**Subject:**

gamma (second derivative of option price wrt S). Does it have a value at t = 0?

Can we model gamma as a PDE?

This is for t == 0 -> t = 1.0e-3

When t = T for initial conditions gives a better approximation..

- Cuchulainn
**Posts:**60840**Joined:****Location:**Amsterdam-
**Contact:**

gamma (second derivative of option price wrt S). Does it have a value at t = 0?

Can we model gamma as a PDE?

This is for t == 0 -> t = 1.0e-3

When t = T for initial conditions gives a better approximation..

http://www.datasimfinancial.com

http://www.datasim.nl

Approach your problem from the right end and begin with the answers. Then one day, perhaps you will find the final question..

R. van Gulik

http://www.datasim.nl

Approach your problem from the right end and begin with the answers. Then one day, perhaps you will find the final question..

R. van Gulik

I’m pretty sure Peter Carr derives a PDE for gamma in his “Deriving derivatives of derivative securities” paper. Since delta at time zero is given by the Heaviside function, gamma at time zero is given by the Dirac delta function.

- Cuchulainn
**Posts:**60840**Joined:****Location:**Amsterdam-
**Contact:**

The reason for this red shift is that I forgot a convection term when differentiating the PDE for gamma. Now it's fine.Subject:

gamma (second derivative of option price wrt S). Does it have a value at t = 0?

Can we model gamma as a PDE?

This is for t == 0 -> t = 1.0e-3

When t = T for initial conditions gives a better approximation..

http://www.datasimfinancial.com

http://www.datasim.nl

Approach your problem from the right end and begin with the answers. Then one day, perhaps you will find the final question..

R. van Gulik

http://www.datasim.nl

Approach your problem from the right end and begin with the answers. Then one day, perhaps you will find the final question..

R. van Gulik

Your gamma Dopplered to the left?The reason for this red shift is that I forgot a convection term when differentiating the PDE for gamma. Now it's fine.Subject:

gamma (second derivative of option price wrt S). Does it have a value at t = 0?

Can we model gamma as a PDE?

This is for t == 0 -> t = 1.0e-3

When t = T for initial conditions gives a better approximation..

- Cuchulainn
**Posts:**60840**Joined:****Location:**Amsterdam-
**Contact:**

Found the article by Peter C. Will read it. Actually, I attended a talk by Peter around 2001 in Broad Street (51?) when he actually introduced the topic!I’m pretty sure Peter Carr derives a PDE for gamma in his “Deriving derivatives of derivative securities” paper. Since delta at time zero is given by the Heaviside function, gamma at time zero is given by the Dirac delta function.

Now, I am fairly confident the maths is solid and the numerics are more robust than other stuff. I tried both Gaussian and box deltas and they are fine. Moving to multiple stat variables with this approach should be easy as well.

An open question is how to compute [$] \frac{\partial C}{\partial K} [$]; the strike [$]K[$] is 'hidden' in the payoff and is nowhere to be seen in the PDE.

Last edited by Cuchulainn on April 23rd, 2019, 4:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.

http://www.datasimfinancial.com

http://www.datasim.nl

Approach your problem from the right end and begin with the answers. Then one day, perhaps you will find the final question..

R. van Gulik

http://www.datasim.nl

Approach your problem from the right end and begin with the answers. Then one day, perhaps you will find the final question..

R. van Gulik

Given that standard options are essentially symmetric in S and K, you could try a change of numeraire. Then the “strike delta” becomes the regular delta. This is usually easier to think about in an FX context.

- Cuchulainn
**Posts:**60840**Joined:****Location:**Amsterdam-
**Contact:**

Don't suppose you have a useful link? (BTW PC also excludes this case from his article).Given that standard options are essentially symmetric in S and K, you could try a change of numeraire. Then the “strike delta” becomes the regular delta. This is usually easier to think about in an FX context.

http://www.datasim.nl

Approach your problem from the right end and begin with the answers. Then one day, perhaps you will find the final question..

R. van Gulik

I had taken it for granted that everyone here knows how to differentiate. Looks like I was wrong.

- Cuchulainn
**Posts:**60840**Joined:****Location:**Amsterdam-
**Contact:**

Mathematica and Maple have a lot to answer for. Just like no one can do log tables not long division any more.I had taken it for granted that everyone here knows how to differentiate. Looks like I was wrong.

Last edited by Cuchulainn on April 23rd, 2019, 8:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

http://www.datasim.nl

Approach your problem from the right end and begin with the answers. Then one day, perhaps you will find the final question..

R. van Gulik

- Cuchulainn
**Posts:**60840**Joined:****Location:**Amsterdam-
**Contact:**

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/do ... 1&type=pdf

This is the article. I use the approach as in eq (1) but then for all greeks in my case, but not in the article..

Theorem 2 shows a formula for the derivatives wrt S written as series of Hermite polynomials. These are computationally difficult in a number of ways. The alternative here is that I only need to embed the greeks in a PDE (qualitative solution) and them embed them in a parabolic PDE system, much easier.

Eqs. (28)-(30); look like PDEs.

This is the article. I use the approach as in eq (1) but then for all greeks in my case, but not in the article..

Theorem 2 shows a formula for the derivatives wrt S written as series of Hermite polynomials. These are computationally difficult in a number of ways. The alternative here is that I only need to embed the greeks in a PDE (qualitative solution) and them embed them in a parabolic PDE system, much easier.

Eqs. (28)-(30); look like PDEs.

http://www.datasim.nl

Approach your problem from the right end and begin with the answers. Then one day, perhaps you will find the final question..

R. van Gulik

- FaridMoussaoui
**Posts:**474**Joined:****Location:**Genève, Genf, Ginevra, Geneva

You have to look into Dupire work.

An open question is how to compute ∂C/∂K; the strike is 'hidden' in the payoff and is nowhere to be seen in the PDE.

That makes it easy. You can still differentiate the PDE => [$]u = C_K[$] follows the same PDE with the differentiated payoff.

- Cuchulainn
**Posts:**60840**Joined:****Location:**Amsterdam-
**Contact:**

Excellent! I was over-engineering it! When I came back from the dojo it came in a flash.An open question is how to compute ∂C/∂K; the strike is 'hidden' in the payoff and is nowhere to be seen in the PDE.

That makes it easy. You can still differentiate the PDE => [$]u = C_K[$] follows the same PDE with the differentiated payoff.

Here is [$] \frac{\partial P}{\partial K} [$] as a function of the underlying [$]S[$], Is it correct(*)? It is the same as the BS PDE and the same BC/IC as detta.It looks a bit like a call delta.

(*) compared against [$]e^{-rT}N(-d2)[$]

http://www.datasim.nl

Approach your problem from the right end and begin with the answers. Then one day, perhaps you will find the final question..

R. van Gulik

- Cuchulainn
**Posts:**60840**Joined:****Location:**Amsterdam-
**Contact:**

Strike gamma (output as expected I suppose)

http://www.datasim.nl

Approach your problem from the right end and begin with the answers. Then one day, perhaps you will find the final question..

R. van Gulik

- Cuchulainn
**Posts:**60840**Joined:****Location:**Amsterdam-
**Contact:**

This counterexample was salvaged from the ashes and saved for posterity.

Some related question to follow..

Good remarks by @fogsnow.

Some related question to follow..

Good remarks by @fogsnow.

http://www.datasim.nl

Approach your problem from the right end and begin with the answers. Then one day, perhaps you will find the final question..

R. van Gulik

GZIP: On