How can I go about applying machine learning algorithms to stock markets?

Can anyone share their experience and basic pointers about how to go about it or at least start applying it to see results from data sets? How ambitious is this? Also, mention standard algorithms that should be investigated.

There seems to be a basic fallacy that someone can come along and learn some machine learning or AI algorithms, set them up as a black box, hit go, and sit back while they retire. My advice to you: Learn statistics and machine learning first, then worry about how to apply them to a given problem. There is no free lunch here. Data analysis is hard work . Read "The Elements of Statistical Learning" (the pdf is available for free on the website), and don't start trying to build a model until you understand at least the first 8 chapters....

1. Determine Factors Economically, the use of factor models can be either motivated using the ICAPM or the APT . Although there are some theoretical differences between the model, for empirical and practical work these differences are irrelevant. In the end, both models stipulate that returns and expected returns are linear functions of the factors: $$ r_{i,t} = \alpha_i + \sum_j \beta_{i,j} F_{j,t} + \epsilon_{i,t} \quad (1)$$ $$ \mathbb{E}[ r_{i,t}] = \lambda_o + \sum_j \beta_{i,j} \lambda_j \quad\quad\quad(2)$$ where $F_{j,t}$ is the factor surprise of factor $j$ at time $t$ and $\lambda_j $ is the factor risk premium of factor $j$....

The volatiltiy surface is just a representation of European option prices as a function of strike and maturity in a different "unit" - namely implied volatility (while the term implied volatility has to be made precise by the model used to convert prices (quotes) into implied volatilities - for example: we may consider log-normal vols and normal vols). Volatility is often preferred over prices, e.g., when considering interpolations of European option prices (although this may introduce difficulties like arbitrage violations, see, e.g., http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1964634 ). A local volatility model can generate a perfect fit to the implied volatility surface via Dupire's...

Wavelets are just one form of "basis decomposition". Wavelets in particular decompose in both frequency and time and thus are more useful than fourier or other purely-frequency based decompositions. There are other time-freq decompositions (for instance the HHT) which should be explored as well. Decomposition of a price series is useful in understanding the primary movement within a series. In general with a decomposition, the original signal is the sum its basis components (potentially with some scaling multiplier). The components range from the lowest frequency (a straight-line through the sample) to the highest frequency, a curve that oscillates with a...


How are correlation and cointegration related?

In what ways (and under what circumstances) are correlation and cointegration related, if at all? One difference is that one usually thinks of correlation in terms of returns and cointegration in terms of price. Another issue is the different measures of correlation (Pearson, Spearman, distance/Brownian) and cointegration (Engle/Granger and Phillips/Ouliaris).

time-series statistics correlation cointegration

This isn't really an answer, but it's too long to add as a comment. I've always had a real problem with the correlation/covariance of price . To me, it means nothing. I realize that it gets used (abused) in many contexts, but I just don't get anything out of it (over time, price has to generally go up, go down, or go sideways, so aren't all prices "correlated"?). On the flip side, correlation/covariance of returns makes sense. You're dealing with random series, not integrated random series. For example, below is the code required to generate two price series that have...

The term has a different meaning to different people. to econometricians, microstructure noise is a disturbance that makes high frequency estimates of some parameters (e.g. realized volatility) very unstable. Generally this strand of the literature professes agnosticism as to the its origin; to market microstructure researchers, microstructure noise is a deviation from fundamental value that is induced by the characteristics of the market under consideration, e.g. bid-ask bounce, the discreteness of price change, latency, and asymmetric information of traders. The last example is frequently cited but I don't think it is accurate. Asymmetric information does not have to be a...

Just to be painfully clear, it only seems to make sense to consider the logarithm of returns, i.e. $X=\log (1+\frac r{100})$ for a simple return of $r\%$ in an arbitrary period because this is what sums when returns are temporally aggregated. A basic property of cumulants is that cumulants of all orders are additive under convolution, for which a proof can be found here here . So if $X_1$, $X_2$, ... $X_n$ are i.i.d. , then all the cumulants of $$Y_n = \sum_{i=1}^nX_i$$ scale linearly with $n$, i.e. $$\kappa_k(Y_n)=n\kappa_k(Y_1).$$ However, I suspect that you are normalizing this sum so that...

In general there are two basic ways to make money out of your option pricing models: Sell side (market maker, risk neutral): You use these models to calculate your greeks to hedge your portfolio, so that you live on the spread. Buy side (market/risk taker): You use your model to find mispriced options in the market and buy/sell accordingly. (A third possibility would be to write fancy books and papers about these models and get rich and/or tenure this way ;-)


How useful is the genetic algorithm for financial market forecasting?

There is a large body of literature on the "success" of the application of evolutionary algorithms in general, and the genetic algorithm in particular, to the financial markets. However, I feel uncomfortable whenever reading this literature. Genetic algorithms can over-fit the existing data. With so many combinations, it is easy to come up with a few rules that work. It may not be robust and it doesn't have a consistent explanation of why this rule works and those rules don't beyond the mere (circular) argument that "it works because the testing shows it works". What is the current consensus on the application of the genetic algorithm in finance?

I have worked on this topic extensively (pricing and calculating IV in production) and believe can offer an informed opinion. First of all Mathworks - the company that creates Matlab is not a trading firm so you should probably not rely on their advice so much. There are few closed form options pricing models, and all have practical shortcomings. Barone-Adesi and Whaley (please correct my spelling of last names as I'm typing from memory) model is simple approximation for American options but is unfortunately not very accurate, and does not deal with dividends. Roll-Geske-Whaley deals with dividends, but not very...

The standard story (also told by @vonjd) is of "The Drunk and Her Dog". This is based on "A Drunk and Her Dog: An Illustration of Cointegration and Error Correction" (1994). The story is itself based on the standard illustration for a random walk known as the "drunkard's walk". The Dickey-Fuller test is used to check for a unit root . It can be used as part of the general Engle-Granger two-step method (although it isn't the only option). In this case, while the two assets themselves are not stationary, you are able to test if the residuals between a...

By "cryptography" you mean information theory. Information theory is useful for portfolio optimization and for optimally allocating capital between trading strategies (a problem which is not well addressed by other theoretical frameworks.) See: --- J. L. Kelly, Jr., "A New Interpretation of Information Rate," Bell System Technical Journal, Vol. 35, July 1956, pp. 917-26 --- E. T. Jaynes, Probability Theory: The Logic of Science http://amzn.to/dtcySD --- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambling_and_information_theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion In the simple case, you would use "The Kelly Rule". More complicated information theory based strategies for allocating capital between trading strategies take into account correlations between the performance of trading strategies...

I've worked at a hedge fund that allowed GA-derived strategies. For safety, it required that all models be submitted long before production to make sure that they still worked in the backtests. So there could be a delay of up to several months before a model would be allowed to run. It's also helpful to separate the sample universe; use a random half of the possible stocks for GA analysis and the other half for confirmation backtests.


Why Drifts are not in the Black Scholes Formula

This question has puzzled me for a while. We all know geometric brownian motions have drifts $\mu$: $dS / S = \mu dt + \sigma dW$ and different stocks have different drifts of $\mu$. Why would the drifts go away in Black Scholes? Intuitively, everything else being equal, if a stock has higher drift, shouldn't it have higher probability of finishing in-the-money (and higher probability of having higher payoff), and the call option should be worth more? Is there an intuitive and easy-to-understand answer? thanks.

options option-pricing black-scholes risk-neutral-measure

In general there are two basic ways to make money out of your option pricing models: Sell side (market maker, risk neutral): You use these models to calculate your greeks to hedge your portfolio, so that you live on the spread. Buy side (market/risk taker): You use your model to find mispriced options in the market and buy/sell accordingly. (A third possibility would be to write fancy books and papers about these models and get rich and/or tenure this way ;-)

Here couple pointers that may make it clearer: Drift can be replaced by the risk-free rate through a mathematical construct called risk-neutral probability pricing. Why can we get away with that without introducing errors? The reason lies in the ability to setup a hedge portfolio, thus the market will not compensate us for the drift above and beyond the risk free rate under risk-neutral probability pricing. As long as such hedge exists and couple other conditions are met (please look up Girsanov's Theorem) we can introduce a risk-neutral measure so that when applying it to the differential equation and through...

A general model (with continuous paths) can be written $$ \frac{dS_t}{S_t} = r_t dt + \sigma_t dW_t^S $$ where the short rate $r_t$ and spot volatility $\sigma_t$ are stochastic processes. In the Black-Scholes model both $r$ and $\sigma$ are deterministic functions of time (even constant in the original model). This produces a flat smile for any expiry $T$. And we have the closed form formula for option prices $$ C(t,S;T,K) = BS(S,T-t,K;\Sigma(T,K)) $$ where $BS$ is the BS formula and $\Sigma(T,K) = \sqrt{\frac{1}{T-t}\int_t^T \sigma(s)^2 ds}$. This is not consistent with the smile observed on the market. In order to match...

I can only talk about quantitative trading. As a rule of thumb, the lower frequency you work in, the more econometrics is important, whereas for a higher frequency, the more econometrics becomes useless . (I would still recommend a top econometrician for HFT since they have what it takes to succeed, it's just the models aren't out-of-the-box applicable.) But if I was interviewing someone who was educated in econometrics for a quantitative research position, I would hope for (given the relevance to financial time-series): I have tried to put in a legend, ^ is something you should learn later and...


Which approach dominates? Mathematical modeling or data mining?

According to my current understanding, there is a clear difference between data mining and mathematical modeling . Data mining methods treat systems (e.g., financial markets) as a "black box". The focus is on the observed variables (e.g., stock prices). The methods do not try to explain the observed phenomena by proposing underlying mechanisms that cause the phenomena (i.e., what happens in the black box). Instead, the methods try to find some features, patterns, or regularities in the data in order to predict future behavior. Mathematical modeling , in contrast, tries to propose a model for what happens inside the black box. Which approach dominates in quantitative finance? Do people try to use more and more fancy data mining techniques or do people try to construct better and better mathematical models?

