Mfcttrf

Rent contract say that pets are not allowed. Possible repercussions if bringing the pet anyway?

What are the occurences of total war in the Native Americans?

Anyone else seeing white rings in the Undead parish?

Retroactively modifying humans for Earth?

Can an Arcane Focus be embedded in one's body?

How were medieval castles built in swamps or marshes without draining them?

Joining lists with same elements

What is the loud noise of a helicopter when the rotors are not yet moving?

Movie where people enter a church but find they can't leave, not in English

Why is "-ber" the suffix of the last four months of the year?

Light Themed Cryptic

I don't have the theoretical background in my PhD topic. I can't justify getting the degree

Expressing the act of drawing

Could this kind of inaccurate sacrifice be countered?

How do I feed my black hole?

Discussing work with supervisor in an invited dinner with his family

Who was the most successful German spy against Great Britain in WWII, from the contemporary German perspective?

Should I stick with American terminology in my English set young adult book?

What is a natural problem in theory of computation?

Is one hour layover sufficient at Singapore Changi Airport (Indian citizen travelling from US to India)?

Duplicate instruments in unison in an orchestra

Why can't I access the 'name' of an object when looping through the scene's objects?

Talk interpreter

What stops you from using fixed income in developing countries?

Why should a self-financing strategy be previsible?

Why is there no “meta-model”?Liquidity detection based strategy in HFThow to measure a event driven strategy?Do you think this strategy will work?Writing an Options Strategy BacktesterOption Strategy: Python Implementation AdviceStrategy for implied volatilityStrategy if dividend is lower than expected

.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;

3

$begingroup$

There is an amazing answer on mathematics stackexchange which defines what a self-financing strategy is—both in the discrete and continuous sense. Please check out this short answer to better understand my question.

I have a short follow-up question: Baxter and Rennie—while defining a self-financing strategy—requires the portfolio process to be previsible. The way the answer in the link arrives at the definition of self-financing, which is also the way I derive it, doesn't seem to require previsiblilty.

We are holding $(Delta_t, E_t)$ over $t$ to $t+1$, which will be know to us at time $t$, even if the process is just adapted; previsiblilty is not required to know $(Delta_t, E_t)$ at time $t$.

Extra for those who are interested:
As always, things get muddier in the continuous time setting.

I think I have an intuition for what previsibility means when dealing with continuous processes: if a process $phi$ is left-continuous, then we can know it's value $phi(t)$ at a particular time $t$ with arbitrary precision by pushing the inputs close enough to $t$ from below, without actually having to reach $t$; this makes the value of $phi(t)$ predictable with information upto but not including time $t$.

But it isn't clear to me why this previsibility is required while arriving at a sensible definition of a self-financing strategy —as the answer in the link succeeds to do.

strategy

share|improve this question

edited 3 hours ago

Dhruv Gupta

asked 8 hours ago

Dhruv GuptaDhruv Gupta

11666 bronze badges

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

3

$begingroup$

There is an amazing answer on mathematics stackexchange which defines what a self-financing strategy is—both in the discrete and continuous sense. Please check out this short answer to better understand my question.

I have a short follow-up question: Baxter and Rennie—while defining a self-financing strategy—requires the portfolio process to be previsible. The way the answer in the link arrives at the definition of self-financing, which is also the way I derive it, doesn't seem to require previsiblilty.

We are holding $(Delta_t, E_t)$ over $t$ to $t+1$, which will be know to us at time $t$, even if the process is just adapted; previsiblilty is not required to know $(Delta_t, E_t)$ at time $t$.

Extra for those who are interested:
As always, things get muddier in the continuous time setting.

I think I have an intuition for what previsibility means when dealing with continuous processes: if a process $phi$ is left-continuous, then we can know it's value $phi(t)$ at a particular time $t$ with arbitrary precision by pushing the inputs close enough to $t$ from below, without actually having to reach $t$; this makes the value of $phi(t)$ predictable with information upto but not including time $t$.

But it isn't clear to me why this previsibility is required while arriving at a sensible definition of a self-financing strategy —as the answer in the link succeeds to do.

strategy

share|improve this question

edited 3 hours ago

Dhruv Gupta

asked 8 hours ago

Dhruv GuptaDhruv Gupta

11666 bronze badges

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

There is an amazing answer on mathematics stackexchange which defines what a self-financing strategy is—both in the discrete and continuous sense. Please check out this short answer to better understand my question.

