Gain, Loss, and Asset Pricing

Antonio E. Bernardo, Olivier Ledoit

Journal of Political Economy · 2000 · 497 citations · 23 references

Concepts

TL;DR

We develop an approach to asset pricing in incomplete markets that bridges the gap between model‑based pricing and no‑arbitrage pricing. The method strengthens the no‑arbitrage assumption by excluding investment opportunities whose attractiveness to a benchmark investor exceeds a threshold measured by the gain‑loss ratio, thereby restricting the admissible pricing kernels and enabling computation of call‑option price bounds in a Black‑Scholes economy without intermediate trading. Restricting the maximum gain‑loss ratio is equivalent to limiting the pricing‑kernel ratio, and varying this restriction yields price bounds that span from model‑based exact prices to the loose bounds implied by pure no‑arbitrage.

Abstract

We develop an approach to asset pricing in incomplete markets that bridges the gap between the two fundamental approaches in finance: model‐based pricing and pricing by no arbitrage. We strengthen the absence of arbtrage assumption by precluding investment opportunities whose attractiveness to a benchmark investor exceeds a specified threshold. In our framework, the attractiveness of an investment opportunity is measured by the gain‐loss ratio. We show that a restriction on the maximum gain‐loss ratio is equivalent to a restriction on the ratio of the maximum to minimum values of the pricing kernel. By limiting the maximum gainloss ratio, we can restrict the admissible set of pricing kernels, which in turn allows us to restrict the set of prices that can be assigned to assets. We illustrate our methodology by computing price bounds for call options in a Black‐Scholes economy without intermediate trading. When we vary the maximum permitted gainloss ratio, these bounds can range from the exact prices implied by a model‐based pricing approach to the loose price bounds implied by the no‐arbitrage approach.

References

23