kij1 Master Thesis Supervisor: PETER LØCHTE JØRGENSEN Author: QIAN Zhang (402847) Pricing of principle protected notes embedded with Asian options in Denmark ---- Using a Monte Carlo Method with stochastic volatility (the Heston Model) Aarhus School of Business and Social Science 2011 2 Acknowledgements My gratitude and appreciation goes to my supervisor Peter Lø chte Jø rgensen, for his kind and insightful discussion and guide through my process of writing. I was always impressed
Words: 17332 - Pages: 70
Abstract The goal of this paper is to investigate the forecasting ability of the Dynamic Conditional Correlation Generalized Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity (DCC-GARCH). We estimate the DCC’s forecasting ability relative to unconditional volatility in three equity-based crashes: the S&L Crisis, the Dot-Com Boom/Crash, and the recent Credit Crisis. The assets we use are the S&P 500 index, 10-Year US Treasury bonds, Moody’s A Industrial bonds, and the Dollar/Yen exchange rate. Our
Words: 7879 - Pages: 32
The Black–Scholes /ˌblæk ˈʃoʊlz/[1] or Black–Scholes–Merton model is a mathematical model of a financial market containing certain derivative investment instruments. From the model, one can deduce the Black–Scholes formula, which gives a theoretical estimate of the price of European-style options. The formula led to a boom in options trading and legitimised scientifically the activities of the Chicago Board Options Exchange and other options markets around the world.[2] lt is widely used, although
Words: 472 - Pages: 2
Critical Thinking in the Legal Environment: Torts and Product Liability A Review of the Pearson v. Chung and Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants Lawsuits Executive Summary This paper will compare and contrast the legal and ethical factors surrounding the Liebeck v. McDonald’s and Pearson v. Chungs lawsuits all of which have been labeled frivolous. The first case is of Liebeck v. McDonald’s, Liebeck simply wanted a cup of coffee from McDonald’s. The second case of Pearson v. Chung, Pearson
Words: 2692 - Pages: 11
violates the Implied Warranty of Merchantability under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). Rule According to the case of Dudzik v. Klein’s All Sports, a baseball bat can’t crack when it’s used normally or the seller has to provider the buyer with a refund for the product. LaurenceDudzik v. Klein’s All Sports, 158 Misc. 2nd 72 (N.Y. J. Ct. 1993). Also, according to the Appeals Court of Massachusetts, a baseball bat shattering into a million pieces, violates the implied warranty
Words: 395 - Pages: 2
|1 |What is a multilateral treaty? | | | | | |a. | | |a treaty related only to military action
Words: 977 - Pages: 4
END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT This is an End User License Agreement (“Agreement”) between you and Apollo Group, Inc. (“Apollo”), for your use of Riverpoint Writer™ software, including all updates, (“Riverpoint Writer”). You may already have another agreement with Apollo, or one of its subsidiaries, for other products or services (“Other Services”). If so, the terms of such other agreement apply to such Other Services. YOU SHOULD CAREFULLY READ THE FOLLOWING AGREEMENT BEFORE USING OR DOWNLOADING
Words: 921 - Pages: 4
Before Operation 7 NOTE: Your air conditioner may differ from the one shown. Parts supplied: Check that all parts are included in parts package. A. Top channel B. Foam seal C. Side brackets (2) D.Window lock bracket ” screws (3) E. F. ” screws (9) G. Side curtains (2) H.Side curtain frames (2) I. Remote control A B E C D F G H I Gather the required tools and parts before starting installation. Read and follow the instructions provided with any tools listed here. Tools
Words: 2954 - Pages: 12
software is provided as is without warranty of any kind, whether express or implied, including warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose which are hereby disclaimed. In no event will SCS Software be liable for any special, incidental, or consequential damages resulting from possession, use, or malfunction of this SCS Software product. Some states do not allow limitations as to how long an implied warranty lasts and/or exclusions or limitations of incidental or consequential
Words: 599 - Pages: 3
expenditures to repair. He brought this suit to recover damages for those repairs, alleging, inter alia, breach of contract, fraud, and negligent misrepresentation.1 The district court entered summary judgment for the defendants, holding that Maine's implied warranty of habitability did not apply under the circumstances of this case, and that defendants had no duty of disclosure. The district court also entered judgment on the record for the plaintiff on the defendants' counterclaim for attorney's fees
Words: 4725 - Pages: 19
