An intuitive explanation the Black Scholes' formula

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 25 янв 2025

Комментарии • 59

  • @motothedog1710
    @motothedog1710 3 года назад +13

    This is the best and more intuitive explanation of the Black Scholes model I have ever seen! Simply awesome! Thank you!

    • @quantpie
      @quantpie  3 года назад +1

      you're welcome! thank you very much, that is very kind!

  • @vvishwakarma
    @vvishwakarma 4 года назад +9

    I watched this video and loved the way he decompose complexity into naturally simple problem. Concise, accurate and easy to explain to myself later.

    • @quantpie
      @quantpie  4 года назад

      Glad you enjoyed it! And many thanks for the kind words!!

  • @alevitorino5707
    @alevitorino5707 Год назад

    Finally an intuitive and straight to the point explanation for BSM formula. Congratulations!!!

  • @finalpurez
    @finalpurez 2 года назад +2

    This has to be the best explanation for Black Scholes model! Thanks so much! Will be trying to re-create your excel!

  • @ammadurrahman5321
    @ammadurrahman5321 Год назад

    Awesome explaination........wonderfull..
    Thankssss

  • @ammonshumway
    @ammonshumway 3 года назад

    Aaaamazing! I've seen this formula so many times, and this explanation is the best!

  • @fminc
    @fminc 4 года назад +2

    Beautifully done. Thank you so much. That was the kick I needed.

    • @quantpie
      @quantpie  4 года назад

      Glad it helped! You are welcome!! thanks!

  • @giovanniberardi4134
    @giovanniberardi4134 2 года назад +1

    It would be possible to post the full list of labels? Thank you very very much for all of your videos!!

    • @quantpie
      @quantpie  2 года назад +2

      Many thanks for the suggestion! The reason we did not is because it encourages a lot of people to recalculate everything, and this practice is priceless!!

  • @entertainity
    @entertainity 2 года назад

    Legend. Gave me the 'click' moment in my head. Thank you!

  • @서희수-r7d
    @서희수-r7d 4 года назад +1

    I love it when you walk us through with concrete examples

    • @quantpie
      @quantpie  4 года назад

      thank you!! Glad you liked it!!

  • @surendrabarsode8959
    @surendrabarsode8959 4 года назад +2

    Very simply and clearly explained. Thanks. Please add more such videos especially on interest rates modeling

    • @quantpie
      @quantpie  4 года назад

      thank you! Sure we will!

  • @spice19218
    @spice19218 Год назад

    I never understood black scholes until this video

  • @monicatian8168
    @monicatian8168 2 года назад

    Best to watch before I head into the difficult textbook

  • @commonmancrypto1648
    @commonmancrypto1648 2 года назад

    Is there a specific term referring to a call whose strike price is an equal distance between the share price and the "breakeven" price?

  • @essaybeans
    @essaybeans 2 года назад +1

    May I ask what is the assumed expected growth rate of the underlying asset as well as the risk free rate in this example? Here, the strike equals the current stock price, would the illustration work when the two are different? Thanks!

    • @quantpie
      @quantpie  2 года назад

      Many thanks! Yes it should work!

  • @sat7909
    @sat7909 2 года назад

    Fantastic video. But, how does the model accomplish this with a Z-score? d1, will yield a Z-score and we use a cdf table to get a probability. How does multiplying this probability by the current share price, ( the first term of black scholes, S0(Nd1) ) give the expected cash inflow of an option?

  • @mattl6462
    @mattl6462 11 месяцев назад

    isn't at money option delta should be 0.5?

  • @hafizurrahman4484
    @hafizurrahman4484 4 года назад +3

    What is the intuitive understanding for the difference between N(d1) and N(d2) here?

    • @quantpie
      @quantpie  4 года назад +2

      Hello! Here we are explaining the full terms: S N(d_1) and K N(d_2). In the original BS, N(d_1) and N(d_2) are just there to collect terms for presentation purposes, but with hindsight (more recent research) we can impose interpretations on them. N(d_1) as we mentioned in this video is the probability of the stock being greater than K (under the risk neutral measure). N(d_2) is the same probability but under the Stock measure (please see here: ruclips.net/video/54QFuJWYlOM/видео.html). This shall be made more simpler in a future video! many thanks!

    • @nikkatalnikov
      @nikkatalnikov 3 года назад

      @@quantpie isn't N(d_1) under stock measure and N(d_2) under risk-neutral measure?