I have a short follow-up question: Baxter and Rennie—while defining a self-financing strategy—requires the portfolio process to be previsible. The way the answer in the link arrives at the definition of self-financing, which is also the way I derive it, doesn't seem to require previsiblilty.

We are holding $(Delta_t, E_t)$ over $t$ to $t+1$, which will be know to us at time $t$, even if the process is just adapted; previsiblilty is not required to know $(Delta_t, E_t)$ at time $t$.

Extra for those who are interested:
As always, things get muddier in the continuous time setting.

I think I have an intuition for what previsibility means when dealing with continuous processes: if a process $phi$ is left-continuous, then we can know it's value $phi(t)$ at a particular time $t$ with arbitrary precision by pushing the inputs close enough to $t$ from below, without actually having to reach $t$; this makes the value of $phi(t)$ predictable with information upto but not including time $t$.

But it isn't clear to me why this previsibility is required while arriving at a sensible definition of a self-financing strategy —as the answer in the link succeeds to do.

strategy

share|improve this question

edited 3 hours ago

Dhruv Gupta

asked 8 hours ago

Dhruv GuptaDhruv Gupta

11666 bronze badges

$endgroup$

share|improve this question

edited 3 hours ago

Dhruv Gupta

asked 8 hours ago

Dhruv GuptaDhruv Gupta

11666 bronze badges

share|improve this question

edited 3 hours ago

Dhruv Gupta

asked 8 hours ago

Dhruv GuptaDhruv Gupta

11666 bronze badges

asked 8 hours ago

Dhruv GuptaDhruv Gupta

11666 bronze badges

asked 8 hours ago

Dhruv GuptaDhruv Gupta

11666 bronze badges

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

2

$begingroup$

A self-financing strategy needs to be previsible (aka predictable) since at time $t$, you need to decide (with the information from $mathcalF_t$) how much you want to be invested in the different assets at time $t+1$. So, you need to decide in advance which makes the trading strategy predictable.

Of course, the asset prices (and hence the value process of your strategy) remain adapted and are not previsible.

share|improve this answer

answered 5 hours ago

KeSchnKeSchn

1,15011 silver badge1313 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I do understand the basic argument: we need to know at time $t$ itself what needs to be held over the next time-tick; if we don't know that, we simply won't be able to execute our strategy in time. My question is based on the technical definition of previsibility and how it applies to the notation in the answer I have linked. If the portfolio held over $t$ to $t+1$ is $(Delta_t, E_t)$, then we only DO NOT require $Delta$ and $E$ to be previsible - we just need them to be adapted so that we know their values at $t$, which can be held over $t$ to $t+1$.
  $endgroup$
  – Dhruv Gupta
  4 hours ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  We could change the notation slightly, and use $(Delta_t+1, E_t+1)$ to denote the portfolio held over $t$ to $t+1$. If we do this, we would indeed require both processes to be previsible; but the concept of previsibility being dependent on notation would mean that it's not a 'universal' requirement—we could just stick to the notation under which the process is adapted and not previsible.
  $endgroup$
  – Dhruv Gupta
  3 hours ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  It is not only a notational but also conceptional necessity that you have predictability. In the notation of the answer you have linked, the OP said that the portfolio with payoff $Delta_1S_1+E_1B_1$ needs to be purchasable at time zero, i.e. $Delta_1$ and $E_1$ need to be known at time zero, i.e. $(Delta_t)$ and $(E_t)$ are previsible. Of course, you can change notation but it does not alter the concept that you need to know one period in advance what your position in the stock/bond/etc. is.
  $endgroup$
  – KeSchn
  55 secs ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "204"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fquant.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f47315%2fwhy-should-a-self-financing-strategy-be-previsible%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

2

$begingroup$

A self-financing strategy needs to be previsible (aka predictable) since at time $t$, you need to decide (with the information from $mathcalF_t$) how much you want to be invested in the different assets at time $t+1$. So, you need to decide in advance which makes the trading strategy predictable.