The minimum variance solution loads up on securities that have low variances and co-variances. Theoretically you are correct that this should have a low expected return profile. However, it turns out - in contradiction to modern portfolio theory - that securities that have low-volatility or low-beta experience higher returns than high-volatility or high-beta stocks. This is well-documented in the literature as the low-volatility anomaly . As a result, many funds and ETFs have been launched in recent years to exploit this phenomenon. There are a couple arguments as to why the anomaly exists. The paper I cite above argues that...

One starts with the Black-Scholes equation $$\frac{\partial C}{\partial t}+\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2S^2\frac{\partial^2 C}{\partial S^2}+ rS\frac{\partial C}{\partial S}-rC=0,\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad(1)$$ supplemented with the terminal and boundary conditions (in the case of a European call) $$C(S,T)=\max(S-K,0),\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad(2)$$ $$C(0,t)=0,\qquad C(S,t)\sim S\ \mbox{ as } S\to\infty.\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad$$ The option value $C(S,t)$ is defined over the domain $0 Step 1. The equation can be rewritten in the equivalent form $$\frac{\partial C}{\partial t}+\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2\left(S\frac{\partial }{\partial S}\right)^2C+\left(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2\right)S\frac{\partial C}{\partial S}-rC=0.$$ The change of independent variables $$S=e^y,\qquad t=T-\tau$$ results in $$S\frac{\partial }{\partial S}\to\frac{\partial}{\partial y},\qquad \frac{\partial}{\partial t}\to - \frac{\partial}{\partial \tau},$$ so one gets the constant coefficient equation $$\frac{\partial C}{\partial \tau}-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2\frac{\partial^2 C}{\partial y^2}-\left(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2\right)\frac{\partial C}{\partial y}+rC=0.\qquad\qquad\qquad(3)$$ Step 2. If we...

I would offer the distinctions are i) pure statistical approach, ii) equilibrium based approach, and iii) empirical approach. The statistical approach includes data mining. Its techniques originate in statistics and machine learning. In its extreme there is no a priori theoretical structure imposed on asset returns. Factor structure might be identified thru Principal Components, for example. The goal here is to maximize predictive accuracy at the expense of intuition and explanatory power. This approach increasingly dominates at very short frequencies in modeling market microstructure, market making algorithms, volatility modeling, etc. However, even in high-frequency trading one can impose a factor...

Consider the standard error , and in particular the distance between the upper and lower limits: \begin{equation} \Delta = (\bar{x} + SE \cdot \alpha) - (\bar{x} - SE \cdot \alpha) = 2 \cdot SE \cdot \alpha \end{equation} Using the formula for standard error, we can solve for sample size: \begin{equation} n = \left(\frac{2 \cdot s \cdot \alpha}{\Delta}\right)^{2} \end{equation} where $s$ is the measured standard deviation, which you already have from your IR calculation. High-frequency Example I was testing a market-making model recently that was expected to return a couple basis points for each trade and I wanted to be confident...


How do I graphically represent the evolution of a covariance matrix over time?

I am working with a set of covariance matrices evaluated at various points in time over some history. Each covariance matrix is $N\times N$ for $N$ financial time-series over $T$ periods. I would like to explore some of the properties of this matrix's evolution over time, particularly whether correlation as a whole is increasing or decreasing, and whether certain series become more or less correlated with the whole. I am looking for suggestions as to the kinds of analysis to perform on this data-set, and particularly graphical/pictorial analysis. Ideally, I would like to avoid having to look in depth into each series as $N$ is rather large. Update The following graphs were generated based on the accepted answer from @Quant-Guy. PC = principal component = eigenvector. The analysis was done on correlations rather than covariances in order to account for vastly different variances of the $N$ series.

Representing time series (esp. tick data) using elaborate data structures may be not the best idea. You may want to try to use two arrays of the same length to store your time series. The first array stores values (e.g. price) and the second array stores time. Note that the second series is monotonically increasing (or at least non-decreasing), i.e. it's sorted. This property enables you to search it using the binary search algorithm. Once you get an index of a time of interest in the second array you also have the index of the relevant entry in the first...

It is hard to find a stable non-trivial dependence structure in financial data. Usually when such is found it is hard to rationalize. One of my favorite (although I am sure there are others) is the so called "Presidential Puzzle". This is an old finding by Santa-Clara and Valkanov (2003) They find that " Excess return in the stock market is higher under Democratic than Republican presidencies: 9 percent for the value‐weighted and 16 percent for the equal‐weighted portfolio. At the time the finding was very robust and did not seem to be explained by anything else. What is more...

The minimum variance solution loads up on securities that have low variances and co-variances. Theoretically you are correct that this should have a low expected return profile. However, it turns out - in contradiction to modern portfolio theory - that securities that have low-volatility or low-beta experience higher returns than high-volatility or high-beta stocks. This is well-documented in the literature as the low-volatility anomaly . As a result, many funds and ETFs have been launched in recent years to exploit this phenomenon. There are a couple arguments as to why the anomaly exists. The paper I cite above argues that...

I would consider a motion chart that plots the eigenvalues of the covariance matrix over time. For a static view you can create a table: rows represent dates, and columns represent eigenvectors. The entries of the table represent changes in the angle of the eigenvector from the previous row. This will show how stable your covariance structure is. You can also create a second table this time with eigenvalues as the columns sorted from high to low (and the corresponding values below for each date). This shows the variance described by each eigenvector so you can see whether correlation as...


How much data is needed to validate a short-horizon trading strategy?

Suppose one has an idea for a short-horizon trading strategy, which we will define as having an average holding period of under 1 week and a required latency between signal calculation and execution of under 1 minute. This category includes much more than just high-frequency market-making strategies. It also includes statistical arbitrage, news-based trading, trading earnings or economics releases, cross-market arbitrage, short-term reversal/momentum, etc. Before even thinking about trading such a strategy, one would obviously want to backtest it on a sufficiently long data sample. How much data does one need to acquire in order to be confident that the strategy "works" and is not a statistical fluke? I don't mean confident enough to bet the ranch, but confident enough to assign significant additional resources to forward testing or trading a relatively small amount of capital. Acquiring data (and not just market price data) could be very expensive or impossible for some signals, such as those based on newer economic or financial time-series. As such, this question is important both for deciding what strategies to investigate and how much to expect to invest on data acquisition. A complete answer should depend on the expected Information Ratio of the strategy, as a low IR strategy would take a much longer sample to distinguish from noise.

data time-series backtesting quant-trading-strategies arbitrage

Strictly speaking, data snooping is not the same as in-sample vs out-of-sample model selection and testing, but has to deal with sequential or multiple tests of hypothesis based on the same data set. To quote Halbert White: Data snooping occurs when a given set of data is used more than once for purposes of inference or model selection. When such data reuse occurs, there is always the possibility that any satisfactory results obtained may simply be due to chance rather than to any merit inherent in the methody yielding the results. Let me provide an example. Suppose that you have...

Consider the standard error , and in particular the distance between the upper and lower limits: \begin{equation} \Delta = (\bar{x} + SE \cdot \alpha) - (\bar{x} - SE \cdot \alpha) = 2 \cdot SE \cdot \alpha \end{equation} Using the formula for standard error, we can solve for sample size: \begin{equation} n = \left(\frac{2 \cdot s \cdot \alpha}{\Delta}\right)^{2} \end{equation} where $s$ is the measured standard deviation, which you already have from your IR calculation. High-frequency Example I was testing a market-making model recently that was expected to return a couple basis points for each trade and I wanted to be confident...


Are there any new Option pricing models?

Back in the mid 90's I used the Black-Scholes Model and the Cox-Ross-Rubenstein (Binomial) Model's to price Options. That was nearly 15 years ago and I was wondering if there are any new models being used to price Options?

Black-Scholes itself didn't change a lot but we can now adjust it to deal with a lot more complicated factors to price more complicated contracts: stochastic volatility (Heston, Gatheral) stochastic rates (Hull) credit risk dividends Other methods (computing intensive) have also evolved to deal with various types of contracts where BS is not very appropriate choice (e.g. Monte Carlo simulation for path-dependant options).

The volatiltiy surface is just a representation of European option prices as a function of strike and maturity in a different "unit" - namely implied volatility (while the term implied volatility has to be made precise by the model used to convert prices (quotes) into implied volatilities - for example: we may consider log-normal vols and normal vols). Volatility is often preferred over prices, e.g., when considering interpolations of European option prices (although this may introduce difficulties like arbitrage violations, see, e.g., http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1964634 ). A local volatility model can generate a perfect fit to the implied volatility surface via Dupire's...

The way you do it in the first place is a discretization of the Geometric Brownian Motion (GBM) process. This method is most useful when you want to compute the path between $S_0$ and $S_t$, i.e. you want to know all the intermediary points $S_i$ for $0 \leq i \leq t$. The second equation is a closed form solution for the GBM given $S_0$. A simple mathematical proof showed that, if you know the initial point $S_0$ (which is $a$ in your equation), then the value of the process at time $t$ is given by your equation (which contains $W_t$,...


How can we reverse engineer a market-making algorithm (HFT)?

