2015
DOI: 10.1137/15m1011731
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Affine LIBOR Models with Multiple Curves: Theory, Examples and Calibration

Abstract: Abstract. We introduce a multiple curve framework that combines tractable dynamics and semi-analytic pricing formulas with positive interest rates and basis spreads. Negatives rates and positive spreads can also be accommodated in this framework. The dynamics of OIS and LIBOR rates are specified following the methodology of the affine LIBOR models and are driven by the wide and flexible class of affine processes. The affine property is preserved under forward measures, which allows us to derive Fourier pricing… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
61
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 50 publications
(64 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
2
61
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In the former case, since the market only provides cap and not caplet volatilities, the calibration routine can be simplified by first bootstrapping a surface of caplet volatilities from the observed surface of cap volatilities, along the lines of [50]. Finally, as we show in [11], the multiple curve extension of affine Libor models proposed by [30] can be regarded as a discrete tenor version of our affine specification, so that the calibration techniques (with respect to caplet data) introduced in that paper can be also employed in our context.…”
Section: General Aspects Of Model Implementation and Calibrationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In the former case, since the market only provides cap and not caplet volatilities, the calibration routine can be simplified by first bootstrapping a surface of caplet volatilities from the observed surface of cap volatilities, along the lines of [50]. Finally, as we show in [11], the multiple curve extension of affine Libor models proposed by [30] can be regarded as a discrete tenor version of our affine specification, so that the calibration techniques (with respect to caplet data) introduced in that paper can be also employed in our context.…”
Section: General Aspects Of Model Implementation and Calibrationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From a modeling perspective, as in the case of classical interest rate models, most of the models proposed so far in the literature can be ascribed to three main mutually related families: short-rate approaches, Libor market models and HJM models. Referring to Section 6 for a detailed comparison of the different approaches, we just mention that multiple curve short rate models have been first introduced in [44], [43], [24] and, more recently, in [56] and [28], while Libor market models have been extended to the multiple curve setting in [51], [52] and, more recently, in [30]. In a related context, [53] propose a model for additive spreads which can be applied on top of any classical single-curve interest rate model.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While research on multi-curve interest rates models was and is very active, see, e.g., [5,6,15,[20][21][22], references therein and the other chapters of in this book, the construction of the initial interest rate curve, here f 0 (T ), naturally does not get a similar strong attention. However, a good curve construction is of high importance for practitioners, since it has a strong impact on the delta-hedge (that is, the first-order interest rate risk).…”
Section: Df (T T ) = μ(T T )Dt + σ(T T )Dw (T)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several spreads have emerged (more precisely widened) between certain interest rates (notably between overnight and unsecured Ibor rates) and these rates in turn differ from interest rates agreed in the context of repurchase agreements (repo rates). From a modeling perspective this resulted in the development of multi curve interest rate models as in Henrard (2007), Bianchetti (2010), Moreni and Pallavicini (2014), Mercurio (2010), Henrard (2014), Grbac et al (2015), Crépey et al (2015) Cuchiero et al (2016) and Cuchiero et al (2019) among others.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%