|
From: Luigi B. <lui...@gm...> - 2011-03-15 16:29:52
|
Kakhkhor, sorry I didn't have time to look at the problem. Do you mind adding the issue to the bug tracker so it doesn't get lost? Thanks, Luigi On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 08:53 -0500, Kakhkhor Abdijalilov wrote: > 1.0 is running accumulator value and 0 is past fixings. It means that > only the reaming fixings are for averaging. > > There is something isn't perfectly right in floating strike engine > implementation. > > These are the steps to reproduce "the bug". > > 1. Set dividend yield to zero. QL and my implementation perfectly agree. > > 2. Increase risk free rate and dividend yield by the same amount. This > won't affect GBM dynamics. If we compensate for the higher discount > factor then the prices shouldn't chance. Indeed, my implementation > gives the same result, but QL gives slightly higher values. The > difference is negligible (only 4th digits differ) for practical > purposes, but it indicates that something isn't right, because > floating strike analytical engine uses exact formula, not > approximation > > When dividend yield is zero my implementation perfectly agrees with QL. > > Fixed strike prices agree in both cases (the difference only in 14th digit). > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > The modern datacenter depends on network connectivity to access resources > and provide services. The best practices for maximizing a physical server's > connectivity to a physical network are well understood - see how these > rules translate into the virtual world? > http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnlfb > _______________________________________________ > QuantLib-dev mailing list > Qua...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quantlib-dev -- Vin: It's like this fellow I knew in El Paso. One day, he just took all his clothes off and jumped in a mess of cactus. I asked him that same question, "Why?" Calvera: And? Vin: He said, "It seemed like a good idea at the time." -- The Magnificent Seven |