Consider a market participant $A$ who is mechanically following an automated liquidity providing algorithm (HFT) in a number of large cap stocks on a specific exchange. Assume furthermore that we are able to observe all orders placed by $A$ and that we know that the algorithm used by $A$ takes only public market data as input. $A$ starts and ends all trading days with zero inventory. We want to reverse engineer the algorithm used by $A$. Let's call this algorithm $f(...)$. The first step in reverse engineering the algorithm $f(...)$ would be to collect potential input variables to the algorithm that can later be used to infer the exact form of $f(...)$. The first problem we face is which input variables we should collect in order to be able to reverse engineer $f(...)$. To have a starting point we can consider the input variables used in Avellaneda & Stoikov (2008) . In Avellaneda & Stoikov (2008) the authors derive how a rational market maker (non-specialist) should set his bid and ask quotes in a limit order book market. The results are obviously contingent on the assumptions and model choices made in the paper. The optimal bid (or ask) in Avellaneda & Stoikov (2008) is a function of the following inputs: The trader's reservation price, which is a function of the security price ($S$), the market maker's current inventory ($q$) and time left until terminal holding time ($T-t$) The relative risk aversion of the trader ($\gamma$) (obviously hard to observe!) The frequency of new bid and ask quotes ($\lambda_{bid}$ and $\lambda_{ask}$) The latest change in frequency of new bid and ask quotes ($\delta\lambda_{bid}$ and $\delta\lambda_{ask}$) What potential input variables should we collect in order to be able to reverse engineer $f(...)$?

trading algorithmic-trading high-frequency market-microstructure

I'll take a stab at it, but this is a really broad question. A direct answer: Bayesian models often use "probability that the counter-party is informed." Indirect answers: I think your assumption is that the algorithm operates on each stock individually, and has no knowledge of what it's doing in any other stock. But, it is likely that the algorithm is doing some hedging that you don't see yet. You should look at similar products (or build synthetic baskets) and see if your algorithm is changing it's quote sizes/prices when other products' quote sizes/prices change. (It is also possible that...

The risk-neutral measure $\mathbb{Q}$ is a mathematical construct which stems from the law of one price , also known as the principle of no riskless arbitrage and which you may already have heard of in the following terms: "there is no free lunch in financial markets". This law is at the heart of securities' relative valuation , see this very nice paper by Emmanuel Derman ("Metaphors, Models & Theories", 2011) and some part of this discussion. In what follows, assume for the sake of simplicity existence of a risk-free asset ; deterministic and constant rates, with risk-free rate $r$ ;...

There seems to be a basic fallacy that someone can come along and learn some machine learning or AI algorithms, set them up as a black box, hit go, and sit back while they retire. My advice to you: Learn statistics and machine learning first, then worry about how to apply them to a given problem. There is no free lunch here. Data analysis is hard work . Read "The Elements of Statistical Learning" (the pdf is available for free on the website), and don't start trying to build a model until you understand at least the first 8 chapters....

The lead paper in the January 2011 Journal of Finance ( Hendershott, Jones, and Menkveld ) addresses algorithmic trading (AT). In short, they find that AT improves liquidity as measured by bid-offer spreads. Taking the econometrics as correct (it is in the Journal of Finance) the next question is if bid-offer spreads are a sufficient statistic for measuring liquidity (or any other benefits). It is a difficult question to answer because, given current market structure, AT may improve liquidity (as measured by bid-offer spreads), but without data on other market structures, it is hard to say that we wouldn't better...


What is the best way to "fix" a covariance matrix that is not positive semi-definite?

I have a sample covariance matrix of S&P 500 security returns where the smallest k-th eigenvalues are negative and quite small (reflecting noise and some high correlations in the matrix). I am performing some operations on the covariance matrix and this matrix must be positive definite. What is the best way to "fix" the covariance matrix? (For what it's worth, I intend to take the inverse of the covariance matrix.) One approach proposed by Rebonato (1999) is to decompose the covariance matrix into its eigenvectors and eigenvalues, set the negative eigenvalues to 0 or (0+epsilon), and then rebuild the covariance matrix. The issue I have with this method is that: the trace of the original matrix is not preserved, and the method ignores the idea of level repulsion in random matrices (i.e. that eigenvalues are not close to each other). Higham (2001) uses an optimization procedure to find the nearest correlation matrix that is positive semi-definite. Grubisic and Pietersz (2003) have a geometric method they claim outperforms the Higham technique. Incidentally, some more recent twists on Rebonato's paper are Kercheval (2009) and Rapisardo (2006) who build off of Rebonato with a geometric approach. A critical point is that the resulting matrix may not be singular (which can be the case when using optimization methods). What is the best way to transform a covariance matrix into a positive definite covariance matrix? UPDATE: Perhaps another angle of attack is to test whether a security is linearly dependent on a combination of securities and removing the offender.

risk statistics research correlation covariance

Nick Higham's specialty is algorithms to find the nearest correlation matrix. His older work involved increased performance (in order-of-convergence terms) of techniques that successively projected a nearly-positive-semi-definite matrix onto the positive semidefinite space. Perhaps even more interesting, from the practitioner point of view, is his extension to the case of correlation matrices with factor model structures. The best place to look for this work is probably the PhD thesis paper by his doctoral student Ruediger Borsdorf. Higham's blog entry covers his work up to 2013 pretty well.

I'm just providing a global answer to the question, as I think it can be interesting for some beginners in quant finance. The properties given by TheBridge: Normalize $\rho (\emptyset)=0$ This means you have no risk in taking no position. Sub-addiitivity $\rho(A_1+A_2) \leq \rho(A_1)+\rho(A_2)$ Having a position in two different can only decrease the risk of the portfolio (diversification) Positive homogeneity $\rho(\lambda A) = \lambda \rho(A)$ Doubling a position in an asset A doubles your risk. And finally, Translation invariance $\rho(A + x) = \rho(A)-x$ That is, adding cash to a portfolio only diminishes the risk. So a risk-measure is...

There are some cases where you can blend your portfolios using weights directly. One case involves corner portfolios . In this case a linear combination of weights is also efficient. Another case is where you can treat the two separate weights you have produced each as distinct portfolio under the assumption that the correlation between these portfolios is relatively stable. In this scenario, the problem reduces to a two-asset portfolio optimization problem (each asset is simply the linear combination of weights produced via your two methods). The other class of methods involves blending via the expected returns. If you arrived...


Lévy alpha-stable distribution and modelling of stock prices.

Since Mandelbrot, Fama and others have performed seminal work on the topic, it has been suspected that stock price fluctuations can be more appropriately modeled using Lévy alpha-stable distrbutions other than the normal distribution law. Yet, the subject is somewhat controversial, there is a lot of literature in defense of the normal law and criticizing distributions without bounded variation. Moreover, precisely because of the the unbounded variation, the whole standard framework of quantitative analysis can not be simply copy/pasted to deal with these more "exotic" distributions. Yet, I think there should be something to say about how to value risk of fluctuations. After all, the approaches using the variance are just shortcuts, what one really has in mind is the probability of a fluctuation of a certain size. So I was wondering if there is any literature investigating that in particular. In other words: what is the current status of financial theories based on Lévy alpha-stable distributions? What are good review papers of the field?

I recently read "Modeling financial data with stable distributions" (Nolan 2005) which gives a survey of this area and might be of interest (I believe it was contained in "Handbook of Heavy Tailed Distributions in Finance" ). Another more recent reference is "Alpha-Stable Paradigm in Financial Markets" (2008). I'm not aware of anything covering "risk of fluctuations" and this is still certainly not at the center of the field (i.e. most theory still includes some version of Gaussian or mixture of Gaussians). Would also be interested in other references.

From what I remember, there is no real relation between Markov and Martingale, and my intuition was confirmed by this post . Basically, it says that you can say neither of the following: If A is Markov, then A is a martingale. If A is a martingale, then A is Markov. further down the post, you can find two counter examples: $dX_t = a dt + \sigma dW_t$ is Markov but not a martingale and $dX_t = (\int_0^t X_s ds) dW_t$ is a Martingale but is not Markov. As for the assumption of these properties being true, I think it...

There are some cases where you can blend your portfolios using weights directly. One case involves corner portfolios . In this case a linear combination of weights is also efficient. Another case is where you can treat the two separate weights you have produced each as distinct portfolio under the assumption that the correlation between these portfolios is relatively stable. In this scenario, the problem reduces to a two-asset portfolio optimization problem (each asset is simply the linear combination of weights produced via your two methods). The other class of methods involves blending via the expected returns. If you arrived...


Machine Learning vs Regression and/or Why still use the latter?

I come from a different field (Machine learning/AI/data science), but aim to ask a philosophical question with the utmost respect: Why do quantitative financial analysts (analysts/traders/etc.) prefer (or at least seem) traditional statistical methods (traditional = frequentist/regression/normal correlation methods/ts analysis) over newer AI/machine learning methods? I've read a million models, but it seems biased? Background: I recently joined a 1B AUM (I know it's not a ton) asset management firm. I was asked to build a new model for a sector rotation strategy (basically predicting which SP 500 sector would do the best over 6 months-- chose to use forward rolling 6 month returns) they employ and my first inclination was to combine ARIMA (traditional) with random forest (feature selection) and a categorical (based on normal distribution standard deviation) gradient boosted classifier for ETFs in each sector. Not to be rude, but I beat the ValuLine timeliness for each sector. I used the above mentioned returns as my indicator and pretty much threw everthing at the wall for predictors initially (basically just combing FRED), then used randomForest to select features. I ended up combining EMA and percent change to create a pretty solid model that, like I said, beat ValuLine. I've read a lot of literature, and I haven't seen anyone do anything like this. Any help in terms of pointing me in the right direction for literature? Or any answers to the overarching idea of why isn't there more machine learning in equity markets (forgetting social/news analysis)? EDIT: For clarification, I'm really interested in long-term predictions (I think Shiller was right) based on macro predictors. Thanks PS- I've been lurking for a while. Thanks for all the awesome questions, answers, and discussions.

In order to answer your question (for you) you would need something to compare to . You would need numbers to know if it is slower/faster, how much, and if it will impact your system overall. Also knowing your performance goals could narrow down the options. My advice is to take a look at your overall architecture of the sytem you have or intend to build. To just look at QuickFIX is rather meaningless without the whole chain involved in processing information and reacting to it . As an example, say QuickFIX is 100 times faster than some part (in...

