Communications for Statistical Applications and Methods

The Korean Statistical Society (한국통계학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Evaluation of interest rate-linked DLSs

  • Received : 2021.07.08
  • Accepted : 2021.11.15
  • Published : 2022.01.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Derivative-linked securities (DLS) is a type of derivatives that offer an agreed return when the underlying asset price moves within a specified range by the maturity date. The underlying assets of DLS are diverse such as interest rates, exchange rates, crude oil, or gold. A German 10-year bond rate-linked DLS and a USD-GBP CMS rate-linked DLS have recently become a social issue in Korea due to a huge loss to investors. In this regard, this paper accounts for the payoff structure of these products and evaluates their prices and fair coupon rates as well as risk measures such as Value-at-Risk (VaR) and Tail-Value-at-Risk (TVaR). We would like to examine how risky these products were and whether or not their coupon rates were appropriate. We use Hull-White Model as the stochastic model for the underlying assets and Monte Carlo (MC) methods to obtain numerical results. The no-arbitrage prices of the German 10-year bond rate-linked DLS and the USD-GBP CMS rate-linked DLS at the center of the social issue turned out to be 0.9662% and 0.9355% of the original investment, respectively. Considering that Korea government bond rate for 2018 is about 2%, these values are quite low. The fair coupon rates that make the prices of DLS equal to the original investment are computed as 4.76% for the German 10-year bond rate-linked DLS and 7% for the USD-GBP CMS rate-linked DLS. Their actual coupon rates were 1.4% and 3.5%. The 95% VaR and TVaR of the loss for German 10-year bond rate-linked DLS are 37.30% and 64.45%, and those of the loss for USD-GBP CMS rate-linked DLS are 73.98% and 87.43% of the initial investment. Summing up the numerical results obtained, we could see that the DLS products of our interest were indeed quite unfavorable to individual investors.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea(NRF) grant funded by the Korea government(MIST) (No.2021R1F1A1048986).

References

  1. Ang A and Sherris M (1997). Interest rate risk management: Developments in interest rate term structure modeling for risk management and valuation of interest-rate-dependent cash flows'. North American Actuarial Journal, 1, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/10920277.1997.10595601
  2. Brace A, Gatarek D, and Musiela M (1997). The Market Model of Interest Rate Dynamics. Mathematical Finance, 7, 127-154. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9965.00028
  3. Broadie M, Glasserman P, and Kou S (1997). A continuity correction for discrete barrier options. Mathematical Finance, 7, 325-349. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9965.00035
  4. Cox JC, Ingersoll JE, and Ross SA (1985). A theory of the term structure of interest rates. Econometrica, 53, 385-407. https://doi.org/10.2307/1911242
  5. Gupta A and Subrahmanyam MG (2005). Pricing and hedging interest rate options: evidence from cap-floor markets. Journal of Banking and Finance, 29, 701-733. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4266(04)00054-8
  6. Henrard M (2009). Efficient Swaptions Price in Hull-White One Factor Model, arXiv 0901.1776v1.
  7. Ho TSY and Lee SB (1986). Term structure movements and pricing interest rate contingent claims. Journal of Finance, 41, 1011-1029. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1986.tb02528.x
  8. Hull J and White A (1990). Pricing interest rate derivative securities. Review of Financial Studies, 3, 573-592. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/3.4.573
  9. Hull J and White A (1996). Using Hull-White interest rate trees. Journal of Derivatives, 3, 26-36. https://doi.org/10.3905/jod.1996.407949
  10. Hull J (2011). Options, Futures, and Other Derivatives (8th ed), Pearson, London.
  11. Hull J, Sokol A, and White A (2014). Short rate joint measure models, Risk, October 2014, 59-63.
  12. Jeong D, Wee IS, and Kim JS (2010). An operator splitting method for pricing the ELS option. Journal of the Korean Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 14, 175-187. https://doi.org/10.12941/JKSIAM.2010.14.3.175
  13. Klugman SA, Panjer HH, and Willmot GE (2012). Loss Models: From Data to Decisions (4th ed), John Wiley & Sons, New York.
  14. Lee H, Ko B, and Song S (2019). Valuing step barrier options and their icicled variations. North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 49, 396-411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.najef.2018.09.001
  15. Lyuu YD (1998). Very fast algorithms for barrier option pricing and the ballot problem. Journal of Derivatives, 5, 68-79. https://doi.org/10.3905/jod.1998.407999
  16. Ostrovski V (2013). Efficient and exact simulation of the Hull-White model, SSRN Electronic Journal, 10.2139/ssrn.2304848.
  17. Rendleman RJ and Bartter BJ (1980). The pricing of options on debt securities. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 15, 11-24. https://doi.org/10.2307/2979016
  18. Vasicek OA (1977). An equilibrium characterization of the term structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 5, 177-188. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(77)90016-2
  19. Yasuoka T (2015). Interest-rate simulation under the real-world measure within a Gaussian HJM framework. Quantitative Finance Letters, 3, 10-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/21649502.2014.995213