Of course, the asset prices (and hence the value process of your strategy) remain adapted and are not previsible.

share|improve this answer

answered 5 hours ago

KeSchnKeSchn

1,15011 silver badge1313 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I do understand the basic argument: we need to know at time $t$ itself what needs to be held over the next time-tick; if we don't know that, we simply won't be able to execute our strategy in time. My question is based on the technical definition of previsibility and how it applies to the notation in the answer I have linked. If the portfolio held over $t$ to $t+1$ is $(Delta_t, E_t)$, then we only DO NOT require $Delta$ and $E$ to be previsible - we just need them to be adapted so that we know their values at $t$, which can be held over $t$ to $t+1$.
  $endgroup$
  – Dhruv Gupta
  4 hours ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  We could change the notation slightly, and use $(Delta_t+1, E_t+1)$ to denote the portfolio held over $t$ to $t+1$. If we do this, we would indeed require both processes to be previsible; but the concept of previsibility being dependent on notation would mean that it's not a 'universal' requirement—we could just stick to the notation under which the process is adapted and not previsible.
  $endgroup$
  – Dhruv Gupta
  3 hours ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  It is not only a notational but also conceptional necessity that you have predictability. In the notation of the answer you have linked, the OP said that the portfolio with payoff $Delta_1S_1+E_1B_1$ needs to be purchasable at time zero, i.e. $Delta_1$ and $E_1$ need to be known at time zero, i.e. $(Delta_t)$ and $(E_t)$ are previsible. Of course, you can change notation but it does not alter the concept that you need to know one period in advance what your position in the stock/bond/etc. is.
  $endgroup$
  – KeSchn
  55 secs ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

2

$begingroup$

A self-financing strategy needs to be previsible (aka predictable) since at time $t$, you need to decide (with the information from $mathcalF_t$) how much you want to be invested in the different assets at time $t+1$. So, you need to decide in advance which makes the trading strategy predictable.

Of course, the asset prices (and hence the value process of your strategy) remain adapted and are not previsible.

share|improve this answer

answered 5 hours ago

KeSchnKeSchn

1,15011 silver badge1313 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I do understand the basic argument: we need to know at time $t$ itself what needs to be held over the next time-tick; if we don't know that, we simply won't be able to execute our strategy in time. My question is based on the technical definition of previsibility and how it applies to the notation in the answer I have linked. If the portfolio held over $t$ to $t+1$ is $(Delta_t, E_t)$, then we only DO NOT require $Delta$ and $E$ to be previsible - we just need them to be adapted so that we know their values at $t$, which can be held over $t$ to $t+1$.
  $endgroup$
  – Dhruv Gupta
  4 hours ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  We could change the notation slightly, and use $(Delta_t+1, E_t+1)$ to denote the portfolio held over $t$ to $t+1$. If we do this, we would indeed require both processes to be previsible; but the concept of previsibility being dependent on notation would mean that it's not a 'universal' requirement—we could just stick to the notation under which the process is adapted and not previsible.
  $endgroup$
  – Dhruv Gupta
  3 hours ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  It is not only a notational but also conceptional necessity that you have predictability. In the notation of the answer you have linked, the OP said that the portfolio with payoff $Delta_1S_1+E_1B_1$ needs to be purchasable at time zero, i.e. $Delta_1$ and $E_1$ need to be known at time zero, i.e. $(Delta_t)$ and $(E_t)$ are previsible. Of course, you can change notation but it does not alter the concept that you need to know one period in advance what your position in the stock/bond/etc. is.
  $endgroup$
  – KeSchn
  55 secs ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

A self-financing strategy needs to be previsible (aka predictable) since at time $t$, you need to decide (with the information from $mathcalF_t$) how much you want to be invested in the different assets at time $t+1$. So, you need to decide in advance which makes the trading strategy predictable.

Of course, the asset prices (and hence the value process of your strategy) remain adapted and are not previsible.

share|improve this answer

answered 5 hours ago

KeSchnKeSchn

1,15011 silver badge1313 bronze badges

$endgroup$

share|improve this answer

answered 5 hours ago

KeSchnKeSchn

1,15011 silver badge1313 bronze badges

answered 5 hours ago

KeSchnKeSchn

1,15011 silver badge1313 bronze badges

answered 5 hours ago

KeSchnKeSchn

1,15011 silver badge1313 bronze badges