In general there are two basic ways to make money out of your option pricing models: Sell side (market maker, risk neutral): You use these models to calculate your greeks to hedge your portfolio, so that you live on the spread. Buy side (market/risk taker): You use your model to find mispriced options in the market and buy/sell accordingly. (A third possibility would be to write fancy books and papers about these models and get rich and/or tenure this way ;-)

Because of: The (extreme) dominance of noise over signal The prevalence of non-repeating patterns (many of which we know are not going to repeat) A pathetic sample size for cross-validation Regime changes due to exogenous events. These are typically in the cross-val window which makes it even worse. (GFC, financial integration, trade law changes, interest rate adjustments by central banks, some idiot in a bank was hiding trades and loses 5 billions dollars, etc). It is well known that non-linear relationships are generally just artefacts of the in sample dataset There is also the following: Much price changes are driven...


Why does the minimum variance portfolio provide good returns?

I've been a researching minimum variance portfolios (from this link ) and find that by building MVPs adding constraints on portfolio weights and a few other tweaks to the methods outlined I get generally positive returns over a six-month to one year time scale. I am looking to build some portfolios that are low risk, but have good long term (yearly) expected returns. MVP (as in minimum variance NOT mean variance) seems promising from backtests but I don't have a good intuition for why this works. I understand the optimization procedure is primarily looking to optimize for reducing variance, and I see that this works in the backtest (very low standard deviation of returns). What I don't have an intuitive feel for is why optimizing variance alone (with no regards to optimizing returns, i.e. no mean in the optimization as in traditional mean-variance optimization) gives generally positive returns. Any explanations?

portfolio-management optimization modern-portfolio-theory covariance

Short of having a 'reasonable' predictive model for expected returns and the covariance matrix, there are a couple lines of attack. Shrinkage estimators (via Bayesian inference or Stein-class of estimators) Robust portfolio optimization Michaud's Resampled Efficient Frontier Imposing norm constraints on portfolio weights Naively, shrinkage methods 'shrink' (of course,no?) your estimates (arrived at using historical data), toward some global mean or some target. Within the mean-variance framework, you can use the shrinkage estimators, for both, the expected returns vector, as well as the covariance matrix. Jorion introduced application of a 'Bayes-Stein estimator' to portfolio analysis. Bradley & Efron have a...

There are some cases where you can blend your portfolios using weights directly. One case involves corner portfolios . In this case a linear combination of weights is also efficient. Another case is where you can treat the two separate weights you have produced each as distinct portfolio under the assumption that the correlation between these portfolios is relatively stable. In this scenario, the problem reduces to a two-asset portfolio optimization problem (each asset is simply the linear combination of weights produced via your two methods). The other class of methods involves blending via the expected returns. If you arrived...


Factor models such as Fama-French or the other ones that are partially summarized here work on the cross-section of asset returns. How are the factors built, how are sensitivities/coefficients estimated? In this context Fama-MacBeth regressions are usually mentioned. How does this method work intuitively? Could anyone give a step-by-step manual? EDIT: Links to papers and manuals have been posted in the two answers - this is great. But can someone provide more intuition in the answer? Say we have a universe of stocks (say MSCI Europe) and we group them by value and size. How can we proceed? How do we construct the factors and how do we construct the sensitivities? Could someone please give a more direct explanation, without a link? thanks!

The standard story (also told by @vonjd) is of "The Drunk and Her Dog". This is based on "A Drunk and Her Dog: An Illustration of Cointegration and Error Correction" (1994). The story is itself based on the standard illustration for a random walk known as the "drunkard's walk". The Dickey-Fuller test is used to check for a unit root . It can be used as part of the general Engle-Granger two-step method (although it isn't the only option). In this case, while the two assets themselves are not stationary, you are able to test if the residuals between a...

I've worked at a hedge fund that allowed GA-derived strategies. For safety, it required that all models be submitted long before production to make sure that they still worked in the backtests. So there could be a delay of up to several months before a model would be allowed to run. It's also helpful to separate the sample universe; use a random half of the possible stocks for GA analysis and the other half for confirmation backtests.

1. Determine Factors Economically, the use of factor models can be either motivated using the ICAPM or the APT . Although there are some theoretical differences between the model, for empirical and practical work these differences are irrelevant. In the end, both models stipulate that returns and expected returns are linear functions of the factors: $$ r_{i,t} = \alpha_i + \sum_j \beta_{i,j} F_{j,t} + \epsilon_{i,t} \quad (1)$$ $$ \mathbb{E}[ r_{i,t}] = \lambda_o + \sum_j \beta_{i,j} \lambda_j \quad\quad\quad(2)$$ where $F_{j,t}$ is the factor surprise of factor $j$ at time $t$ and $\lambda_j $ is the factor risk premium of factor $j$....


Has high frequency trading (HFT) been a net benefit or cost to society?

Various studies have demonstrated the very large and growing influence of high frequency trading (HFT) on the markets. HFT firms are clearly making a great deal of money from somewhere, and it stands to reason that they are making this money at the expense of every other participant in the market. Defenders of HFT will argue that HFT firms provide an essential service to the economy in the form of greater liquidity. What research has been done on the benefits and costs of HFT? Has any study attempted to measure either the benefits or the costs? How would one attempt to measures these benefits and costs? What would be the effect of banning rapidly cancelled limit orders (see follow-up question ), e.g. via a minimum 1-second tick rule? Any references and professional opinions (backed by research) on this topic would be appreciated.

algorithmic-trading research high-frequency market-microstructure

Here couple pointers that may make it clearer: Drift can be replaced by the risk-free rate through a mathematical construct called risk-neutral probability pricing. Why can we get away with that without introducing errors? The reason lies in the ability to setup a hedge portfolio, thus the market will not compensate us for the drift above and beyond the risk free rate under risk-neutral probability pricing. As long as such hedge exists and couple other conditions are met (please look up Girsanov's Theorem) we can introduce a risk-neutral measure so that when applying it to the differential equation and through...

The lead paper in the January 2011 Journal of Finance ( Hendershott, Jones, and Menkveld ) addresses algorithmic trading (AT). In short, they find that AT improves liquidity as measured by bid-offer spreads. Taking the econometrics as correct (it is in the Journal of Finance) the next question is if bid-offer spreads are a sufficient statistic for measuring liquidity (or any other benefits). It is a difficult question to answer because, given current market structure, AT may improve liquidity (as measured by bid-offer spreads), but without data on other market structures, it is hard to say that we wouldn't better...

I can think of an application in options pricing. I came across the following paper a long time ago but think it explains FT very eloquently as applied to pricing options under BS: http://maxmatsuda.com/Papers/2004/Matsuda%20Intro%20FT%20Pricing.pdf The fun starts on page 112 but it relies on the 1998 paper by Madan and Carr. What I like about the paper is that it gives a thorough introduction to FT and only when the groundwork is set it applies it to option pricing. Not a bad approach vs many other papers which make a lot of assumption and assume the reader can jump right...


How to estimate real-world probabilities

In the world of finance, Risk-neutral pricing allow us to estimate the fair value of derivatives using the risk free rate as the expected return of the underlyings. However, the behavior of financial assets in the real-world might be substantially different to the evolution used in a risk-neutral context. For instance, if I want to estimate the real-world probability of an equity asset reaching certain thresholds, which models and calibration techniques could be used? In particular, some questions that may arise in the estimation of real-world probabilities are: Calibration : Should real-world probabilities be calibrated to current market prices or, alternative, historical data should be used for this type of estimation? No-arbitrage conditions : Could they be relaxed or they still play a role in the assessment of real-world probabilities? Expected returns : Assuming that I have already estimated the expected return of an asset $\mu$, how accurate would be a real-world estimation that combines a widely used evolution model (e.g. Geometric Brownian motion ), with the use of $\mu$ instead of the risk free rate $r$? Per comments, I understand that in order to estimate real-world probabilities: I should use expected returns instead of the risk-free rate. The asset evolution should still respect the no-arbitrage conditions (i.e: the real-world dynamics should still reproduce the current prices of vanilla options). However, if we just use $\mu$ instead of $r$, the underlying asset behavior might not be consistent with the observed option prices. For instance, if we just change $r$ by $\mu$ (with $\mu>r$) the underlying asset dynamics will lead to call prices above its current market price, and put prices below its market price. Therefore, in addition to use expected returns, which other adjustment might be needed in order to estimate real-world probabilities? Any papers or references regarding real-world estimation will be greatly appreciated.

derivatives risk-neutral-measure forecasting stochastic-discount real-world-measure

There seems to be a basic fallacy that someone can come along and learn some machine learning or AI algorithms, set them up as a black box, hit go, and sit back while they retire. My advice to you: Learn statistics and machine learning first, then worry about how to apply them to a given problem. There is no free lunch here. Data analysis is hard work . Read "The Elements of Statistical Learning" (the pdf is available for free on the website), and don't start trying to build a model until you understand at least the first 8 chapters....

The risk-neutral measure $\mathbb{Q}$ is a mathematical construct which stems from the law of one price , also known as the principle of no riskless arbitrage and which you may already have heard of in the following terms: "there is no free lunch in financial markets". This law is at the heart of securities' relative valuation , see this very nice paper by Emmanuel Derman ("Metaphors, Models & Theories", 2011) and some part of this discussion. In what follows, assume for the sake of simplicity existence of a risk-free asset ; deterministic and constant rates, with risk-free rate $r$ ;...