  • @rodrigovivas1985
    @rodrigovivas1985 4 года назад +1

    Amazing explanation. Thank you very much for sharing!!

    • @quantpie
      @quantpie  4 года назад

      You're very welcome!

  • @stonecastle858
    @stonecastle858 11 месяцев назад

    Worth pointing out that it is the mean of the log return, not the mean of the stock price?. Seems obvious, but not always clear.

  • @FenderAddict93
    @FenderAddict93 Год назад

    Another channel on YT mentioned that if we assume the risk-free rate = 0 (implies random walk), then we shouldn't include the σ²/2 part into the drift calculation, instead, just zero out the whole drift calculation. In this case (according to the formula you give), m should be = ln S₀ - 0.
    Why was his equation different than yours even when you both assume risk free rate = 0?

  • @shawngu86
    @shawngu86 2 года назад +1

    Hi can I ask a question, N(d1) is a normal distribution function, whereas your video uses lognormal to replace it?

    • @quantpie
      @quantpie  2 года назад

      hello @GU Shawn, and sorry for the slow response. Not it is based on log normal distribution.

  • @abcchanaskh2006
    @abcchanaskh2006 2 года назад

    can I know why the mu is InS0 -0.5 *variance *T ?
    thanks

  • @saumitrabhaduri8943
    @saumitrabhaduri8943 Год назад +1

    According to the example N(d1) and N(d2) are same - how to reconcile with BS

  • @Pier_Py
    @Pier_Py 4 года назад +4

    Can i cite this video in my final thesis?

    • @quantpie
      @quantpie  4 года назад +1

      of course! many thanks!!

    • @Pier_Py
      @Pier_Py 4 года назад +2

      I showed the professor who is following my thesis this video, he approved it and said that this is one of the clearest video explaining Black and Scholes ever!

    • @quantpie
      @quantpie  4 года назад +1

      @@Pier_Py many thanks! And good luck with the thesis!

    • @Pier_Py
      @Pier_Py 4 года назад +1

      @quantpie just for fact, i succedeed in doing your scheme on Excel but with more categories and random drawings from log-normal distribution! It is just a bit more precise, however it is a really great rappresentation! you guys gave me a lot of inspiration! i think that i watched this video at list 50 times ahah

    • @quantpie
      @quantpie  4 года назад +2

      @@Pier_Py glad to hear it!!When we get questions we will be sending them your way!!

  • @abcchanaskh2006
    @abcchanaskh2006 2 года назад

    Hi , I could not calculate the number as your. Could you share the excel file of the prob. for me (if have ) ? thanks a lot

  • @अंतुबर्वा
    @अंतुबर्वा 3 года назад +1

    In case any one wondering conversion LOGNORMDIST to prob value, the prob value is LND (S2)- LND (S1).. i.e. subtract lower
    Quantpie, please confirm if that's valid approach.

    • @quantpie
      @quantpie  3 года назад

      yes that's correct but LND also takes the two parameters.

  • @prorigami2444
    @prorigami2444 2 года назад

    that was so nicely explained

  • @world_affair
    @world_affair Год назад

    good video

  • @jonnysilver8303
    @jonnysilver8303 3 года назад +1

    brilliant👍🏻

    • @quantpie
      @quantpie  2 года назад

      thanks @Jonny Silver!

  • @rasher939
    @rasher939 4 года назад +1

    Wonderful 👏

    • @quantpie
      @quantpie  4 года назад

      Thank you Rahul! Cheers!

  • @hankigoe8615
    @hankigoe8615 Год назад

    well done

  • @stonecastle858
    @stonecastle858 11 месяцев назад

    Great explanation though - thank you

  • @madaragrothendieckottchiwa8648
    @madaragrothendieckottchiwa8648 4 года назад +1

    Good topic

  • @hit3212
    @hit3212 2 года назад +2

    Your calculation assumes that N(d1)=N(d2), as you are using the same probabilities to calculate the sums. This is not right. N(d1) is always greater than N(d2). The two probabilities are never the same.

    • @quantpie
      @quantpie  2 года назад

      Many thanks @Googgie Bear for the question! No it is not assuming that N(d1) and N(d2) are equal. N(d1) and N(d2) are aggregate measures, here we are dealing with probabilities at various levels of the underling asset prices. Hope that helps!

  • @psggroupref-vz4jz
    @psggroupref-vz4jz Год назад

    super

  • @takosmos
    @takosmos 4 года назад

    Mafhmt ta 9elwa