The Black-Scholes Model
Options, Futures and Derivative Securities
Spring 2025
The Replicating Portfolio Approach
- Consider a derivative V written on a non-dividend paying stock S with maturity T that pays F(S) at maturity.
- The binomial model implies that the derivative can be replicated by buying (or selling) N_{S, t} units of the stock and N_{B, t} units of a bond with face value K and maturity T, respectively.
- If we call V the value of such replicating portfolio, we have that at time t < T:
V_{t} = N_{S, t} S_{t} + N_{B, t} B_{t}.
- In order to replicate the derivative, we want to make sure that the value of the portfolio at time t = T is equal to the payoff of the derivative, that is:
V_{T} = H_{T}
- For example, for a European call option H_{T} = \max(S_{T} - K, 0).
The Replicating Portfolio is Self-Financing
- At time t+\Delta t, the value of the replicating portfolio is:
V_{t + \Delta t} = N_{S, t} S_{t + \Delta t} + N_{B, t} B_{t + \Delta t},
which implies that:
\Delta V_{t} = N_{S, t} \Delta S_{t} + N_{B, t} \Delta B_{t}.
- The new composition of the portfolio at time t+\Delta t is chosen such that:
V_{t + \Delta t} = N_{S, t} S_{t + \Delta t} + N_{B, t} B_{t + \Delta t} = N_{S, t + \Delta t} S_{t + \Delta t} + N_{B, t + \Delta t} B_{t + \Delta t}
which implies no matter what you do, you keep the value of the replicating portfolio unchanged, i.e., the portfolio is self-financing.
Replication in Continuous-Time
- As \Delta t \rightarrow 0, we have that:
\begin{align*}
dV & = N_{S} dS + N_{B} dB \\
& = N_{S} dS + N_{B} (r B dt) \\
& = N_{S} dS + (N_{B} B) r dt \\
\end{align*}
- And since V = N_{S} S + N_{B} B \Rightarrow N_{B} B = V - N_{S} S, we can conclude that:
dV = r (V - N_{S} S) dt + N_{S} dS
Applying Ito’s Lemma
- We will assume for the moment that V is a smooth function of S and t, that is, V = V(S,t).
- Then, Ito’s Lemma implies that:
\begin{align*}
dV
& = \frac{\partial V}{\partial S} dS + \frac{1}{2} \frac{\partial^{2} V}{\partial S^{2}} (dS)^{2} + \frac{\partial V}{\partial t} dt \\
& = \left(\frac{1}{2} \sigma^{2} S^{2} \frac{\partial^{2} V}{\partial S^{2}} + \frac{\partial V}{\partial t}\right) dt + \frac{\partial V}{\partial S} dS
\end{align*}
- Therefore:
\left(\frac{1}{2} \sigma^{2} S^{2} \frac{\partial^{2} V}{\partial S^{2}} + \frac{\partial V}{\partial t}\right) dt + \textcolor{blue}{\frac{\partial V}{\partial S} dS} = r (V - N_{S} S) dt + \textcolor{blue}{N_{S} dS}
The Delta of the Derivative
- First, the previous equation shows that replication works if and only if:
N_{S} = \frac{\partial V}{\partial S}
- This is a fundamental relationship in derivatives pricing.
- It states that the number of shares needed to replicate the derivative is equal its sensitivity to the underlying asset.
- We call this quantity the delta (\Delta) of the derivative.
- Also, note that by choosing N_{S} equal to the delta of the derivative, it really does not matter what drift we have for the stock.
- We will use this fact in a moment to define the risk-neutral probabilities in continuous-time.
The Fundamental Partial Differential Equation (PDE)
- Second, it must be the case that:
\frac{1}{2} \sigma^{2} S^{2} \frac{\partial^{2} V}{\partial S^{2}} + \frac{\partial V}{\partial t} = r \left(V - S \frac{\partial V}{\partial S}\right)
- Therefore:
\frac{\partial V}{\partial t} + \frac{1}{2} \sigma^{2} S^{2} \frac{\partial^{2} V}{\partial S^{2}} + r S \frac{\partial V}{\partial S} - r V = 0
subject to V_{T} = H_{T}.
- This is the celebrated Black-Scholes partial differential equation (PDE) which allowed the authors to compute their influential formula in 1973!
- Solving PDEs, in general, is very hard so we will resort to a different approach to price European call and put options.
The Risk-Neutral Pricing Approach
- The replicating approach is insensitive to the drift of the stock.
- As a matter of fact, the drift might even change based on whose thinking about the asset.
- Since the previous reasoning is silent about the drift and the type of investor pricing the asset, we can assume in our reasoning that all investors are .
- Even if this is not true in real markets, such assumption would not affect of the replicating-portfolio argument.