A general model (with continuous paths) can be written $$ \frac{dS_t}{S_t} = r_t dt + \sigma_t dW_t^S $$ where the short rate $r_t$ and spot volatility $\sigma_t$ are stochastic processes. In the Black-Scholes model both $r$ and $\sigma$ are deterministic functions of time (even constant in the original model). This produces a flat smile for any expiry $T$. And we have the closed form formula for option prices $$ C(t,S;T,K) = BS(S,T-t,K;\Sigma(T,K)) $$ where $BS$ is the BS formula and $\Sigma(T,K) = \sqrt{\frac{1}{T-t}\int_t^T \sigma(s)^2 ds}$. This is not consistent with the smile observed on the market. In order to match...


In my firm we are beginning a new OMS (Order Management System) project and there is a debate whether we use Quickfix or we go for a professional fix engine? Because there is a common doubt that QuickFix is not enough fast and obviously we will not get any technical support. I heard that in BOVESPA it has been used for a while. They are changing it with a paid one now. Well that is enough for me. If they use it I can use it. Should I choose a professional one over QuickFix? Is it not good enough?

There are some cases where you can blend your portfolios using weights directly. One case involves corner portfolios . In this case a linear combination of weights is also efficient. Another case is where you can treat the two separate weights you have produced each as distinct portfolio under the assumption that the correlation between these portfolios is relatively stable. In this scenario, the problem reduces to a two-asset portfolio optimization problem (each asset is simply the linear combination of weights produced via your two methods). The other class of methods involves blending via the expected returns. If you arrived...

In order to answer your question (for you) you would need something to compare to . You would need numbers to know if it is slower/faster, how much, and if it will impact your system overall. Also knowing your performance goals could narrow down the options. My advice is to take a look at your overall architecture of the sytem you have or intend to build. To just look at QuickFIX is rather meaningless without the whole chain involved in processing information and reacting to it . As an example, say QuickFIX is 100 times faster than some part (in...


Why aren't econometric models used more in Quant Finance?

There is a big body of literature on econometric models like ARIMA , ARIMAX or VAR . Yet to the best of my knowledge practically nobody is making use of that in Quantitative Finance. Yes, there is a paper here and there and sometimes you find an example where stock prices are being used for illustrative purposes but this is far from the main stream. My question Is there a good reason for that? Is it just because of tradition and different schools of thought or is there a good technical explanation? (By the way I was pleased to find an arima tag here... but this is again a case in point: only 8 out of nearly 7,000 questions (~ 0.1% !) use this tag! ...ok, make this 9 now ;-)

modeling forecasting econometrics models arima

Because of: The (extreme) dominance of noise over signal The prevalence of non-repeating patterns (many of which we know are not going to repeat) A pathetic sample size for cross-validation Regime changes due to exogenous events. These are typically in the cross-val window which makes it even worse. (GFC, financial integration, trade law changes, interest rate adjustments by central banks, some idiot in a bank was hiding trades and loses 5 billions dollars, etc). It is well known that non-linear relationships are generally just artefacts of the in sample dataset There is also the following: Much price changes are driven...

I know that I have seen things like this in the past. Wasn't there something recently that used Twitter? Here are a few recent papers as examples, although I will be brutally honest that I don't know if they speak to your decent quality requirement: "Trading Strategies to Exploit Blog and News Sentiment" (Zhang, Skiena 2010) "The Predictive Power of Financial Blogs" (Frisbee 2010) "An analysis of verbs in financial news articles and their impact on stock price" (Schumaker 2010)

In general there are two basic ways to make money out of your option pricing models: Sell side (market maker, risk neutral): You use these models to calculate your greeks to hedge your portfolio, so that you live on the spread. Buy side (market/risk taker): You use your model to find mispriced options in the market and buy/sell accordingly. (A third possibility would be to write fancy books and papers about these models and get rich and/or tenure this way ;-)

It's an interesting question. I particularly agree with the $\mathbb{Q}-\mathbb{P}$ dichotomy mentioned by many. I would add to the other answers that, come to think of it, the Black-Scholes postulated Geometric Brownian Motion could be interpreted as an AR(1) process on the logarithm of the stock price as you discretise the SDE from which it is a solution, which is exactly what you do when running Monte-Carlo simulations (same thing for the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process as explained here and noted by @Richard). Actually, when taking the continuous-time limit, many more econometric models can be shown to correspond to stochastic processes frequently...


How should I calculate the implied volatility of an American option in a real-time production environment?

There are many models available for calculating the implied volatility of an American option. The most popular method, employed by OptionMetrics and others, is probably the Cox-Ross-Rubinstein model. However, since this method is numerical, it yields a computationally intensive algorithm which may not be feasible (at least for my level of hardware) for repeated re-calculation of implied volatility on a hundreds of option contracts and underlying instruments with ever-changing prices. I am looking for an efficient and accurate closed form algorithm for calculating implied volatility. Does anyone have any experience with this problem? The most popular closed-form approximation appears to be Bjerksund and Stensland (2002), which is recommended by Matlab as the top choice for American options, although I've also seen Ju and Zhong (1999) mentioned on Wilmott . I am interested in knowing which of these (or other) methods gives the most reasonable and accurate approximations in a real-world setting.

The way you do it in the first place is a discretization of the Geometric Brownian Motion (GBM) process. This method is most useful when you want to compute the path between $S_0$ and $S_t$, i.e. you want to know all the intermediary points $S_i$ for $0 \leq i \leq t$. The second equation is a closed form solution for the GBM given $S_0$. A simple mathematical proof showed that, if you know the initial point $S_0$ (which is $a$ in your equation), then the value of the process at time $t$ is given by your equation (which contains $W_t$,...

I have worked on this topic extensively (pricing and calculating IV in production) and believe can offer an informed opinion. First of all Mathworks - the company that creates Matlab is not a trading firm so you should probably not rely on their advice so much. There are few closed form options pricing models, and all have practical shortcomings. Barone-Adesi and Whaley (please correct my spelling of last names as I'm typing from memory) model is simple approximation for American options but is unfortunately not very accurate, and does not deal with dividends. Roll-Geske-Whaley deals with dividends, but not very...

The standard story (also told by @vonjd) is of "The Drunk and Her Dog". This is based on "A Drunk and Her Dog: An Illustration of Cointegration and Error Correction" (1994). The story is itself based on the standard illustration for a random walk known as the "drunkard's walk". The Dickey-Fuller test is used to check for a unit root . It can be used as part of the general Engle-Granger two-step method (although it isn't the only option). In this case, while the two assets themselves are not stationary, you are able to test if the residuals between a...


Mapping symbols between tickers, Reuters RICs and Bloomberg tickers

Is there any known solution (preferably open source) to map between ticker symbols, Reuters and Bloomberg symbols. For example: Ticker: AAPL Reuters: AAPL.O (may be prefixed with RSF.ANY. dependent upon infrastructure) Bloomberg: AAPL US Equity Edit: by mapping I mean translating from one symbol naming convention to another. For example let's say we have RSF.ANY.AAPL.O and want to get Bloomber equivalent, which is "AAPL US Equity". Edit2: Fixed Bloomber mapping, it should be "AAPL US Equity" not "AAPL:US"

Here are some pointers. First of all: What you list as a Reuters RIC, RSF.ANY.AAPL.OQ , is not really a RIC, only the AAPL.OQ is. The initial part is some stuff which is essentially site specific and tells me that you are working on a site that has a legacy RTIC infrastructure (some Reuters/TIBCO technology which is quite old these days and for all practical purposes has been deprecated in favour of other distribution mechanisms, most notably the ADS). Ok, the AAPL.OQ is the RIC, and only that. The initial part, the RSF.ANY denotes the feed and that is because...

I have worked on this topic extensively (pricing and calculating IV in production) and believe can offer an informed opinion. First of all Mathworks - the company that creates Matlab is not a trading firm so you should probably not rely on their advice so much. There are few closed form options pricing models, and all have practical shortcomings. Barone-Adesi and Whaley (please correct my spelling of last names as I'm typing from memory) model is simple approximation for American options but is unfortunately not very accurate, and does not deal with dividends. Roll-Geske-Whaley deals with dividends, but not very...

This isn't really an answer, but it's too long to add as a comment. I've always had a real problem with the correlation/covariance of price . To me, it means nothing. I realize that it gets used (abused) in many contexts, but I just don't get anything out of it (over time, price has to generally go up, go down, or go sideways, so aren't all prices "correlated"?). On the flip side, correlation/covariance of returns makes sense. You're dealing with random series, not integrated random series. For example, below is the code required to generate two price series that have...

From my experience, EODData is pretty much that you get what you pay for. Its not a very sophisticated product. They email you the files you subscribe to, and thats that. I have had an issue before of where the emails didn't go through anymore and I never heard anything from them. On Quality, I can't make a claim on its accuracy. It seems good. I find issue with three things about the data: There is no way to signal an exchange change It doesn't give you an easy way to grab the symbol info [Names, etc] If there is...


What type of investor is willing to be short gamma?

As far as I understand, most investors are willing to buy options (puts and calls) in order to limit their exposure to the market in case it moves against them. This is due to the fact that they are long gamma. Being short gamma would mean that the exposure to the underlying becomes more long as the underlying price drops and more short as the underlying price rises. Thus exposure gets higher with a P&L downturn and lower with a P&L upturn. Hence I wonder who is willing to be short gamma? Is it a bet on a low volatility? Also, for a market maker in the option market, writing (selling) an option means being short gamma, so if there is no counterparty willing to be short gamma, how are they going to hedge their gamma?

options hedging portfolio-management greeks investing

Great question! I think the most useful starting point is Stock Return Characteristics, Skew Laws, and the Differential Pricing of Individual Equity Options by Bakshi, Kapadia and Madan (2003) . Their paper proposes a definition of model-free implied skewness (they originally called it risk-neutral skewness, but MFIS is more accurate), which they prove will have a P&L directly proportional to the realized skewness of the underlier. Subsequent papers (there are literally dozens) have thoroughly explored the properties of MFIS. In particular, Does Risk-Neutral Skewness Predict the Cross-Section of Equity Option Portfolio Returns? by Bali and Murray (2011) estimates the empirical...

