Paper detail

Nonlinear Valuation under Collateral, Credit Risk and Funding Costs: A Numerical Case Study Extending Black-Scholes

We develop an arbitrage-free framework for consistent valuation of derivative trades with collateralization, counterparty credit gap risk, and funding costs, following the approach first proposed by Pallavicini and co-authors in 2011. Based on the risk-neutral pricing principle, we derive a general pricing equation where Credit, Debit, Liquidity and Funding Valuation Adjustments (CVA, DVA, LVA and FVA) are introduced by simply modifying the payout cash-flows of the deal. Funding costs and specific close-out procedures at default break the bilateral nature of the deal price and render the valuation problem a non-linear and recursive one. CVA and FVA are in general not really additive adjustments, and the risk for double counting is concrete. We introduce a new adjustment, called a Non-linearity Valuation Adjustment (NVA), to address double-counting. The theoretical risk free rate disappears from our final equations. The framework can be tailored also to CCP trading under initial and variation margins, as explained in detail in Brigo and Pallavicini (2014). In particular, we allow for asymmetric collateral and funding rates, replacement close-out and re-hypothecation. The valuation equation takes the form of a backward stochastic differential equation or semi-linear partial differential equation, and can be cast as a set of iterative equations that can be solved by least-squares Monte Carlo. We propose such a simulation algorithm in a case study involving a generalization of the benchmark model of Black and Scholes for option pricing. Our numerical results confirm that funding risk has a non-trivial impact on the deal price, and that double counting matters too. We conclude the article with an analysis of large scale implications of non-linearity of the pricing equations.

preprint2014arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.