- Joined
- 3/5/15
- Messages
- 5
- Points
- 13
@themarketprofessor I believe you totally misunderstand the use of mathematical models in pricing financial instruments.
There are two types of instruments: those actively traded (i.e. "liquid assets") and those that are not.
We CALIBRATE models on liquid assets and use calibrated models to PRICE non liquid assets.
This is because if an asset is actively traded there are no arbitrages on that and hence that's the unique price. If an asset is non liquid, you need a "guide" for pricing it, in order to obtain a no-arbitrage price which is coherent with a given market situation.
If you think models (and hence, mathematics) are used to predict something, YOU ARE WRONG. If you think mathematics gives you prices YOU ARE WRONG AGAIN, because the market gives you the prices. We only use mathematics to bridge the gap between what the market tells us and what it doesn't (but in a coeherent manner)
There are two types of instruments: those actively traded (i.e. "liquid assets") and those that are not.
We CALIBRATE models on liquid assets and use calibrated models to PRICE non liquid assets.
This is because if an asset is actively traded there are no arbitrages on that and hence that's the unique price. If an asset is non liquid, you need a "guide" for pricing it, in order to obtain a no-arbitrage price which is coherent with a given market situation.
If you think models (and hence, mathematics) are used to predict something, YOU ARE WRONG. If you think mathematics gives you prices YOU ARE WRONG AGAIN, because the market gives you the prices. We only use mathematics to bridge the gap between what the market tells us and what it doesn't (but in a coeherent manner)