The standard story (also told by @vonjd) is of "The Drunk and Her Dog". This is based on "A Drunk and Her Dog: An Illustration of Cointegration and Error Correction" (1994). The story is itself based on the standard illustration for a random walk known as the "drunkard's walk". The Dickey-Fuller test is used to check for a unit root . It can be used as part of the general Engle-Granger two-step method (although it isn't the only option). In this case, while the two assets themselves are not stationary, you are able to test if the residuals between a...

Being short gamma simply means that you are short options regardless of whether they are puts or calls. The most common type of investor that is willing to be short gamma is someone who sells options, also known as a premium collector. These investors commonly use strategies such as short puts, covered calls, iron condors, vertical credit spreads, and a few others. These strategies are typically referred to as income generation strategies. They offer the investor a return known in advance, in exchange for the risk of being short options. Frequently these types of income trades have have a probability...


What are the popular methodologies to minimize data snooping?

Are there common procedures prior or posterior backtesting to ensure that a quantitative trading strategy has real predictive power and is not just one of the thing that has worked in the past by pure luck? Surely if we search long enough for working strategies we will end up finding one. Even in a walk forward approach that doesn't tell us anything about the strategy in itself. Some people talk about white's reality check but there are no consensus in that matter.

1. Determine Factors Economically, the use of factor models can be either motivated using the ICAPM or the APT . Although there are some theoretical differences between the model, for empirical and practical work these differences are irrelevant. In the end, both models stipulate that returns and expected returns are linear functions of the factors: $$ r_{i,t} = \alpha_i + \sum_j \beta_{i,j} F_{j,t} + \epsilon_{i,t} \quad (1)$$ $$ \mathbb{E}[ r_{i,t}] = \lambda_o + \sum_j \beta_{i,j} \lambda_j \quad\quad\quad(2)$$ where $F_{j,t}$ is the factor surprise of factor $j$ at time $t$ and $\lambda_j $ is the factor risk premium of factor $j$....

Strictly speaking, data snooping is not the same as in-sample vs out-of-sample model selection and testing, but has to deal with sequential or multiple tests of hypothesis based on the same data set. To quote Halbert White: Data snooping occurs when a given set of data is used more than once for purposes of inference or model selection. When such data reuse occurs, there is always the possibility that any satisfactory results obtained may simply be due to chance rather than to any merit inherent in the methody yielding the results. Let me provide an example. Suppose that you have...

The volatiltiy surface is just a representation of European option prices as a function of strike and maturity in a different "unit" - namely implied volatility (while the term implied volatility has to be made precise by the model used to convert prices (quotes) into implied volatilities - for example: we may consider log-normal vols and normal vols). Volatility is often preferred over prices, e.g., when considering interpolations of European option prices (although this may introduce difficulties like arbitrage violations, see, e.g., http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1964634 ). A local volatility model can generate a perfect fit to the implied volatility surface via Dupire's...


There is a concept of trading or observing the market with signal processing originally created by John Ehler . He wrote three books about it. Cybernetic Analysis for Stocks and Futures Rocket Science for Traders MESA and Trading Market Cycles There are number of indicators and mathematical models that are widely accepted and used by some trading software (even MetaStock), like MAMA, Hilbert Transform, Fisher Transform (as substitutes of FFT), Homodyne Discriminator, Hilbert Sine Wave, Instant Trendline etc. invented by John Ehler. But that is it. I have never heard of anybody other than John Ehler studying in this area. Do you think that it is worth learning digital signal processing? After all, each transaction is a signal and bar charts are somewhat filtered form of these signals. Does it make sense?

I can think of an application in options pricing. I came across the following paper a long time ago but think it explains FT very eloquently as applied to pricing options under BS: http://maxmatsuda.com/Papers/2004/Matsuda%20Intro%20FT%20Pricing.pdf The fun starts on page 112 but it relies on the 1998 paper by Madan and Carr. What I like about the paper is that it gives a thorough introduction to FT and only when the groundwork is set it applies it to option pricing. Not a bad approach vs many other papers which make a lot of assumption and assume the reader can jump right...


Skew arbitrage: How can you realize the skewness of the underlying?

It's not clear to me how to realize skewness. In other words, how do you implement skew arbitrage? There seems to be no well-known recipe like in volatility arbitrage . Volatility arbitrage (or vol arb) is a type of statistical arbitrage implemented by trading a delta neutral portfolio of an option and its underlier. The objective is to take advantage of differences between the implied volatility and a forecast of future realized volatility of the option's underlier. My hypothetical skew arbitrage definition: Skew arbitrage is a type of statistical arbitrage implemented by trading a delta and volatility neutral portfolio. The objective is to take advantage of differences between the implied skew and a forecast of future realized skew of the option's underlier. Is it possible to make such a skew-arb portfolio in practice? If I have great confidence in my skew forecast but not in my volatility forecast, I am tempted to engage in this type arbitrage. But again, this is just a hypothetical version of skew arbitrage. If you know a correct and more practical version, you are welcome to correct me! The same question but in a different voice: In practice, a skew bet is implemented through vertical spread, i.e. buying and selling options of different strikes. How do options traders hedge / realize the edge of the spread they trade that is indifferent to the underlying volatility?

options volatility trading hedging option-strategies

For an option with price $C$ , the P $\&$ L, with respect to changes of the underlying asset price $S$ and volatility $\sigma$ , is given by \begin{align*} P\&L = \delta \Delta S + \frac{1}{2}\gamma (\Delta S)^2 + \nu \Delta \sigma, \end{align*} where $\delta$ , $\gamma$ , and $\nu$ are respectively the delta, gamma, and vega hedge ratios. Then it is clear the vega P $\&$ L has exposure to the change of the implied volatility $\sigma$ . Note that, for the gamma P $\&$ L, \begin{align*} \frac{1}{2}\gamma (\Delta S)^2 = \frac{1}{2}\gamma S^2 \frac{1}{\Delta t}\left(\frac{\Delta S}{S}\right)^2\Delta t, \end{align*} where...


Is there an intuitive explanation for the Feynman-Kac-Theorem?

The Feynman-Kac theorem states that for an Ito-process of the form $$dX_t = \mu(t, X_t)dt + \sigma(t, X_t)dW_t$$ there is a measurable function $g$ such that $$g_t(t,x) + g_x(t, x) \mu(t,x) + \frac{1}{2} g_{xx}(t,x)\sigma(t,x)^2 = 0$$ with an appropriate boundary condition $h$: $g(T,x) = h(x)$. We also know that $g(t,x)$ is of the form $$g(t,x)=\mathbb{E}\left[h(X_T) \big| X_t=x\right].$$ This means that I can price an option with payoff function $h(x)$ at $T$ by solving the differential equation without regard to the stochastic process. Is there an intuitive explanation how it is possible to model the stochastic behaviour of the Ito-process by a differential equation, even though the differential equation does not have a stochastic component?

Martingales + Markovian Here is the motivation. Conditional expectations are martingales by the tower property of conditional expectations (an easy exercise to show). Suppose $r=0$, by the risk neutral pricing theorem $E^\star\left[h(X_T)\bigg|\mathscr{F}_t,\,X_t=x\right]$ is the price of any derivative security with $X$ as the underlying asset and payoff function $h$ assuming for the moment that the underlying security and the derivative itself pay no intermediate cashflows. In a Markovian setting, it must be the case that the price of the derivative is a measurable function of the current asset price and the time to maturity only, say a function $g(t, x)$....

I can only talk about quantitative trading. As a rule of thumb, the lower frequency you work in, the more econometrics is important, whereas for a higher frequency, the more econometrics becomes useless . (I would still recommend a top econometrician for HFT since they have what it takes to succeed, it's just the models aren't out-of-the-box applicable.) But if I was interviewing someone who was educated in econometrics for a quantitative research position, I would hope for (given the relevance to financial time-series): I have tried to put in a legend, ^ is something you should learn later and...


How to identify technical analysis chart patterns algorithmically?

I'm working on a small application that will provide some charts and graphs to be used for technical analysis. I'm new to TA but I'm wondering if there is a way to algorithmically identify the formation of certain patterns. In most of the TA literature I've read the authors explain how to identify these patterns visually. Is there a way to algorithmically determine these patterns so that I could, for example, examine the prices in code and identify a possible Head and Shoulders pattern?

I've worked at a hedge fund that allowed GA-derived strategies. For safety, it required that all models be submitted long before production to make sure that they still worked in the backtests. So there could be a delay of up to several months before a model would be allowed to run. It's also helpful to separate the sample universe; use a random half of the possible stocks for GA analysis and the other half for confirmation backtests.

I would offer the distinctions are i) pure statistical approach, ii) equilibrium based approach, and iii) empirical approach. The statistical approach includes data mining. Its techniques originate in statistics and machine learning. In its extreme there is no a priori theoretical structure imposed on asset returns. Factor structure might be identified thru Principal Components, for example. The goal here is to maximize predictive accuracy at the expense of intuition and explanatory power. This approach increasingly dominates at very short frequencies in modeling market microstructure, market making algorithms, volatility modeling, etc. However, even in high-frequency trading one can impose a factor...

As mentioned elsewhere on this site, Lo, Mamaysky, and Wang (2000) do exactly what you're talking about, namely algorithmic detection of head and shoulders patterns. Their definition: Head-and-shoulders (HS) and inverted head-and-shoulders (IHS) patterns are characterized by a sequence of five consecutive local extrema $E_1,...,E_5$ such that $$ HS \equiv \begin{cases} E_1 \text{ is a maximum} \\ E_3 > E_1, E_3 > E_5 \\ E_1\text{ and }E_5\text{ are within 1.5 percent of their average} \\ E_2\text{ and }E_4\text{ are within 1.5 percent of their average,} \end{cases} $$ $$ IHS \equiv \begin{cases} E_1\text{ is a minimum} \\ E_3

I have worked on this topic extensively (pricing and calculating IV in production) and believe can offer an informed opinion. First of all Mathworks - the company that creates Matlab is not a trading firm so you should probably not rely on their advice so much. There are few closed form options pricing models, and all have practical shortcomings. Barone-Adesi and Whaley (please correct my spelling of last names as I'm typing from memory) model is simple approximation for American options but is unfortunately not very accurate, and does not deal with dividends. Roll-Geske-Whaley deals with dividends, but not very...