A Risk-Neutral World
- In a world populated by risk-neutral investors, the price today of any non-dividend paying asset is equal to the expected payoff at maturity discounted at the risk-free rate, that is:
X = e^{-rT} \operatorname{E}^{*}(X_{T})
- Therefore, the drift of a non-dividend paying stock is the risk-free rate:
dS = r S dt + \sigma S dW^{*}
- The same is true for all derivatives written on the stock:
dV = \underbrace{\left(r S \frac{\partial V}{\partial S} + \frac{1}{2} \sigma^{2} S^{2} \frac{\partial^{2} V}{\partial S^{2}} + \frac{\partial V}{\partial t}\right)}_{=rV} dt + \left(\sigma S \frac{\partial V}{\partial S}\right) dW^{*}
- We recover the same equation as before!
Pricing a European Call Option
- Consider a European call option written on a non-dividend paying stock with maturity T and strike price K.
- The price of the call should then be:
\begin{align*}
C & = e^{-r T} \operatorname{E}\left((S_{T} - K) \large\mathbb{1}_{\{S_{T} > K\}} \right) \\
& = e^{-r T} \operatorname{E}\left(S_{T} \large\mathbb{1}_{\{S_{T} > K\}} \right) - e^{-r T} \operatorname{E}\left(K \large\mathbb{1}_{\{S_{T} > K\}} \right) \\
& = S \mathop{\Phi}(d_{1}) - K e^{-r T} \mathop{\Phi}(d_{2})
\end{align*}
where
\begin{align*}
d_{1} & = \frac{\ln(S/K) + (r + \frac{1}{2} \sigma^{2}) T}{\sigma \sqrt{T}} \\
d_{2} & = d_{1} - \sigma \sqrt{T}
\end{align*}
Call Premium vs. Spot Price
![]()
The figure plots the Black-Scholes call premium C(S) if r=0.05, \sigma=0.45, T=1 and K=100. It also shows the call option payoff given by \max(S - K, 0) and the lower bound for a European call given by \max(S - K e^{-r T}, 0).
Reconciling Both Pricing Approaches
- It is tedious but straightforward to prove that:
\begin{equation}
N_{S} = \frac{\partial C}{\partial S} = \mathop{\Phi}(d_{1})
\end{equation}
\tag{1}
- Also, we have that for a European call option:
C = N_{S} S + N_{B} B = S \mathop{\Phi}(d_{1}) - K e^{-r T} \mathop{\Phi}(d_{2})
which because of implies that:
N_{B} = -\mathop{\Phi}(d_{2})
Call Delta
![]()
The figure plots the Black-Scholes call premium C(S) where r = 0.05, \sigma = 0.45, T = 1 and K = 100, and shows the tangent line at S = 100 whose slope coefficient is the delta of the call given by \mathop{\Phi}(d_{1}).
Hedging the Call
- Our analysis so far implies that to replicate a European call option, we need to go \mathop{\Phi}(d_{1}) shares of stock and \mathop{\Phi}(d_{2}) risk-free bonds with face value K and maturity T.
- The call is therefore a levered position in the underlying asset whose delta is given by \mathop{\Phi}(d_{1}).
- Since 0<\mathop{\Phi}(d_{1})<1, the delta of the call for a non-dividend paying asset is bounded between 0 and 1.
- As we saw in the previous slide, for a given spot price, the delta of the call represents the slope coefficient of the tangency line at that point.
Pricing a European Put Option
- Consider now a European put option with the same characteristics as the previous call.
- According to put-call parity, it must be the case that: `
C - P = S - K e^{-r T}
- Hence,
\begin{align*}
P & = C - (S - K e^{-rT}) \\
& = S \mathop{\Phi}(d_{1}) - K e^{-r T} \mathop{\Phi}(d_{2}) - (S - K e^{-rT}) \\
& = K e^{-r T} (1 - \mathop{\Phi}(d_{2})) - S (1 - \mathop{\Phi}(d_{1})) \\
& = K e^{-r T} \mathop{\Phi}(-d_{2}) - S \mathop{\Phi}(-d_{1})
\end{align*}
Put Premium vs. Spot Price
![]()
The figure plots the Black-Scholes put premium P(S) if r = 0.05, \sigma = 0.45, T = 1 and K = 100. It also shows the put option payoff given by \max(K - S, 0) and the lower bound for a European put given by \max(K e^{-r T} - S, 0).
Put Delta
![]()
The figure plots the Black-Scholes put premium P(S) where r = 0.05, \sigma = 0.45, T = 1 and K = 100, and shows the tangent line at S = 100 whose slope coefficient is the delta of the put given by -\mathop{\Phi}(-d_{1}) = \mathop{\Phi}(d_{1}) - 1.
