Regulatory Costs Break Risk Neutrality

Chris Kenyon and Andrew Green

Contents

Introduction

Preface to Chapter 1

1.

Being Two-Faced over Counterparty Credit Risk

2.

Risky Funding: A Unified Framework for Counterparty and Liquidity Charges

3.

DVA for Assets

4.

Pricing CDSs’ Capital Relief

5.

The FVA Debate

6.

The FVA Debate: Reloaded

7.

Regulatory Costs Break Risk Neutrality

8.

Risk Neutrality Stays

9.

Regulatory Costs Remain

10.

Funding beyond Discounting: Collateral Agreements and Derivatives Pricing

11.

Cooking with Collateral

12.

Options for Collateral Options

13.

Partial Differential Equation Representations of Derivatives with Bilateral Counterparty Risk and Funding Costs

14.

In the Balance

15.

Funding Strategies, Funding Costs

16.

The Funding Invariance Principle

17.

Regulatory-Optimal Funding

18.

Close-Out Convention Tensions

19.

Funding, Collateral and Hedging: Arbitrage-Free Pricing with Credit, Collateral and Funding Costs

20.

Bilateral Counterparty Risk with Application to Credit Default Swaps

21.

KVA: Capital Valuation Adjustment by Replication

22.

From FVA to KVA: Including Cost of Capital in Derivatives Pricing

23.

Warehousing Credit Risk: Pricing, Capital and Tax

24.

MVA by Replication and Regression

25.

Smoking Adjoints: Fast Evaluation of Monte Carlo Greeks

26.

Adjoint Greeks Made Easy

27.

Bounding Wrong-Way Risk in Measuring Counterparty Risk

28.

Wrong-Way Risk the Right Way: Accounting for Joint Defaults in CVA

29.

Backward Induction for Future Values

30.

A Non-Linear PDE for XVA by Forward Monte Carlo

31.

Efficient XVA Management: Pricing, Hedging and Allocation

32.

Accounting for KVA under IFRS 13

33.

FVA Accounting, Risk Management and Collateral Trading

34.

Derivatives Funding, Netting and Accounting

35.

Managing XVA in the Ring-Fenced Bank

36.

XVA: A Banking Supervisory Perspective

37.

An Annotated Bibliography of XVA

Increased regulation and market changes since 2007 have altered the perceived costs of many financial products. Here we prove that these changes are not just perception: they have had a fundamental effect on pricing theory. That is, we prove a market-wide risk-neutral measure that is common to all participants does not exist. This proof is based on our Theorem 7.2, which states that if different market participants receive different dividends for holding the same stock, then there is no market-wide risk-neutral measure that is common to all market participants. We then demonstrate that, because of regulations and unhedgeable risks, different trading businesses have different holding costs for the same positions. This means that all valuations are private, in the sense that they can be derived from idiosyncratic risk-neutral measures (that is, the valuations are local to the individual pricing institution). Executable screen prices are components of value, not valuations by themselves, because of these idiosyncratic and asymmetric costs.

Legally binding regulations, eg, Capital Requirements Directive IV (CRD IV) in Europe (European Union 2013) and the Dodd–Frank Act in the US

Sorry, our subscription options are not loading right now

Please try again later. Get in touch with our customer services team if this issue persists.

New to Risk.net? View our subscription options

You need to sign in to use this feature. If you don’t have a Risk.net account, please register for a trial.

Sign in
You are currently on corporate access.

To use this feature you will need an individual account. If you have one already please sign in.

Sign in.

Alternatively you can request an individual account here