How to simulate stock prices with a Geometric Brownian Motion?

I want to simulate stock price paths with different stochastic processes. I started with the famous geometric brownian motion. I simulated the values with the following formula: $$R_i=\frac{S_{i+1}-S_i}{S_i}=\mu \Delta t + \sigma \varphi \sqrt{\Delta t}$$ with: $\mu= $ sample mean $\sigma= $ sample volatility $\Delta t = $ 1 (1 day) $\varphi=$ normally distributed random number I used a short way of simulating: Simulate normally distributed random numbers with sample mean and sample standard deviation. Multiplicate this with the stock price, this gives the price increment. Calculate Sum of price increment and stock price and this gives the simulated stock price value. (This methodology can be found here ) So I thought I understood this, but now I found the following formula , which is also the geometric brownian motion: $$ S_t = S_0 \exp\left[\left(\mu - \frac{\sigma^2}{2}\right) t + \sigma W_t \right] $$ I do not understand the difference? What does the second formula says in comparison to the first? Should I have taken the second one? How should I simulate with the second formula?

equities simulations stochastic-processes brownian-motion

I know that I have seen things like this in the past. Wasn't there something recently that used Twitter? Here are a few recent papers as examples, although I will be brutally honest that I don't know if they speak to your decent quality requirement: "Trading Strategies to Exploit Blog and News Sentiment" (Zhang, Skiena 2010) "The Predictive Power of Financial Blogs" (Frisbee 2010) "An analysis of verbs in financial news articles and their impact on stock price" (Schumaker 2010)

I recently read "Modeling financial data with stable distributions" (Nolan 2005) which gives a survey of this area and might be of interest (I believe it was contained in "Handbook of Heavy Tailed Distributions in Finance" ). Another more recent reference is "Alpha-Stable Paradigm in Financial Markets" (2008). I'm not aware of anything covering "risk of fluctuations" and this is still certainly not at the center of the field (i.e. most theory still includes some version of Gaussian or mixture of Gaussians). Would also be interested in other references.

The way you do it in the first place is a discretization of the Geometric Brownian Motion (GBM) process. This method is most useful when you want to compute the path between $S_0$ and $S_t$, i.e. you want to know all the intermediary points $S_i$ for $0 \leq i \leq t$. The second equation is a closed form solution for the GBM given $S_0$. A simple mathematical proof showed that, if you know the initial point $S_0$ (which is $a$ in your equation), then the value of the process at time $t$ is given by your equation (which contains $W_t$,...


Trading a synthetic replication of the VIX index

One cannot directly buy and sell the VIX index. Theoretically, however, one could approximate the index by purchasing an at-the-money straddle on the SP500, then delta-hedging the straddle. Does anyone have experience with such a "synthetic" replication of the index? It might be very useful for betting on volatility or for spreads against the VIX futures (a sort of basis trade), but I can see potential problems if the replication is too inaccurate. (To anticipate your comments: I'm aware of the many VIX-related ETFs; but, no, I would not consider using them. I'm also aware that the VIX calculation uses other strikes beyond the ATM options; this proposed synthetic is admittedly an approximation.)

A synthetic model for the VIX would be quite useful. I just mention this since it has been covered elsewhere in the past, although I don't think that it's a real solution to your problem (for a number of reasons). Several blogs posted on the "William's VIX Fix" (WVF) in the past: marketsci , trading the odds , mindmoneymarkets . The WVF is intended to be a synthetic VIX calculation, derived by Larry Williams (see the original article here ), and is represented by the following formula: $wvf = \frac{Highest(Close, 22) - Low}{Highest(Close, 22)} * 100$ In R, this can...

I've worked at a hedge fund that allowed GA-derived strategies. For safety, it required that all models be submitted long before production to make sure that they still worked in the backtests. So there could be a delay of up to several months before a model would be allowed to run. It's also helpful to separate the sample universe; use a random half of the possible stocks for GA analysis and the other half for confirmation backtests.

I haven't read Natenberg but it of course depends on your side in the trade: Are you a market maker or a risk taker? So do you live on the spread (first) or are trying to make money based on e.g. forecasts on direction (second). This is the great divide in QuantFinance! Only in the first case will all your option trades be delta neutral. There is a nice short paper which elaborates on both concepts (it calls the first one Q and the second P ): Meucci: 'P' Versus 'Q': Differences and Commonalities between the Two Areas of Quantitative...


What exactly is meant by "microstructure noise"?

I see that term tossed around a lot, in articles relating to HFT, and ultra high frequency data. It says at higher frequencies, smaller intervals, microstructure noise is very dominant. What is this microstructure noise that they refer to?

volatility statistics high-frequency market-microstructure high-frequency-estimators

The volatiltiy surface is just a representation of European option prices as a function of strike and maturity in a different "unit" - namely implied volatility (while the term implied volatility has to be made precise by the model used to convert prices (quotes) into implied volatilities - for example: we may consider log-normal vols and normal vols). Volatility is often preferred over prices, e.g., when considering interpolations of European option prices (although this may introduce difficulties like arbitrage violations, see, e.g., http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1964634 ). A local volatility model can generate a perfect fit to the implied volatility surface via Dupire's...

Volatility is mean reverting if the underlying security doesn't drop to zero. If the security has some underlying "value" then its price is co-integrated with that "value". The volatility is the uncertainty of that price as it tracks the security's "value". Edit 12/03/2011 ================================================= @pteetor, I may have missed something, but the question was " Why is volatility mean-reverting?". I realize that the standard answer is that the VIX (I'm assuming he's asking about the VIX) is related to the historical volatility of the S&P. A simple version of that relationship provides a reasonable R^2 (see Fig. 1). It relates...

The term has a different meaning to different people. to econometricians, microstructure noise is a disturbance that makes high frequency estimates of some parameters (e.g. realized volatility) very unstable. Generally this strand of the literature professes agnosticism as to the its origin; to market microstructure researchers, microstructure noise is a deviation from fundamental value that is induced by the characteristics of the market under consideration, e.g. bid-ask bounce, the discreteness of price change, latency, and asymmetric information of traders. The last example is frequently cited but I don't think it is accurate. Asymmetric information does not have to be a...

The risk-neutral measure $\mathbb{Q}$ is a mathematical construct which stems from the law of one price , also known as the principle of no riskless arbitrage and which you may already have heard of in the following terms: "there is no free lunch in financial markets". This law is at the heart of securities' relative valuation , see this very nice paper by Emmanuel Derman ("Metaphors, Models & Theories", 2011) and some part of this discussion. In what follows, assume for the sake of simplicity existence of a risk-free asset ; deterministic and constant rates, with risk-free rate $r$ ;...


How do we use option price models (like Black-Scholes Model) to make money in practice?

In quantitative finance, we know we have a lot of option price models such as geometric Brownian motion model (Black-Scholes models), stochastic volatility model (Heston), jump diffusion models and so on, my question is how can we use these models to make money in practice? My comments: Because we can read option price from the market, by these models (Black-Scholes), we can get the implied volatility, then we may use this implied volatility to compute other exotic option price, then we can make money by selling/buying this exotic option as a market maker, is this the only way to make money? For stocks, we know that if we have a better model to predict future stock prices, then we can make money, but for option, it seems that we didn't use these models to predict the future option prices? so how can we make money with these models?

Wavelets are just one form of "basis decomposition". Wavelets in particular decompose in both frequency and time and thus are more useful than fourier or other purely-frequency based decompositions. There are other time-freq decompositions (for instance the HHT) which should be explored as well. Decomposition of a price series is useful in understanding the primary movement within a series. In general with a decomposition, the original signal is the sum its basis components (potentially with some scaling multiplier). The components range from the lowest frequency (a straight-line through the sample) to the highest frequency, a curve that oscillates with a...


What is the Risk Neutral Measure? I don't believe this has been answered on the internet well and with all the parts connecting. So: What is the risk neutral measure/pricing? Why do we need it? How we calculate the risk neutral measure or probabilities in practice? What connection has risk neutral pricing to the drift of a SDE? Does this help with 3)?

option-pricing stochastic-processes risk-neutral-measure pricing martingale

Intro: Great answer given by Kevin. I would like to contribute an additional perspective. My experience with and my understanding of the Risk Neutral measure is entirely based on "no arbitrage" and "replication / hedging" arguments. The way I would like to explain this view is via the following three-step construction : (i) First, I want to build the intuition with a one-period discrete model: only a single stock and a risk-free account, no derivatives . The aim is to show that even without trying to price derivatives, one can create a mathematical object called a "risk-neutral probability measure", just...

Because of: The (extreme) dominance of noise over signal The prevalence of non-repeating patterns (many of which we know are not going to repeat) A pathetic sample size for cross-validation Regime changes due to exogenous events. These are typically in the cross-val window which makes it even worse. (GFC, financial integration, trade law changes, interest rate adjustments by central banks, some idiot in a bank was hiding trades and loses 5 billions dollars, etc). It is well known that non-linear relationships are generally just artefacts of the in sample dataset There is also the following: Much price changes are driven...


