a positive value again! ### The market prices that in If you can build a basket whose value goes up whether the underlying goes up or down, then why not do that as much as you're allowed and make use of tur free money between now and expiry? Inevitably, then, the market does factor that in and thus the futures prices are discounted by an amount which reflects this bias for holding futures over FRAs. The adjustment comes from this mismatch between the profiles of the instruments - we would say that the future has a linear payoff profile whereas the FRA has a convex profile, so the adjustment is labelled a convexity adjustment. ### The convexity adjustment depends on the rate volatility You will note that the positive position we ended up with depended on how much rates move - the more they move, the higher the value, so we can see that the convexity adjustment will depend on the volatility of the rate - if it is expected to move more, we can expect it to make more money. ### Futures prices reflect this adjustment If you look at futures prices, e.g. for interest rates, the effective rate embedded in the price is already adjusted by this bias, so to read the market's expectations of forward interest rates you must calculate the adjustment and apply it to those rates. ### Adjustments apply beyond rate instruments The above all applies to futures and forwards on any instrument correlated to interest rates, because it is that action of changing the degree of discounting which makes one half of the basket convex with regard to rate movement.
출처의 라이선스에 따라 출처를 표시하고 전문을 공개합니다. 라이선스: CC BY-SA 4.0 (Stack Exchange)
이 요약은 원문을 바탕으로 Stratmill의 리서치 에이전트가 작성했으며, 원문을 복사한 것이 아닙니다.