The main result of this paper is a collateralized counterparty valuation adjusted pricing equation, which allows to price a deal while taking into account credit and debit valuation adjustments (CVA, DVA) along with margining and funding costs, all in a consistent way. Funding risk breaks the bilateral nature of the valuation formula. We find that the equation has a recursive form, making the introduction of a purely additive funding valuation adjustment (FVA) difficult. Yet, we can cast the pricing equation into a set of iterative relationships which can be solved by means of standard least-square Monte Carlo techniques. As a consequence, we find that identifying funding costs and debit valuation adjustments is not tenable in general, contrary to what has been suggested in the literature in simple cases. The assumptions under which funding costs vanish are a very special case of the more general theory.We define a comprehensive framework that allows us to derive earlier results on funding or counterparty risk as a special case, although our framework is more than the sum of such special cases. We derive the general pricing equation by resorting to a riskneutral approach where the new types of risks are included by modifying the payout cash flows. We consider realistic settings and include in our models the common market practices suggested by ISDA documentation, without assuming restrictive constraints on margining procedures and close-out netting rules. In particular, we allow for asymmetric collateral and funding rates, and exogenous liquidity policies and hedging strategies. Re-hypothecation liquidity risk and close-out amount evaluation issues are also covered. Finally, relevant examples of non-trivial settings illustrate how to derive known facts about discounting curves from a robust general framework and without resorting to ad hoc hypotheses.

We develop an arbitrage‐free valuation framework for bilateral counterparty risk, where collateral is included with possible rehypothecation. We show that the adjustment is given by the sum of two option payoff terms, where each term depends on the netted exposure, i.e., the difference between the on‐default exposure and the predefault collateral account. We then specialize our analysis to credit default swaps (CDS) as underlying portfolios, and construct a numerical scheme to evaluate the adjustment under a doubly stochastic default framework. In particular, we show that for CDS contracts a perfect collateralization cannot be achieved, even under continuous collateralization, if the reference entity’s and counterparty’s default times are dependent. The impact of rehypothecation, collateral margining frequency, and default correlation‐induced contagion is illustrated with numerical examples.

This paper generalizes the framework for arbitrage-free valuation of bilateral counterparty risk to the case where collateral is included, with possible re-hypotecation. We analyze how the payout of claims is modified when collateral margining is included in agreement with current ISDA documentation. We then specialize our analysis to interestrate swaps as underlying portfolio, and allow for mutual dependences between the default times of the investor and the counterparty and the underlying portfolio risk factors. We use arbitrage-free stochastic dynamical models, including also the effect of interest rate and credit spread volatilities. The impact of re-hypotecation, of collateral margining frequency and of dependencies on the bilateral counterparty risk adjustment is illustrated with a numerical example. JEL classification code: G13.

In this paper we describe how to include funding and margining costs into a risk-neutral pricing framework for counterparty credit risk. We consider realistic settings and we include in our models the common market practices suggested by the ISDA documentation without assuming restrictive constraints on margining procedures and close-out netting rules. In particular, we allow for asymmetric collateral and funding rates, and exogenous liquidity policies and hedging strategies. Re-hypothecation liquidity risk and close-out amount evaluation issues are also covered.We define a comprehensive pricing framework which allows us to derive earlier results on funding or counterparty risk. Some relevant examples illustrate the non trivial settings needed to derive known facts about discounting curves by starting from a general framework and without resorting to ad hoc hypotheses.Our main result is a bilateral collateralized counterparty valuation adjusted pricing equation, which allows to price a deal while taking into account credit and debt valuation adjustments along with margining and funding costs in a coherent way. We find that the equation has a recursive form, making the introduction of an additive funding valuation adjustment difficult. Yet, we can cast the pricing equation into a set of iterative relationships which can be solved by means of standard least-square Monte Carlo techniques.

We present a dialogue on Funding Costs and Counterparty Credit Risk modeling, inclusive of collateral, wrong way risk, gap risk and possible Central Clearing implementation through CCPs. This framework is important following the fact that derivatives valuation and risk analysis has moved from exotic derivatives managed on simple single asset classes to simple derivatives embedding the new or previously neglected types of complex and interconnected nonlinear risks we address here. This dialogue is the continuation of the "Counterparty Risk, Collateral and Funding FAQ" by Brigo (2011). In this dialogue we focus more on funding costs for the hedging strategy of a portfolio of trades, on the non-linearities emerging from assuming borrowing and lending rates to be different, on the resulting aggregation-dependent valuation process and its operational challenges, on the implications of the onset of central clearing, on the macro and micro effects on valuation and risk of the onset of CCPs, on initial and variation margins impact on valuation, and on multiple discount curves. Through questions and answers (Q&A) between a senior expert and a junior colleague, and by referring to the growing body of literature on the subject, we present a unified view of valuation (and risk) that takes all such aspects into account. * This dialogue, available at damianobrigo.it, SSRN.com and arXiv.org, is second in a series started with "Counterparty Risk, Collateral and Funding FAQ", see