What is the so-called Swap Curve, and how does it relate to the Zero Curve (or spot yield curve)? Does it only refer to a curve of swap rates versus maturities found in the market? Or is it a swap equivalent of a spot-yield curve constructed from bootstrapping a bond yield curve? The context of this question is set against a backdrop of a plethora of terminology (that seems to be used interchangeably). I am looking into how the so-called Zero Curve (or spot yield curve) is constructed in order to discount various IR derivatives (including swaps) when pricing them.

It's an interesting question. I particularly agree with the $\mathbb{Q}-\mathbb{P}$ dichotomy mentioned by many. I would add to the other answers that, come to think of it, the Black-Scholes postulated Geometric Brownian Motion could be interpreted as an AR(1) process on the logarithm of the stock price as you discretise the SDE from which it is a solution, which is exactly what you do when running Monte-Carlo simulations (same thing for the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process as explained here and noted by @Richard). Actually, when taking the continuous-time limit, many more econometric models can be shown to correspond to stochastic processes frequently...

Garabedian, Typically, the "swap curve" refers to an x-y chart of par swap rates plotted against their time to maturity. This is typically called the "par swap curve." Your second question, "how it relates to the zero curve," is very complex in the post-crisis world. I think it's helpful to start the discussion with a government bond yield curve to clarify some concepts and terminologies. Consider the US Treasury market, using the outstanding Treasury notes and bonds (nearly 300 of them...), we can either use bootstrapping or more sophisticated spline models to construct a "fitted curve." Since this yield curve...


What is the role of stochastic calculus in day-to-day trading?

I work with practical, day-to-day trading: just making money. One of my small clients recently hired a smart, new MFE. We discussed potential trading strategies for a long time. Finally, he expressed surprise that I never mentioned (much less used) stochastic calculus, which he spent many long hours studying in his MFE program. I use the products of stochastic calculus (e.g., the Black-Scholes equation) but not the calculus itself. Now I am wondering, does stochastic calculus play a role in day-to-day trading strategies? Am I under-utilizing a potentially valuable tool? If this client was a Wall Street investment bank that was making markets in complicated derivatives, I'm sure their research department would use stochastic calculus for modeling. But they're not, so I'm not sure how we would use stochastic calculus. ( Full disclosure: I have Masters degrees but not a PhD. I'm an applied mathematician, not a theoretician.)

Martingales + Markovian Here is the motivation. Conditional expectations are martingales by the tower property of conditional expectations (an easy exercise to show). Suppose $r=0$, by the risk neutral pricing theorem $E^\star\left[h(X_T)\bigg|\mathscr{F}_t,\,X_t=x\right]$ is the price of any derivative security with $X$ as the underlying asset and payoff function $h$ assuming for the moment that the underlying security and the derivative itself pay no intermediate cashflows. In a Markovian setting, it must be the case that the price of the derivative is a measurable function of the current asset price and the time to maturity only, say a function $g(t, x)$....

This isn't really an answer, but it's too long to add as a comment. I've always had a real problem with the correlation/covariance of price . To me, it means nothing. I realize that it gets used (abused) in many contexts, but I just don't get anything out of it (over time, price has to generally go up, go down, or go sideways, so aren't all prices "correlated"?). On the flip side, correlation/covariance of returns makes sense. You're dealing with random series, not integrated random series. For example, below is the code required to generate two price series that have...

Here couple pointers that may make it clearer: Drift can be replaced by the risk-free rate through a mathematical construct called risk-neutral probability pricing. Why can we get away with that without introducing errors? The reason lies in the ability to setup a hedge portfolio, thus the market will not compensate us for the drift above and beyond the risk free rate under risk-neutral probability pricing. As long as such hedge exists and couple other conditions are met (please look up Girsanov's Theorem) we can introduce a risk-neutral measure so that when applying it to the differential equation and through...

This is pure speculation: MFE's are really tailored toward valuation models (how can we develop a model to price x swap, etc.). You don't entirely have to worry about those details in order to trade them: you're just quoted a price based on these models. But if you go in-house at a bank and are working as a product quant (structured products, etc.), then you really need to worry about these things. Alternatively, it could be relevant to a trading strategy if you think that the current model is mispricing things and there's an arbitrage opportunity. This is why banks...


What is the best data structure/implementation for representing a time series?

I was wondering what is best practice for representing elements in a time series, especially with large amounts of data. The focus/context is in a back testing engine and comparing multiple series. It seems there are two options: 1) Using an integer index, or 2) Using a date-based index At the moment I am using dates, but this impacts on performance & memory usage in that I am using a hash table rather than an array, and it requires some overhead in iteration (either forward or backwards) as I have to determine the next/previous valid date before I can access it. However, it does let me aggregate data on the fly (e.g. building the ohlc for the previous week when looking at daily bars) and most importantly for me allows me to compare different series with certainty I am looking at the same date/time. If I am looking at an equity issue relative to a broader index, and say the broader index is missing a few bars for whatever reason, using an integer indexed array would mean I'm looking at future data for the broad index vs present data for the given security. I don't see how you could handle these situations unless you're using date/times. Using integer indexes would be a lot easier code wise, so I was just wondering what others are doing or if there is best practice with this.

Representing time series (esp. tick data) using elaborate data structures may be not the best idea. You may want to try to use two arrays of the same length to store your time series. The first array stores values (e.g. price) and the second array stores time. Note that the second series is monotonically increasing (or at least non-decreasing), i.e. it's sorted. This property enables you to search it using the binary search algorithm. Once you get an index of a time of interest in the second array you also have the index of the relevant entry in the first...

The risk-neutral measure $\mathbb{Q}$ is a mathematical construct which stems from the law of one price , also known as the principle of no riskless arbitrage and which you may already have heard of in the following terms: "there is no free lunch in financial markets". This law is at the heart of securities' relative valuation , see this very nice paper by Emmanuel Derman ("Metaphors, Models & Theories", 2011) and some part of this discussion. In what follows, assume for the sake of simplicity existence of a risk-free asset ; deterministic and constant rates, with risk-free rate $r$ ;...

1. Determine Factors Economically, the use of factor models can be either motivated using the ICAPM or the APT . Although there are some theoretical differences between the model, for empirical and practical work these differences are irrelevant. In the end, both models stipulate that returns and expected returns are linear functions of the factors: $$ r_{i,t} = \alpha_i + \sum_j \beta_{i,j} F_{j,t} + \epsilon_{i,t} \quad (1)$$ $$ \mathbb{E}[ r_{i,t}] = \lambda_o + \sum_j \beta_{i,j} \lambda_j \quad\quad\quad(2)$$ where $F_{j,t}$ is the factor surprise of factor $j$ at time $t$ and $\lambda_j $ is the factor risk premium of factor $j$....

One starts with the Black-Scholes equation $$\frac{\partial C}{\partial t}+\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2S^2\frac{\partial^2 C}{\partial S^2}+ rS\frac{\partial C}{\partial S}-rC=0,\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad(1)$$ supplemented with the terminal and boundary conditions (in the case of a European call) $$C(S,T)=\max(S-K,0),\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad(2)$$ $$C(0,t)=0,\qquad C(S,t)\sim S\ \mbox{ as } S\to\infty.\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad$$ The option value $C(S,t)$ is defined over the domain $0 Step 1. The equation can be rewritten in the equivalent form $$\frac{\partial C}{\partial t}+\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2\left(S\frac{\partial }{\partial S}\right)^2C+\left(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2\right)S\frac{\partial C}{\partial S}-rC=0.$$ The change of independent variables $$S=e^y,\qquad t=T-\tau$$ results in $$S\frac{\partial }{\partial S}\to\frac{\partial}{\partial y},\qquad \frac{\partial}{\partial t}\to - \frac{\partial}{\partial \tau},$$ so one gets the constant coefficient equation $$\frac{\partial C}{\partial \tau}-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2\frac{\partial^2 C}{\partial y^2}-\left(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2\right)\frac{\partial C}{\partial y}+rC=0.\qquad\qquad\qquad(3)$$ Step 2. If we...


Any known bugs with Yahoo Finance adjusted close data ?

Yahoo Finance allows you to download tables of their daily historical stock price data. The data includes an adjusted closing price that I thought I might use to calculate daily log returns as a first step to other kinds of analyses. To calculate the adj. close you need to know all the splits and dividends, and ex-div and ex-split dates. If someone gets this wrong it should create some anomalous returns on the false vs. true ex dates. Has anyone seen any major problems in the adj. closing price data on Yahoo Finance?

Yahoo rounds the adjusted price to 2 decimals even though dividend amounts often have 3 decimal places. Since they apply the adjustment formula to adjusted prices, if you go far enough back in time, the value they give for Adjusted Price will be different than it would be if there were no rounding. edit: For example, for C (Citigroup), on January 2, 1990, Yahoo gives a close value of 29.37 and an Adjusted value of 1.50. Using the dividend data that Yahoo supplies, if they didn't round to cents on every adjustment, the adjusted value would be 1.677.

Consider the standard error , and in particular the distance between the upper and lower limits: \begin{equation} \Delta = (\bar{x} + SE \cdot \alpha) - (\bar{x} - SE \cdot \alpha) = 2 \cdot SE \cdot \alpha \end{equation} Using the formula for standard error, we can solve for sample size: \begin{equation} n = \left(\frac{2 \cdot s \cdot \alpha}{\Delta}\right)^{2} \end{equation} where $s$ is the measured standard deviation, which you already have from your IR calculation. High-frequency Example I was testing a market-making model recently that was expected to return a couple basis points for each trade and I wanted to be confident...

The minimum variance solution loads up on securities that have low variances and co-variances. Theoretically you are correct that this should have a low expected return profile. However, it turns out - in contradiction to modern portfolio theory - that securities that have low-volatility or low-beta experience higher returns than high-volatility or high-beta stocks. This is well-documented in the literature as the low-volatility anomaly . As a result, many funds and ETFs have been launched in recent years to exploit this phenomenon. There are a couple arguments as to why the anomaly exists. The paper I cite above argues that...