      
   |
|
 |
Avoiding
Software Time Bombs
by
Rich Tanenbaum
(from
Derivatives Strategy, August 1996)
When
you hear ticking in your portfolio, you want the bomb squad,
not the local electrician. But in a world where everyone wants
to be your best friend, it can be hard to decide which vendor
is telling you the truth. To help guide you (since I'm your
real best friend) through the smoke, we present a set of features
that are "must haves" for any derivatives software you might
use to sniff out the bombs, and, better yet, to keep them from
ever getting into your portfolio in the first place.
There
are a lot of exotic structures out there, and being able to
measure the risk of 90% of them sounds good on paper. In reality,
all it takes is one or two bad deals to take down the whole
portfolio, as we've seen so many times recently.
Ability
to handle all structures
A
sound derivatives system must be able to handle all different
types of derivative structures: equities, fixed income, foreign
exchange, commodities, options on cash or futures, American,
European and Bermuda exercise, the list goes on. It must be
capable of valuing Lookbacks, Barriers, Indexed Amortizing Swaps...
the list still goes on. And the models must allow you to value
structures with changing strike prices, changing notional amounts,
changing coupons, changing barriers... and on and on, ad infinitum.
Even if you don't currently have these instruments on your books,
the software you buy today has to be able to handle them in
case you own them tomorrow, or are being shown a new trade by
a dealer.
It's
not enough to know what an exotic option is worth, you also
must be able to measure how that worth changes with the market.
This is risk measurement, and it means all those greek letters
options theoreticians love to use, like delta, gamma, theta,
vega and rho. Risk measurement is important both before and
after the trade. Before the trade, so you know in advance what
type of risks you'll be taking on if you do the deal. And after
the trade, so you can figure out how to hedge against the risks
you don't want to keep.
For
example, suppose you want to hedge a yen exposure you have in
one year. One hedge could be to buy yen forward. Another would
be to buy a yen call option, for say 7%. If you're shown an
Average Price option by a dealer for 3%, it may seem very attractive,
because it's so much cheaper. You may even run the inputs through
your Average Price option model, and discover that 3% is a very
fair value. But by doing some sensitivity analysis, you'll discover
that as the yen gets stronger, the Average Price option doesn't
rise nearly as much as the standard option. In fact, if the
yen gets weaker for most of the year, and gets stronger at the
end, the Average Price option will actually finish out of the
money, and you won't be hedged at all.
It
seems almost tautological to say this, but it needs to be said
nonetheless: options software must use the appropriate pricing
models. Surprisingly, they often don't. That's because too many
people mistakenly think that Black-Scholes is the first and
last word in option pricing. As groundbreaking as their formula
is, it can't even handle exchange traded American options. There's
a story that made the rounds a while back that when Fischer
Black first joined Goldman Sachs, he was amazed at how prevalent
the use of his formula was. Once he got over the initial shock,
his first official order of business was to tell everyone to
switch over to the binomial model so they could value American
options.
The
need to use the proper model is even greater when dealing with
interest rate options. Again, the use of Black Scholes is prevalent,
but even for European swaptions, the formula ignores the tug
to par of a bond, or, if applied as an option on rates, it incorrectly
converts the yield to an option price. Then again, merely applying
the binomial model to bond options isn't enough, either, since
that leads to put-call parity violations. Without an arbitrage
free framework, like that of Ho-Lee, then whatever bond option
formula you use, it will not be correct.
Twenty
years ago, when option trading started taking off, anyone who
needed a computer system to value and measure the risk of positions
had to run their books on a mainframe. Fifteen years ago, people
were switching over to Apple II's. Ten years ago they switched
again, to the PC. And now they may run the system on a Sun,
an HP, an RS 6000, or Next. Each time there was a switch, chances
are the existing software (and database) had to be scrapped,
and a new one written, with a new learning curve. Anyone who
believes their current system will be their last system, is
deluding themselves. The change may not come until next year,
or in three years, but it will inevitably come. And when it
does, you'll be much better off if your derivatives valuation
models can be easily ported over from your old system to your
new system. This results in faster and cheaper implementation
of the new system, since you won't have to spend money rewriting
large part of your derivatives models. And the models which
use to work on your old system won't become broken on the new
system. In other words, your derivatives software should be
platform independent.
Platform
independence means two things in the context of derivatives
software. First, the option pricing models must be available
as subroutines, callable from any programming language. Second,
the subroutines must run on a variety of different machines
and operating systems.
Beyond
callable subroutines, derivatives software may come with a "front
end" which is the user interface you use see to tell the program
what type of structure to value. If there is a user interface,
make sure it is easy and safe to use. This means that you can
enter deals quickly, without a lot of pull down menus to go
through. It also means that when you are entering your inputs,
it should be clear what each input means, what type of data
format the program is expecting (i.e., are interest rates expected
as .07 or 7, are they annually or semi-annually compounded),
if there's On-Line Help, and if it's easy to go back and correct
any input errors.
The
value of this feature is not just that of a shorter learning
curve, but also quicker turnaround time in between when you
are asked for a quote and when you are able to provide one.
More importantly, the best user interface cuts down on input
errors, which will cut down on misquoted deals. Making a wrong
quote on a deal can cost dearly, and can cost much more than
the price of the right software. Keep in mind, however, that
even the best option pricing model will give the wrong quote,
if it has been given the wrong inputs.
The
derivatives software vendor you choose should have people on
staff who have created option models for major investment houses.
It may seem as if any programmer is capable of lifting a formula
out of the latest issue of the Journal of Finance, but you trust
an amateur at your own peril. For one thing, books and journals
often have typos, and someone not familiar with the theory behind
the model won't catch them. Also, the formula as stated may
only be correct for certain types of options. For example, one
widely published formula for barrier options can handle down
and out calls, but not up and out calls. Even so, some well
known derivatives software will blithely calculate (incorrect)
values for these options.
Another
reason you need a seasoned option modeler behind the software
is so that new models will be added to the system as new structures
are invented in the marketplace. Even someone who is knowledgeable
enough to catch any typos in an academic paper, that person
must still wait for the paper to get published before adding
the model their software.
This
paper has outlined some basic attributes that should be considered
before purchasing derivatives software. You will find that although
the software marketplace seems to be crowded with many vendors,
very few of them possess the qualities needed to work for today's
portfolio, let alone tomorrow's. Not only that, but what seems
cheap can turn out to be very expensive, and what seems expensive
can turn out to be very expensive, too. Choose wisely: the old
adage that "Nobody got fired for buying IBM" is no longer true.
It doesn't work in the long run for any software vendors, either.
The only sure bet is making sure the software you buy today
is the optimum one for your needs, and the points raised here
should help you decide those needs.
|
|