- January 3rd, 2020, 4:36 am
- Forum: Student Forum
- Topic: Realised Volatility v Calculated Daily Volatility
- Replies:
**2** - Views:
**5289**

pankajchitlangia: if annualized volatility is 19.105% then daily volatility should be 1% assuming daily volatility is same across. >> This is true only in an ideal world in which (1) stock prices follow geometric Brownian motion (GBM) with a constant volatility, and (2) realized volatility is measu...

- January 2nd, 2020, 3:28 pm
- Forum: Student Forum
- Topic: Realised Volatility v Calculated Daily Volatility
- Replies:
**2** - Views:
**5289**

if annualized volatility is 19.105% then daily volatility should be 1% assuming daily volatility is same across. However, if I have an ATM options with implied vols of 19.105%, then if the futures prices has daily movement of 1% till expiry, why doesn't the realized volatility is equal to the premi...

- August 15th, 2017, 4:04 pm
- Forum: General Forum
- Topic: CBOE VIX INDEX - Logic behind the Formula
- Replies:
**5** - Views:
**1293**

Thanks!Derman - varswap replication paper

- August 15th, 2017, 9:00 am
- Forum: General Forum
- Topic: CBOE VIX INDEX - Logic behind the Formula
- Replies:
**5** - Views:
**1293**

Thanks, but I have already gone through this. What I was looking for is more of derivation of the formula used - which explains the mathematical logic behind it. This white paper just states the formula

- August 14th, 2017, 5:02 pm
- Forum: General Forum
- Topic: CBOE VIX INDEX - Logic behind the Formula
- Replies:
**5** - Views:
**1293**

Need to understand the mathematical logic behind the CBOE VIX Index. Is there a white paper on that which cab be of help?

- August 4th, 2017, 10:45 am
- Forum: Student Forum
- Topic: ATMF Call Delta in High Vols or long time to maturity - why much higher than 0.50
- Replies:
**8** - Views:
**2326**

Since [$]\Delta^{(F)} \equiv C^{Black}_F = e^{-r T} \Phi(d_1)[$], this delta will ultimately tend to 0 as [$]T \rightarrow[$] for any r>0. But when [$]r T \ll \sigma^2 T[$] ; i.e. [$] r \ll \sigma^2[$] and [$]r T[$] small, it will behave like a delta w.r.t. spot. That's what you're seeing. (More ca...

- July 29th, 2017, 3:19 pm
- Forum: Student Forum
- Topic: ATMF Call Delta in High Vols or long time to maturity - why much higher than 0.50
- Replies:
**8** - Views:
**2326**

more chance to be in the money. you should also try to be more precise: atm spot or atm forward? call or put delta? how does the forward term structure look like? etc. Thanks: Question edited. More chance of be in the money how ? Returns would be normally distributed so chances that the stock price...

- July 29th, 2017, 2:36 pm
- Forum: Student Forum
- Topic: ATMF Call Delta in High Vols or long time to maturity - why much higher than 0.50
- Replies:
**8** - Views:
**2326**

In case of high vols (say 500%) or long tenor (say 10 years) - why ATMF call delta is much higher than 0.50 (>0.80). Theoretically I understand in N(d1) if time is very high, it will give number greater than 0.50. But how can one explain it intuitively? Assuming the term structure is flat.

- July 17th, 2011, 1:15 am
- Forum: Technical Forum
- Topic: lmplied Volatility Term Structure
- Replies:
**1** - Views:
**20692**

lf one has standard maturity ATM vols (i.e. 1m, 2m, 3m, 6m and 1y) which model do one use to determine ATM vols between those maturities? ls cubic spline interpolation method most appropriate in this case ?

- March 3rd, 2011, 3:20 am
- Forum: Technical Forum
- Topic: Smile Delta Adjustment
- Replies:
**4** - Views:
**24549**

Yes ... the first question was the result of over-burdened mind ...hope to see clues for second question though.

- March 2nd, 2011, 3:11 pm
- Forum: Technical Forum
- Topic: Smile Delta Adjustment
- Replies:
**4** - Views:
**24549**

<t>As per my understanding smile adjusted delta can be found from the formulaSmile adjusted delta = delta + vega * dvol/dSNow assume a positive risk reversal scenario - in that case dvol/ds would always be positive (if spot moves up vols move up and vice versa)In that case 1 - will both put and call...

- March 19th, 2010, 11:01 am
- Forum: General Forum
- Topic: put-call parity violation
- Replies:
**24** - Views:
**39090**

<t>Basically put call parity is p + S = c + Ke-rt ... rearranging c - p = S - Ke-rt Now LHS = long forward (this has to be the case in OTC market else there would be arbitrage opportunities... in exchange traded option this may not be true due to bid offer spread) and value of long forward F = S - K...

- March 18th, 2010, 3:06 am
- Forum: Technical Forum
- Topic: BS and Volatility - Interpretation
- Replies:
**9** - Views:
**32051**

Thanks everyone for clarifications .... (a mock experimentation in excel sheet of option delta hedging also was a great help)

- March 15th, 2010, 7:10 am
- Forum: Technical Forum
- Topic: BS and Volatility - Interpretation
- Replies:
**9** - Views:
**32051**

am clear on "b" ... but still not able to convince myself on "a" though i know intuitively it should be 1% per day movement on stock but not able to explain logically

- March 15th, 2010, 6:33 am
- Forum: Technical Forum
- Topic: BS and Volatility - Interpretation
- Replies:
**9** - Views:
**32051**

<t>In that case ... a. Assume that I buy a call on a stock pay premium based on implied volatility (in BS) of 1% every day - then to recover the premium paid (i.e. realized volatility = implied volatility) should i. stock move 1% every day on average or ii. there has to be some outcome on the return...