Choice of model in convertible valuation—A case study

Sorensson, Tomas

doi:10.1016/0305-0483(91)90038-u

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These examples are, in an overwhelming majority, valuations of contingent claims with only one underlying state variable (e.g., see Geske and Shastri (1985), Jennergren and S6rensson (1991), McConnel and Schwartz (1986) or Schwartz (1977)). During the last two decades, however, there has been an explosion of new exotic financial instruments.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experiences in the pricing of trivariate contingent claims with finite difference methods on a massively parallel computer

Ekvall

1994

Comput Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.Finite difference schemes have proved to be very flexible numerical methods for the pricing of contingent claims with one and two underlying state variables. This flexibility and the steady stream of new complex financial instruments imply that finite difference schemes for the valuation of contingent claims with three underlying state variables can supposedly be very useful. In this paper, two such schemes are developed and tested. For practical purposes, numerical valuation of contingent claims with three underlying state variables by means of finite difference methods is probably too laborious computationally to be performed on a single processor computer. Many calculations can, however, be performed in parallel. Therefore, the methods are well suited to be executed on a massively parallel computer, like the Connection Machine CM-200, which is used in this paper. The accuracy of the schemes proposed in this paper suggests that valuation of multivariate contingent claims with the help of finite difference methods on a massively parallel computer can be a useful approach for academics as well as practitioners.

show abstract