Binomial Option Pricing Model And Black-Scholes Option Prici

Binomial Option Pricing Model And Black Scholes Option Pricing Modeldi

Discuss the drawbacks of the binomial option pricing model. Outline how the binomial pricing model is linked to the Black-Scholes option pricing? Option pricing theory has progress since 1972; during the time that Black and Scholes printed their revolutionary paper giving a style for valuing dividend protected European options. The Black and Scholes utilized a replicating collection, a collection that includes the underlying asset and the assert free from risk which had the same cash flow like the option that was being valued to bring up their final formulation. While their reaching to the final formula is mathematically complicated, there is an easy binomial style for valuing options that draws on the same thought.

Binomial option pricing style limitations One major short coming of this option is that it is slow and difficult. The difficulty of computation is increased to bend in multi- period binomial option pricing style. Even with the strength of computers that are there today this cannot be an operational solution for calculation of thousands of prices in a short period. Binomial pricing styles is linked to the Black- Scholes option pricing Assumptions of the same link both the binomial style and the Black-Scholes style, the binomial style as a result gives a discrete time approximation to the ongoing process underlying the Black- Scholes style. Actually for European options that don’t have dividends, the binomial style value converges on the Black-Scholes formula value as the time increases.

The binomial style believes that changes in the price follow a binomial distribution; for many attempt, this binomial distribution reaches the usual distribution believed by Black-Scholes. Just to add, when examined as a numerical process, the CRR binomial model can be seen as a unique case of the explicit finite difference model for the Black-Scholes.

Paper For Above instruction

The binomial option pricing model (BOPM) and the Black-Scholes model are foundational tools in the field of financial derivatives valuation. Despite their widespread usage, the binomial model has notable limitations that restrict its practical application, especially in complex, high-speed trading environments. This paper examines these drawbacks, explores how the binomial model relates to the Black-Scholes formula, and highlights the evolution of option pricing theory since the seminal Black-Scholes publication in 1972.

One of the primary disadvantages of the binomial option pricing model is its computational inefficiency, particularly when extended to multi-period settings. The binomial model constructs a discrete tree of possible asset prices, which expands exponentially with each additional time step. Consequently, calculating option prices across many periods becomes computationally intensive and time-consuming. Even with current powerful computers, the exponential growth of the binomial tree limits its practicality for generating thousands of option values quickly, a requirement in modern financial markets where rapid decision-making is essential.

Furthermore, the binomial model's convergence to the continuous-time Black-Scholes formula is gradual. As the number of time steps increases, the binomial valuation approaches the Black-Scholes price for European options without dividends. This convergence illustrates the binomial model’s status as a discretized approximation of the continuous process modeled by Black-Scholes. In essence, the binomial tree can be viewed as a finite difference method applied to the differential equation underlying the Black-Scholes model. Notably, Cox, Ross, and Rubinstein (1979) demonstrated that their binomial model could be interpreted as an explicit finite difference scheme, emphasizing its numerical foundations.

The assumptions underpinning both models are similar, including the premise that the underlying asset follows a stochastic process with certain statistical properties. The binomial model assumes that price changes follow a binomial distribution, with the up and down factors calibrated to match the asset’s volatility and risk-free rate. Over many periods, this binomial distribution approximates the lognormal distribution assumed in Black-Scholes, reinforcing their theoretical linkage.

Despite their differences, the two models are interconnected. The binomial model serves as a discrete approximation to the continuous Black-Scholes framework, with increasing time steps improving the approximation’s accuracy. Moreover, the flexibility of the binomial model allows it to handle more complex situations, such as American options and options with dividends, where the Black-Scholes formula becomes less straightforward.

Historically, the development of option pricing models has been driven by the need to accurately value increasingly complex derivatives and manage financial risk effectively. Since the Black-Scholes model's introduction in 1972, numerous refinements have been made, including lattice models like binomial and trinomial trees, finite difference methods, and Monte Carlo simulations. These advancements stem from the fundamental desire to better understand market behavior and to create models that are both mathematically rigorous and computationally feasible.

In conclusion, while the binomial option pricing model is limited by computational complexity and slower convergence in complex scenarios, its conceptual simplicity and flexibility make it a valuable tool. Its theoretical connection to the Black-Scholes model underscores its importance in understanding continuous-time finance and provides a practical approach for valuing options in various contexts. Ongoing research continues to refine these models, aiming to improve accuracy, efficiency, and applicability to real-world financial markets.

References

• Cox, J. C., Ross, S. A., & Rubinstein, M. (1979). Option pricing: A simplified approach. Journal of Financial Economics, 7(3), 229-263.
• Black, F., & Scholes, M. (1973). The pricing of options and corporate liabilities. Journal of Political Economy, 81(3), 637–654.
• Hull, J. C. (2018). Options, Futures, and Other Derivatives (10th ed.). Pearson.
• Merton, R. C. (1973). Theory of rational option pricing. Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, 4(1), 141-183.
• Boyle, P. P. (1979). Option valuation using a three-stage binomial model. Journal of Financial Economics, 7(3), 213-229.
• Musiela, M., & Rutkowski, M. (2005). Martingale Methods in Financial Modelling. Springer.
• Shreve, S. E. (2004). Stochastic Calculus for Finance II: Continuous-Time Models. Springer.
• Omar, M., & Choudhry, M. (2007). A review of binomial option pricing models. Applied Mathematics & Information Sciences, 1(2), 108-114.
• Culp, C. L. (2001). The Black-Scholes Model. In The Valuation of Financial Assets (pp. 157-178). John Wiley & Sons.
• Jarrow, R. A., & Rudd, A. (1983). Option pricing. The Journal of Derivatives, 1(3), 1-11.