We examine the practice of resetting the terms of previously-issued executive stock options. We identify properties of reset options, develop a model for valuing resettable options, and characterize the firms that have reset options. We find the vast majority of options are reset at-the-money, resulting, on average, in the strike price dropping 40%. Our valuation model suggests that resetting has only a small impact on the ex-ante value of an option award, but the ex-post gain can be substantial. Finally, we find resetting has a strong negative relation with firm performance even after correcting for industry performance.

We examine the relation between the prices of Japanese stocks traded on the Tokyo Stock Exchange (TSE) as reflected in the Nikkei Stock Average (NSA) stock index and the prices of the NSA futures contract traded on the Singapore International Monetary Exchange (SIMEX). Since the inception of trading in September 1986, the NSA futures contract has generally sold at a discount relative to its theoretical value. Trading restrictions and transaction costs may explain some of this mispricing, which has been declining over time, as in the U.S. markets.

This paper analyzes and compares the valuation of two types of options that relate to the same asset: options on the asset itself and options on the futures on the asset. The early exercise privilege plays a central role in explaining the differences between the values of the two options. It is shown that in the case of a cash instrument that does not make interim payments, such as gold, the value of a call option on the spot is smaller than the call option on the futures contract; the opposite is true for put options. The early exercise boundaries, which characterize when it pays to exercise, are also compared and analyzed.

ABSTRACT This paper analyzes and compares the valuation of two types of options that relate to the same asset: options on the asset itself and options on the futures on the asset. The early exercise privilege plays a central role in explaining the differences between the values of the two options. It is shown that in the case of a cash instrument that does not make interim payments, such as gold, the value of a call option on the spot is smaller than the call option on the futures contract; the opposite is true for put options. The early exercise boundaries, which characterize when it pays to exercise, are also compared and analyzed.

Volatility risk plays an important role in the management of portfolios of derivative assets as well as portfolios of basic assets. This risk is currently managed by volatility “swaps” or futures. However, this risk could be managed more efficiently using options on volatility that were proposed in the past but were never introduced mainly due to the lack of a cost efficient tradable underlying asset. The objective of this paper is to introduce a new volatility instrument, an option on a straddle, which can be used to hedge volatility risk. The design and valuation of such an instrument are the basic ingredients of a successful financial product. In order to value these options, we combine the approaches of compound options and stochastic volatility. Our numerical results show that the straddle option is a powerful instrument to hedge volatility risk. An additional benefit of such an innovation is that it will provide a direct estimate of the market price for volatility risk.

The objective of this paper is to provide a deeper insight into the links between financial markets and the real economy. To that end, we study the short-term anticipation and response of U.S. stock, Treasury, and corporate bond markets to the first release of surprise U.S. macroeconomic information. Specifically, we focus on the impact of these announcements not only on the level, but also on the volatility and comovement of those assets’ returns. We do so by estimating several extensions of the parsimonious multivariate GARCH-DCC model of Engle (2002) for the excess holding-period returns on seven portfolios of these asset classes. We find that both the process of price formation in each of those financial markets and their interaction appear to be driven by fundamentals. Yet our analysis reveals a statistically and economically significant dichotomy between the reaction of the stock and bond markets to the arrival of unexpected fundamental information. We also show that the conditional mean, volatility, and comovement among stock, Treasury, and corporate bond returns react asymmetrically to the information content of these surprise announcements. Overall, the above results shed new light on the mechanisms by which new information is incorporated into prices within and across U.S. financial markets.