Comparative Analysis of the Artificial Neural Networks Options Pricing Model Under Constant and Time-Variant Volatilities

IF 0.3 Q4 MATHEMATICS
H. Simiyu, A. Waititu, Jane Aduda Akinyi
{"title":"Comparative Analysis of the Artificial Neural Networks Options Pricing Model Under Constant and Time-Variant Volatilities","authors":"H. Simiyu, A. Waititu, Jane Aduda Akinyi","doi":"10.3844/JMSSP.2019.158.175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Option pricing using artificial neural networks (ANN) model while relaxing the assumption of constant volatility still remains a challenge. The conventional practice for pure ANN models has been to either model volatility using the very ANN model and have the model output fed as an input to the ANN option pricing model, or to make allowances for a large number of lags directly as inputs to the option pricing model with the belief that the ability of ANN to incorporate flexibility and redundancy creates a more robust model. This has been done in spite of a well-known fact-that financial time series data harbors a set of characteristics such as volatility clustering, leptokurtosis and leverage effects-features that ANNs in their pure forms have proved inadequate in capturing. Consequently, this study sought to follow the conventional methods employed by other studies and developed two pure ANN option pricing models-one with constant volatility and the other while violating the assumption of constant volatility with an aim of establishing whether significant differences exist in the outputs of the two models. The intraday data for the AAPL stock option for the period between December 2016 and March 2017 with 56,238 data points was used in validating the developed models. Results indicate that the ANN model (with varying volatility) makes better predictions than the model with constant volatility. However, the difference between the performance of the two models is not significant at 0.05 level of significance.","PeriodicalId":41981,"journal":{"name":"Jordan Journal of Mathematics and Statistics","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jordan Journal of Mathematics and Statistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3844/JMSSP.2019.158.175","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Option pricing using artificial neural networks (ANN) model while relaxing the assumption of constant volatility still remains a challenge. The conventional practice for pure ANN models has been to either model volatility using the very ANN model and have the model output fed as an input to the ANN option pricing model, or to make allowances for a large number of lags directly as inputs to the option pricing model with the belief that the ability of ANN to incorporate flexibility and redundancy creates a more robust model. This has been done in spite of a well-known fact-that financial time series data harbors a set of characteristics such as volatility clustering, leptokurtosis and leverage effects-features that ANNs in their pure forms have proved inadequate in capturing. Consequently, this study sought to follow the conventional methods employed by other studies and developed two pure ANN option pricing models-one with constant volatility and the other while violating the assumption of constant volatility with an aim of establishing whether significant differences exist in the outputs of the two models. The intraday data for the AAPL stock option for the period between December 2016 and March 2017 with 56,238 data points was used in validating the developed models. Results indicate that the ANN model (with varying volatility) makes better predictions than the model with constant volatility. However, the difference between the performance of the two models is not significant at 0.05 level of significance.
恒波动率与时变波动率下人工神经网络期权定价模型的比较分析
在放松恒定波动假设的同时,利用人工神经网络模型进行期权定价仍然是一个挑战。纯人工神经网络模型的传统做法是,要么使用人工神经网络模型来模拟波动率,并将模型输出作为人工神经网络期权定价模型的输入,要么允许大量滞后直接作为期权定价模型的输入,并相信人工神经网络结合灵活性和冗余的能力会创建一个更稳健的模型。尽管有一个众所周知的事实,即金融时间序列数据包含一系列特征,如波动性聚类、细峰态和杠杆效应,但事实证明,纯形式的人工神经网络在捕捉这些特征方面是不够的。因此,本研究试图遵循其他研究的传统方法,建立两个纯人工神经网络期权定价模型,一个是恒定波动率,另一个是违反恒定波动率假设,目的是确定两个模型的输出是否存在显著差异。2016年12月至2017年3月期间,苹果股票期权的盘中数据为56,238个数据点,用于验证所开发的模型。结果表明,变化波动率的人工神经网络模型比恒定波动率的模型具有更好的预测效果。但两种模型的性能差异在0.05显著水平上不显著。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
33.30%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信