Live data from Hacker News

A guide to pricing and hedging (2003) [pdf]

ieor.columbia.edu

61–70 of 90 posts

Re: A guide to pricing and hedging (2003) [pdf]

#61
post #59
post #53

I was happy to see this because of my interest in the subject, but I can understand that the title is a bit off-putting. A bit off topic anecdote: a few years ago, while floor trading was still important on the Chicago Board of Trade, I was getting a tour of the floor during trading hours and my guide, a very experienced commodity trader, pointed out a fellow trader that had made the largest trade in history; it was…

It's almost as if sometimes women do things and then other times men do things! Who would have thunk it??

The actual title of the article is “A Boy’s Guide to Pricing and Hedging”. If you read the link, the above comment is more relevant.

Re: A guide to pricing and hedging (2003) [pdf]

#62
post #20

The mus and sigmas in this paper on risk modelling would not make Nicholas Taleb very happy

I think he would be more offended on the general idea of risk model. His conclusion: we can't do it. Don't model risk. Set yourself up to benefit from our inability to do it.

Re: A guide to pricing and hedging (2003) [pdf]

#64
post #11

What's the benefit of these fancy financial instruments other than for someone who wants to enjoy a slower, higher stakes version of the roulette wheel at a casino (assuming the Boglehead wisdom that individual stock picking is about as reliable as that)?

Let's say you run a business in Canada exporting goods to the US. You negotiate a price with a client up front, but only get paid when you ship an order a few months later. Clients pay in USD, so it's good for you when CAD is low and bad for you when CAD is high (because your USD buys less CAD, which is what you actually use to pay workers, spend on yourself, etc.) Also let's say it's the kind of business where you ship massive orders, but only a handful of times per year.

In the months between finalizing a price and receiving the cash, you're exposed to foreign exchange risk. If CAD goes down, you end up making more money "for free", but if CAD goes up you make less. In the long run, you expect these currency fluctuations to average out; the unexpected surpluses will go towards covering unexpected losses.

Now let's look at a financial engineering trick that can eliminate this currency risk. Let's say you buy some `call` options, and sell some `put` options on a CAD/USD fund. (Selling the puts covers the cost of buying the calls). Now, if CAD goes up--which is normally bad for you--the value of your call options also goes up and cancels out your losses on the shipment. If CAD goes down--which is normally good for you--the puts that you've sold grow in value and must be settled with the buyer, so this cancels out the surplus you made on the shipment. The net result is that the amount of CAD you expect to receive two months after signing a contract in USD is "locked in" based on the exchange rate at the exact time you signed the contract and simultaneously bought the options.

So far, both the naked method and the "hedged" method result in the same expected profit in the long run. But notice that in the hedged case, you don't need to carry extra cash on hand just in case your company is hit with 3/4/5+ bad orders in a row. You don't need an insurance policy, you don't need to carry debt, and you don't need to pay the interest associated with either of those. You might still need some extra cash lying around to cover for other unexpected risks like labor strikes, natural disasters, whatever, but not for currency risk. This money is now freed up and you can use it to build new factories and grow your operation. You've made your business more efficient without lifting a finger!

Now the beautiful thing is that on the other end of this options deal there's going to be someone selling calls and buying puts that has the exact opposite problem you have. Maybe an importer in Canada or an exporter in America who both benefit from a rising CAD. They too get to lock in a price and avoid carrying extra cash to cover for currency risk. You both ended up helping each other without having to expend any effort finding the other party, negotiating deals, etc.

Now think how much more efficient the economy gets when everyone does this. And this is just one technique.

---

Regarding personal investment, you can likewise use hedges, levers, and other financial instruments to come up with a risk/reward profile that matches your particular life situation. As a very simple example, you can buy a "protective put" option at say 80% of the price of equity A. This basically acts as an insurance policy; you spend a bit of money on the put, but now you're guaranteed to not lose more than 20% of your investment. Why not just keep 80% of your money in a bank account and invest 20%? Well, to make the same return you'd have to find an equity B that's expected to return 5x what you're expecting from equity A, and that might not exist.

Re: A guide to pricing and hedging (2003) [pdf]

#65
post #45
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is "the boy" a patriarchic stand-in for the word "child", or what? It seems like some kind of in-group slang. Reminds me of the British expression "old boy", meaning "man".

I am so glad several other commenters here have pointed out that boy's guides were fairly common and this is a cute reference to that genre of book. There were girl's guides too. It is not the least bit offensive nor meant to cause offense.

Were the girl's guides about the same things as boy's guides? By cute, you probably meant harmless. You probably didn't mean to say that gender roles are cute. I guess its harmlessness is up for debate. My position on the matter is that there's no place for socially constructed gender roles in this society, and it's not cute.

Re: A guide to pricing and hedging (2003) [pdf]

#66
post #63

From OP: "If you want to know the value of a security, use the price of another security that's as similar to it as possible. All the rest is modelling. Go and build." Buffett: "Price is what you pay; value is what you get." [a] -- [a] https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Warren_Buffett

Time horizons are important. Buffett's capital comes from insurance float. That's very long-term capital. He can afford to buy an asset and let its cash flows pay him back.

If you're balancing an options portfolio, on the other hand, shorter time horizons matter. If the stock pays back in 10 years but crashes in one, the ten years don't matter for the holder of a 12-month call option. Thus finding symmetries becomes more relevant than fundamental analysis.

Re: A guide to pricing and hedging (2003) [pdf]

#67
post #4

I hate to be "that person" ... but what is it in this paper that makes it appropriate to label it "The boy's guide ..." Answer: nothing. Nothing at all. Words matter, role-models matter, names matter, and this is just completely tone-deaf in today's world. Men (and boys) may scoff, but seeing the title is seriously off-putting. Unnecessary, inappropriate, and the problem is that the author probably has no clue. I've…

i agree wholeheartedly with you but just to point out it does look like this is from 2003

In 2003, steampunk was really big, and this seems like a throwback to that neo-victorian terminology.

Re: A guide to pricing and hedging (2003) [pdf]

#68

This is so cool. It's like the boy's king Arthur of finance. I get a fair few channels and podcasts on engineering and such, but I haven't found a lot of good approaches to financial topics. This is great. Thank you!

Check out the book "Options, Futures, and Other Derivatives" by Hull, it covers a huge swath of financial instruments.

[0] https://www.amazon.com/Options-Futures-Other-Derivatives-10t...

Re: A guide to pricing and hedging (2003) [pdf]

#69
post #63

From OP: "If you want to know the value of a security, use the price of another security that's as similar to it as possible. All the rest is modelling. Go and build." Buffett: "Price is what you pay; value is what you get." [a] -- [a] https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Warren_Buffett

Time horizons are important. Buffett's capital comes from insurance float. That's very long-term capital. He can afford to buy an asset and let its cash flows pay him back. If you're balancing an options portfolio, on the other hand, shorter time horizons matter. If the stock pays back in 10 years but crashes in one, the ten years don't matter for the holder of a 12-month call option. Thus finding symmetries becomes…

Yes. Couldn't agree more.

Arguably, one could call the long-horizon, volatility-ignoring approach "investing" and the short-horizon, volatility-sensitive approach "trading."

Post reply on HN