Hedging the Put
- We can use put-call parity to compute N_{S} for the put:
N_{S} = \frac{\partial P}{\partial S} = \frac{\partial (C - S + K e^{-rT})}{\partial S} = \mathop{\Phi}(d_{1}) - 1 = -\mathop{\Phi}(-d_{1}) < 0
- The fact that we also have P = N_{S} S + N_{B} B also implies that:
N_{B} = \mathop{\Phi}(-d_{2}) > 0
- Therefore, to replicate a European put option, we need to go \mathop{\Phi}(-d_{1}) shares of stock and \mathop{\Phi}(-d_{2}) risk-free bonds with face value K and maturity T.
Finishing In-The-Money
- Remember that we showed that:
\operatorname{P}(S_{T} > K) = \operatorname{E}\left(\large\mathbb{1}_{\{S_{T} > K\}}\right) = \mathop{\Phi}(d_{2})
which also implies that:
\operatorname{P}(S_{T} < K) = 1 - \operatorname{P}(S_{T} > K) = 1 - \mathop{\Phi}(d_{2}) = \mathop{\Phi}(-d_{2})
- Therefore, the risk-neutral probability that the call will expire in-the-money is equal to \mathop{\Phi}(d_{2}) whereas the risk-neutral probability that the put finishes in-the-money is given by \mathop{\Phi}(-d_{2}).
Example 1 Consider a non-dividend paying stock that currently trades for $100. The risk-free rate is 4% per year, continuously compounded and constant for all maturities. The instantaneous volatility of returns is 25% per year. Consider at-the-money call and put options written on the stock with maturity 9 months. Then,
\begin{align*}
d_{1} & = \frac{\ln(100/100) + (0.04 + 0.5(0.25)^{2})(0.75)}{0.25\sqrt{0.75}} = 0.2468 \\
d_{2} & = 0.2468 - 0.25\sqrt{0.75} = 0.0303
\end{align*}
Therefore, \mathop{\Phi}(d_{1}) = 0.5975 and \mathop{\Phi}(d_{2}) = 0.5121, which implies that:
\begin{align*}
C & = 100(0.5975) - 100e^{-0.04(0.75)}(0.5121) = \$10.05 \\
P & = 100e^{-0.04(0.75)}(1 - 0.5121) - 100(1 - 0.5975) = \$7.10
\end{align*}
The Impact of Volatility
![]()
The figure shows the Black-Scholes call premium for different levels of volatility where r = 0.05, T = 1 and K = 100. The dashed line represents the lower bound for the European call and the solid black line is the call payoff at maturity.
Option Premium vs. Volatility
- One of the most important determinants of option prices in the Black-Scholes model is volatility.
- We can show that for European call and put options:
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial C}{\partial \sigma} = \frac{\partial P}{\partial \sigma} = S \mathop{\Phi^{'}}(d_{1}) \sqrt{T} > 0
\end{equation}
\tag{2}
- Hence, both European call and put options increase in value as volatility increases.
- Moreover, this also implies that there is a one-on-one relationship between option value and volatility, i.e., we can use volatility to quote prices and vice-versa.
- The volatility that matches the observed price of an option is called the implied volatility.
Example 2 Consider a non-dividend paying stock that currently trades for $100. The risk-free rate is 5% per year, continuously compounded and constant for all maturities. An ATM European call option written on the stock with maturity 12 months trades for $16. We can check that \sigma=34.66\% prices the call correctly:
\begin{align*}
d_{1} & = \frac{\ln(100/100) + (0.05 + 0.5(0.3466)^{2})(1)}{0.3466\sqrt{1}} = 0.3176 \\
d_{2} & = 0.3358 - 0.3466\sqrt{1} = -0.0290 \\
\end{align*}
Therefore, \mathop{\Phi}(d_{1}) = 0.6246 and \mathop{\Phi}(d_{2}) = 0.4884, which implies that
C = 100(0.6246) - 100e^{-0.05(1)}(0.4884) = \$16.00
How Can We Compute the Implied Volatility?
- Unfortunately, it is not possible to solve analytically for the implied volatility.
- For a call option, for example, it involves solving numerically for \sigma:
C = C(\sigma_{\mathit{imp}})
- Alternatively, we could tabulate the price of a call option for different values of \sigma (using the same parameters as the previous example):
C |
5.28 |
6.80 |
8.59 |
10.45 |
12.34 |
14.23 |
16.13 |
18.02 |
- We can see that \sigma=35\% gives a price of \$16.13 for the call, which is quite close to the true implied volatility of 34.66%.
Implied Volatility for a Call Option
![]()
The figure shows the Black-Scholes call premium C(\sigma) as a function of \sigma where S=100, r = 0.05, T = 1 and K = 100. We can see that for C = \$16 the corresponding volatility is approximately 35%.