Abstract
The article examines the volatility forecasting and option pricing performance of model‐free implied volatility (MFIV) in comparison to that of the forecasts based on model‐free realized volatility (RV). There is evidence that the forecasts based on RV are significantly more efficient and less biased than those based on MFIV, whereas the option prices based on MFIV are significantly more efficient and less biased than those based on RV. These contrasting results can be reconciled by accounting for the volatility risk premium (VRP), which is found to follow an autoregressive process in this study. The significant daily returns, observed for various option strategies used to exploit the VRP, are substantially reduced, when the normal transaction costs are accounted for. Although the VRP is priced in the Indian options market, it can provide economic benefits only to those option writers, who have sufficiently low transaction costs. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Jrl Fut Mark 35:795–812, 2015
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
