<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">
 <record>
  <leader>     caa a22        4500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="001">463187555</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="003">CHVBK</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="005">20180406164858.0</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="007">cr unu---uuuuu</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="008">170326e20070101xx      s     000 0 eng  </controlfield>
  <datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">10.1007/s11156-006-0005-8</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">doi</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">(NATIONALLICENCE)springer-10.1007/s11156-006-0005-8</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Chidambaran</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">N.</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Rutgers Business School, Newark &amp; New Brunswick, Rutgers University, 07102, Newark, NJ, USA</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">Density estimation through quasi-analytic Monte-Carlo simulation: Options arbitrage with transactions costs</subfield>
   <subfield code="h">[Elektronische Daten]</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">[N. Chidambaran]</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1="3" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Discretely rebalanced options arbitrage strategies in the presence of transaction costs have path dependent returns that are difficult to model analytically. I instead use a quasi-analytic procedure that combines the computational efficiency of analytical solutions with the flexibility of simulations. The central feature is the estimation of the distribution of returns of the arbitrage strategy by mapping simulated returns percentiles and the input parameter set. Using the estimated density, I evaluate the tradeoff between transaction costs and risk exposure under generalized transaction costs structures that includes bid-ask spread and brokerage commission. I show that the optimal strategy depends on transaction costs, volatility, and option moneyness. Strategies such as rebalancing when the hedge ratio changes by 0.25, balances transaction costs and risk exposure, and can be optimal.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="540" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, 2006</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Rebalancing</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Discrete</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Frequency</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Options arbitrage</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Density estimation</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Transactions cost</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="t">Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Kluwer Academic Publishers-Plenum Publishers; http://www.springer-ny.com</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">28/1(2007-01-01), 101-122</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">0924-865X</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">28:1&lt;101</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">2007</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">28</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">11156</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11156-006-0005-8</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="908" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="D">1</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">research-article</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">jats</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">856</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">40</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11156-006-0005-8</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">100</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">1-</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">Chidambaran</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">N.</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Rutgers Business School, Newark &amp; New Brunswick, Rutgers University, 07102, Newark, NJ, USA</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">773</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">0-</subfield>
   <subfield code="t">Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Kluwer Academic Publishers-Plenum Publishers; http://www.springer-ny.com</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">28/1(2007-01-01), 101-122</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">0924-865X</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">28:1&lt;101</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">2007</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">28</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">11156</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="900" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Metadata rights reserved</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">Springer special CC-BY-NC licence</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="898" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">BK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">XK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">XK010000</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="949" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="F">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">NL-springer</subfield>
  </datafield>
 </record>
</collection>
