Smooth pasting as rate of return equalization
Introduction
The smooth pasting (or high-contact) condition associated with option and real options decisions has generated considerable interest because of the optimality of early exercise. It is well known that smooth pasting is a first-order condition for optimum; proposed by Samuelson (1965), proven by Merton (1973), discussed by Dumas (1991) and several others. Brekke and Øksendal (1991) also show that the condition is sufficient under weak constraints. Nonetheless, smooth pasting remains somewhat mysterious to both economists and practitioners and it is apparently not very useful for many except theorists. The popular real options introduction by Dixit and Pindyck (1994) saves the discussion of smooth pasting for a quite technical appendix, and no simple rules of thumb seem to exist for practitioners.
Dixit et al. (1999) bridged some of the gap between theory and practice using an analogy between optimal exercise of investment options of the McDonald and Siegel (1986) type and application of standard market power models. Optimal investment can be characterized by an elasticity-based premium, analogous to the markup price chosen by a profit-maximizing monopolist.
We provide another, more intuitive and natural, explanation of the phenomenon; that of rate of return equalization between the option and its levered payoff. This allows a larger audience to appreciate and implement smooth pasting techniques in a wider variety of situations. We also relate results to the elasticity-based rules introduced by Dixit et al. (1999) and Sødal (1998). The results are illustrated here using geometric Brownian motion but are also valid for other diffusions.
Section snippets
Rates of return
Geometric Brownian diffusions can be written in the Risk Neutral Q or Real World P; having drift r − δ or μ − δ, respectively (r, δ, μ, σ represent the continuous risk free, dividend, project return and volatility rates)
Local changes dC in the call price C (puts can also be analyzed) are given by the Ito expansion, furthermore no arbitrage requires that Risk Neutral expectations EQ[dC] of these changes must be risk free (or the hedged position yields the risk
Smooth pasting
The rate of return can be investigated at the point of optimal early call exercise S¯ (where S¯ > X, the exercise price). The two conditions necessary for this are value matching (payoff compensates for option termination) and smooth pasting (slope equality between option and payoff functions)
Thus at the critical exercise boundary S = S¯ the call return rC iswhich is also rPO, the return rate of the levered payoff S¯ − X (as a fraction
Relationship to other approaches
The result that the return on the option equates the return on the net payoff is closely related to other findings on smooth pasting. Dixit et al. (1999) argues that the optimal exercise of a perpetual call option consists of maximizing the expected net present valuewhere T is the (random) first-hitting time from the current value of the project, S, up to the value S¯ at which the option is exercised. The objective is to maximize the expected,
Dividend yields and an analytic approximation
The dividend yield δ is important since when zero, American calls become zero dividend Black Scholes calls; early exercise, smooth pasting and rate of return equalization are all ruled out (r is key for the put). Without an opportunity cost of waiting, early exercise never occurs. Thus it is important to understand the yield, δ in determining option returns, since without it equalization is impossible.
The fractional amounts of stock and borrowing required in the replicating portfolio are often
Intuition and implications
The results above have economic implications and intuition, particularly for real option situations where it is difficult to evaluate the option value function explicitly. Optimal early exercise of real options is driven by two conditions, no loss (gain) of value on exercise and rate of return equalization.
This provides a second, more intuitive, condition to managers other than smooth pasting, which may be difficult to evaluate for some pricing problems. Do managers think that the rate of return
References (12)
Super contact and related optimality conditions
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control
(1991)- et al.
Efficient analytic approximation of American option values
Journal of Finance
(1987) - et al.
The pricing of options and corporate liabilities
Journal of Political Economy
(1973) - et al.
The high contact principle as a sufficiency condition for optimal stopping
- et al.
Investment Under Uncertainty
(1994) - et al.
A markup interpretation of optimal investment rules
Economic Journal
(1999)
Cited by (28)
Secured and unsecured debt in creditor-friendly bankruptcy
2023, Journal of Corporate FinanceReal options, risk aversion and markets: A corporate finance perspective
2022, Journal of Corporate FinanceCitation Excerpt :Their pricing rules however do not originate from within an equilibrium framework and are not presented through a pricing kernel. Our paper builds on the CAPM and was originally inspired by the paper of Shackleton and Sodal (2005), which also studies real options in the CAPM context. Shackleton and Sodal show that within a one-dimensional complete market setting, exercising is optimal when the rate of return of the real option value is the same as the return of a certain leveraged portfolio where sunk costs are financed through a loan at the riskless rate and investment is into a risky portfolio which has the same CAPM beta as the project.
Leverage, uncertainty and investment decisions
2020, Economics LettersIrreversibility, mean reversion, and investment timing
2013, Economic ModellingWatchfully waiting: Medical intervention as an optimal investment decision
2012, Journal of Health EconomicsOptimal capital accumulation under price uncertainty and costly reversibility
2011, Journal of Economic Dynamics and ControlCitation Excerpt :It is also worth pointing out that according to the results of Theorem 3.1 the value function satisfies the smooth pasting condition in both cases. As was established in Shackleton and Sødal (2005), this guarantees the equalization of the rate of return of the firm both prior and after the irreversible decision has been exercised (see also Dias and Shackleton, 2011). It is worth emphasizing that the conclusions of Theorem 4.1 are important from the point of view of other related stochastic control problems as well.
- 1
Tel.: +47 38141522.