Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T21:21:21.514Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Uniform approximation of the Cox-Ingersoll-Ross process

Part of: Probabilistic methods, simulation and stochastic differential equations Stochastic analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2016

Grigori N. Milstein  and
John Schoenmakers
Grigori N. Milstein*
Affiliation:
Ural Federal University
John Schoenmakers*
Affiliation:
Weierstrass Institute for Applied Analysis and Stochastics
*
∗ Postal address: Ural Federal University, Lenin Str. 51, 620083 Ekaterinburg, Russia.
∗∗ Postal address: Weierstrass Institute for Applied Analysis and Stochastics, Mohrenstrasse 39, 10117 Berlin, Germany. Email address: schoenma@wias-berlin.de
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The Doss-Sussmann (DS) approach is used for uniform simulation of the Cox-Ingersoll-Ross (CIR) process. The DS formalism allows us to express trajectories of the CIR process through solutions of some ordinary differential equation (ODE) depending on realizations of a Wiener process involved. By simulating the first-passage times of the increments of the Wiener process to the boundary of an interval and solving the ODE, we uniformly approximate the trajectories of the CIR process. In this respect special attention is payed to simulation of trajectories near 0. From a conceptual point of view the proposed method gives a better quality of approximation (from a pathwise point of view) than standard, even exact, simulation of the stochastic differential equation at some deterministic time grid.

Keywords

Cox-Ingersoll-Ross processDoss-Sussmann formalismBessel functionconfluent hypergeometric equation

MSC classification

Primary: 65C30: Stochastic differential and integral equations
Secondary: 60H35: Computational methods for stochastic equations
Type
General Applied Probability
Information
Advances in Applied Probability , Volume 47 , Issue 4 , December 2015 , pp. 1132 - 1156
Copyright
Copyright © Applied Probability Trust 2015 

References

Alfonsi, A. (2005). On the discretization schemes for the CIR (and Bessel squared) processes. Monte Carlo Methods Appl. 11, 355–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alfonsi, A. (2010). High order discretization schemes for the CIR process: application to affine term structure and Heston models. Math. Comput. 79, 209–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, L. (2008). Simple and efficient simulation of the Heston stochastic volatility model. J. Comput. Finance 11, 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bateman, H. and Erdélyi, A. (1953). Higher Transcendental Functions. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Broadie, M. and Kaya, Ö. (2006). Exact simulation of stochastic volatility and other affine jump diffusion processes. Operat. Res. 54, 217–231.Google Scholar
Cox, J. C., Ingersoll, J. E. Jr. and Ross, S. A. (1985). A theory of the term structure of interest rates. Econometrica 53, 385–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dereich, S., Neuenkirch, A. and Szpruch, L. (2012). An Euler-type method for the strong approximation of the Cox–Ingersoll–Ross process. Proc. R. Soc. London A 468, 1105–1115.Google Scholar
Doss, H. (1977). Liens entre équations différentielles stochastiques et ordinaires. Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Sect. B (N.S.) 13, 99–125.Google Scholar
Glasserman, P. (2004). Monte Carlo Methods in Financial Engineering. Springer, New York.Google Scholar
Göing-Jaeschke, A. and Yor, M. (2003). A survey on some generalizations of Bessel processes. Bernoulli 9, 313–349.Google Scholar
Hartman, P. (1964). Ordinary Differential Equations. John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
Heston, S. L. (1993). A closed-form solution for options with stochastic volatility with applications to bond and currency options. Rev. Financial Studies 6, 327–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higham, D. J. and Mao, X. (2005). Convergence of Monte Carlo simulations involving the mean-reverting square root process. J. Comp. Finance 8, 35–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higham, D. J., Mao, X. and Stuart, A. M. (2002). Strong convergence of Euler-type methods for nonlinear stochastic differential equations. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 40, 1041–1063.Google Scholar
Ikeda, N. and Watanabe, S. (1981). Stochastic Differential Equations and Diffusion Processes. North-Holland, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Karatzas, I. and Shreve, S. E. (1991). Brownian Motion and Stochastic Calculus, 2nd edn. Springer, New York.Google Scholar
Milstein, G. N. and Schoenmakers, J. G. M. (2015). Uniform approximation of the CIR process via exact simulation at random times. Preprint. WIAS preprint no. 2113, ISSN 2198-9855.Google Scholar
Milstein, G. N. and Tretyakov, M. V. (2004). Stochastic Numerics for Mathematical Physics. Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
Milstein, G. N. and Tretyakov, M. V. (2005). Numerical analysis of Monte Carlo evaluation of Greeks by finite differences. J. Comp. Finance 8, 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Revuz, D. and Yor, M. (1991). Continuous Martingales and Brownian Motion. Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
Rogers, L. C. G. and Williams, D. (1987). Diffusions, Markov Processes, and Martingales, Vol. 2, Itô Calculus. John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
Sussmann, H. J. (1978). On the gap between deterministic and stochastic ordinary differential equations. Ann. Prob. 6, 19–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar