Two Essays on the Applications of Contingent Claim Approach: The Cases of Pricing Deposit Insurance and ESO

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：28

、訪客IP：18.191.120.103

姓名

何瑞鎮(Ruey-Jenn Ho) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

財務金融學系

論文名稱

(Two Essays on the Applications of Contingent Claim Approach: The Cases of Pricing Deposit Insurance and ESO)

相關論文

★ 最適指數複製法之自動化建置：以ETF50為例	★ 台灣公債市場與台幣利率交換交易市場動態關聯性之研究
★ 企業貸款債權證券化--信用增強探討	★ 停損點反向操作指標在台灣期貨市場實證
★ 投資型保單評價-富邦金吉利保本投資連結型遞延年金保險乙型(VANB5)	★ 停損點反向操作指標在台灣債券市場實證
★ 匯率風險值衡量之實證研究-以新台幣、日圓、英鎊、歐元匯率為例	★ 探討央行升息國內十年期指標公債未同步上升之原因
★ 信用風險模型評估—Merton模型之應用	★ 資產管理公司購買不動產擔保不良債權評價之研究
★ 股票除息對期貨與現貨報酬之影響	★ 主權基金的角色定位與未來影響力之研究
★ 我國公債期貨之研究分析	★ 用事件研究法探討希臘主權債信危機-以美國及德國公債為例
★ 企業避險及財務操作之實例探討	★ 台灣期貨市場之量價交易策略

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

本論文由兩篇關於選擇權評價方法應用之文章所構成。
第一篇文章是關於美國商業銀行風險移轉行為之理論與實證分析。文獻上對於美國商業銀行存款保險之風險移轉行為，多著重於固定存款保險金制度期間，且實證研究並無一致性的結論。本文的實證研究包含美國市場的固定與風險基礎存款保險金期間，提供商業銀行風險移轉行為更完整的實證分析。
本文在研究方法上有兩個創新。首先，我們在上限選擇權分析法(The Barrier Option Approach)的架構下，進行存款保險金的理論評價，進而提供合理的存款保險金評價公式。接著在模型參數的估計上，我們使用最大概似估計法(The Maximum Likelihood Estimation Method)替代文獻上使用的Ronn與Verma之方法，以避免模型估計可能產生不一致的問題。
在固定存款保險金制度期間，本文的實證結果顯示商業銀行傾向將其風險移轉給存款保險公司；然而在風險基礎存款保險金制度期間，商業銀行的風險移轉行為明顯減少，雖然此行為並未完全消失。進一步觀察風險基礎存款保險金制度期間，發現財務結構正常的商業銀行大幅降低其風險移轉行為，但是財務結構不佳的銀行則並未停止將其風險移轉給存款保險公司，因此我們建議政策上應該再針對財務不佳的商業銀行進行補強。我們也發現在固定存款保險金制度期間，大銀行因為有「大到不能倒」的優勢，因此明顯將其風險移轉給存保公司，但此現象在風險基礎的存款保險金制度下則已經消失。

第二篇文章我們考慮多點執行(Multiple Exercise)的情況下，員工認股選擇權(Employee Stock Options)的評價分析。文獻上對於員工認股選擇權之評價，通常假設員工會在單一時點，將其所有選擇權部位執行完畢，此假設可合理的評價交易選擇權(Traded Options)，但是卻不適合員工認股選擇權。
關於考慮多點執行的文獻不多，且為了降低評價的複雜程度，文獻上對於允許多點執行情況下的員工認股選擇權，通常都忽略員工除了選擇權以外尚有其他資產(Non-Option Wealth)，因而高估了員工面對的風險，進而使評價產生偏務。不同於文獻的假設，本文同時考慮員工的其他資產與多點執行，提供更完整的評價分析。在評價上我們應用最小平方蒙地卡羅法(Least-Squares Monte Carlo Method)來進行員工認股選擇權的評價，以避免使用二項樹法(Binomial Tree Approach)可能面對路徑相依(Path-Dependent)的問題，使評價更容易在多變數下進行。
由數值分析的結果的我們發現考慮多點執行時，員工認股選擇權的成本(Cost to Firms)提高，尤其是在到期日較長、風險較趨避、以及標的股票波動性較高的情況。而考慮員工擁有其他資產時，由於員工整體風險降低，因此傾向延遲執行其選擇權部位，進而使員工認股選擇權的成本提高，尤其是在到期日較長的情況。最後，在本文的模型下，員工認股選擇權並不會隨著風險趨避係數降低而單調上升(Monotonously Increase)，此情況是本文模型與文獻模型最大的不同之處。

摘要(英)

This dissertation contains two essays on the applications of contingent claim approach: the cases of pricing deposit insurance and ESO.
First Essay
Risk-Shifting Behavior at Commercial Banks under Different Deposit Insurance Systems: Further Evidence from U.S. Markets
In this essay, we provide further evidence regarding the effect of deposit insurance on the risk-shifting behavior at commercial banks in the United States. In particular, we compare the risk-shifting behavior of commercial banks before and after adopting the risk-based capital requirements in the U.S. market. To test the risk-shifting behaviors, we propose a new pricing model for the valuation of deposit insurance premium using a barrier option framework. We also estimate the unknown parameters using a maximum likelihood estimation method rather than Ronn and Verma’s (1986) two-equation approach. We find that the risk-shifting behaviors at commercial banks have reduced significantly but have not disappeared after the adoption of a risk-based deposit insurance system. The risk-shifting behavior at commercial banks still exists, especially for those banks with high risks or high financial distress probabilities. We find that the deposit insurance reform prevents large banks from shifting their risk to the deposit insurers as well.

Second Essay
Pricing Employee Stock Options with Multiple-Exercise Decisions
This essay proposes a model to value the effective cost of employee stock options (ESOs) assuming that the employee may exercise his/her options in multiple future dates. Therefore we first constructed our model considering the dynamic non-option wealth by maximizing the expected time-additive inter-temporal utility. We then implement our model by using the least-squares Monte Carlo technique for valuing ESOs with multiple-exercise features. Our model can avoid computational path-dependent problems encountered in the binomial tree method. There are three main findings from our numerical analysis. First, consistent with literature, we find that the costs of employee stock options to shareholders will increase if the multiple-date exercise is allowable for options with longer time to maturity, smaller risk aversion parameter, and higher stock price volatility. Second, due to the non-option wealth reducing the total risk of employees, we find that the cost of employee stock options to shareholders will increase after taking the non-option wealth into account, especially for options with longer time to maturity. With longer maturity, the cost of options will increase with non-option wealth. Finally, the costs of employee stock options do not monotonously increase with the risk aversion parameter in our two-state-variable model.

關鍵字(中)

★ 存款保險
★ 風險移轉
★ 上限選擇權分析法
★ 最小平方蒙地卡羅法
★ 多點執行
★ 員工認股選擇權

關鍵字(英)

★ Deposit insurance
★ Risk-shifting behavior
★ Least-squares Monte Carlo simulations
★ Multiple exercise
★ Employee stock options
★ Barrier option approach

論文目次

Abstract in Chinese I
Abstract III
Acknowledgements V
Contents VI
List of Tables VIII
First Essay Risk-Shifting Behavior at Commercial Banks under Different Deposit Insurance Systems: Further Evidence from U.S. Markets
1.Introduction 1
2.Institutional Background 4
3.Models of Deposit Insurance under a Barrier Option Framework 6
3.1 Risk-Adjusted Deposit Insurance Premiums 6
3.2 Estimation of Bank Assets and Its Volatilities 9
4.Empirical Design for Testing Risk-Shifting Behavior at Commercial Banks 12
5.Empirical Analysis 14
5.1 Data and Sample Selection 14
5.2 Empirical Results 15
5.3 Robustness Checks 18
6.Conclusions 19
Appendix A: The Proof of Theorem 1 21
Appendix B: The Proof of Theorem 2 27
References 28
Second Essay Pricing Employee Stock Options with Multiple-Exercise Decisions
1.Introduction 41
2.Related Literature 44
3.The Model 45
3.1 The Two-State-Variable Framework 46
3.2 The Optimal Exercise Policy and Its Corresponding Cost to Shareholders 48
3.3 The Implementation of Utility-Pricing Algorithm 51
4.Numerical Analysis 53
5.Conclusions 59
Appendix A: The Proof of Proposition 1 60
References 61

參考文獻

Black, F. and M. Scholes, 1973, The pricing of options and corporate liabilities, Journal of Political Economy, 81, 637-659.
Brockman, P. and H.J. Turtle, 2003, A barrier option framework for corporate security valuation, Journal of Financial Economics, 67, 511-529.
Demigurc-Kunt, A. and E. Detragiache, 2002, Does deposit insurance increase banking system stability? An empirical investigation, Journal of Monetary Economics, 49, 1373-1406.
Diamond, D. and P. Dybvig, 1993, Bank runs, deposit insurance, and liquidity, Journal of Political Economy, 91, 401-419.
Duan, J.C., 1994, Maximum likelihood estimation using price data of the derivative contract, Mathematical Finance, 4, 155-167.
Duan, J.C., 2000, Correction: Maximum likelihood estimation using price data of the derivative contract (Mathematical Finance 1994, 4/2, 1994), Mathematical Finance, 10, 461-462.
Duan, J.C., A.F. Moreau and C.W. Sealey, 1992, Fixed-rate deposit insurance and risk-shifting behavior at commercial banks, Journal of Banking and Finance, 16, 715-742.
Ericsson, J. and J. Reneby, 2005, Estimating structural bond pricing model, Journal of Business, 78, 707-735.
Flannery, M.J., 1989, Capital regulation and insured banks’ choice of individual loan default risks, Journal of Monetary Economics, 24, 235-258.
Grossman, R., 1992, Deposit insurance, regulation, and moral hazard in the thrift industry: evidence from the 1930s, American Economic Review, 82, 800-821.
Jones, E.P., S. Mason and S. Rosenfeld, 1984, Contingent claims analysis of corporate capital structures: an empirical investigation, Journal of Finance, 39, 611-625.
Marcus, A.J., 1984, Deregulation and bank financial policy, Journal of Banking and Finance, 8, 557-565.
Marcus, A.J. and I. Shaked, 1984, The valuation of FDIC deposit insurance using option-pricing estimates, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 16, 446-460.
Merton, R.C., 1973, Theory of rational option pricing, Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, 4, 141-183.
Merton, R.C., 1977, An analytic derivation of the cost of deposit insurance and loan guarantees, Journal of Banking and Finance, 1, 3-11.
Mussa, M., 1986, Safety and soundness as an objective of regulations of depository institutions: comment on Kareken, Journal of Business, 59, 97-117
O’Hara, M. and W. Shaw, 1990, Deposit insurance and wealth effects: the value of being “too big to fail”, Journal of Finance, 45, 1587-1600.
Ronn, E.I. and A.K. Verma, 1986, Pricing risk-adjusted deposit insurance: an option-based model, Journal of Finance, 41, 871-895.
Rubinstein, M. and E. Reiner, 1991, Breaking down the barrier. Risk, 4, 28-35.
Hovakimian, A. and E.J. Kane, 2000, Effectiveness of capital regulation at U.S. commercial banks, 1985 to 1994, Journal of Finance, 55, 451-469.
Hovakimian, A., E.J. Kane and L. Laeven, 2003, How country and safety-net characteristics affect bank risk-shifting, Journal of Financial Services Research, 23, 177-204.
Ioannidou, V.P. and M.F. Penas, 2010, Deposit insurance and bank risk-taking: evidence from internal loan ratings, Journal of Financial Intermediation, 19, 95-115.
Kane, E.J., 1987, No room for weak links in the chain of deposit-insurance reform, Journal of Financial Services Research, 1, 77-111.
Karels, G. and C. McClatchey, 1999, Deposit insurance and risk-taking behavior in the credit union industry, Journal of Banking and Finance, 23, 105-134.
Kennedy, P., 2008, A guide to econometrics (Blackwell Publishing, U.K.).
Pesando, J.E., 1985, Deposit Insurance and Incentive for Excessive Risk-taking: Alternative Strategies for Reform (Discussion Paper Series), Ontario Economic Council.
Wagster, J.D., 2007, Wealth and risk effects of adopting deposit insurance in Canada: evidence of risk shifting by banks and trust companies, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 39, 1651-1681.
Wong, H.Y. and T.W. Choi, 2009, Estimating default barriers from market information, Quantitative Finance, 9, 187-196.
Zhang, P.G. 1997, Exotic options: a guide to second generation options (World Scientific, Singapore).
Aboody, D., 1996, Market valuation of employee stock options, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 22, 357-391.
Ammann, M. and R. Seiz, Does the model matter in valuing employee stock option? Financial Analysts Journal, 60, 21-37.
Black, F. and M. Scholes, 1973, The pricing of options and corporate liabilities, Journal of Political Economy, 81, 637-659.
Cai, J. and A. M. Vijh, 2005, Executive stock and option valuation in a two state-variable framework, Journal of Derivatives, Spring, 9-27.
Cao, M. and J. Wei, 2008, Incentive stocks and options with trading restrictions: not as restricted as we thought, Research in Finance, 24, 213-248.
Carpenter J. N., 1998, The exercise and valuation of employee stock options, Journal of Financial Economics, 48, 127-158.
Carpenter, J. N., R. Stanton and N. Wallace, 2010, Optimal exercise of executive stock options and implications for firm cost, Journal of Financial Economics, 98, 315-337.
Carr, P. and V. Linetsky, 2000, The valuation of employee stock options in an intensity based framework, European Finance Review, 4, 211-230.
Cvitanic, J., Z. Wiener and F. Zapatero, 2008, Analytic pricing of employee stock options, Review of Financial Studies, 21, 683-724.
Detemple, J. and S. Sundaresan, 1999, Nontraded asset valuation with portfolio constraints: A binomial approach, Review of Financial Studies, 12, 835-572.
Grasselli, M. R., 2005, Nonlinearity, correlation and the valuation of employee stock options, working paper, McMaster University.
Grasselli, M. R. and V. Henderson, 2009, Risk aversion and block exercise of executive stock options, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 33, 109-127.
Hall, B. J. and K. J. Murphy, 2002, Stock options for undiversified executives, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 33, 3-42.
Henderson, V., 2005, The impact of the market portfolio on the valuation, incentives and optimality of executive stock options, Quantitative Finance, 5, 1-13.
Henner T., S. Matsunaga and T. Shevlin, 1994, Estimating the “fair value” of employee stock options with expected early exercise, Accounting Horizons, 8, 23-42.
Huddart, S., 1994, Employee stock options, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 18, 207-231.
Huddart, S. and M. Lang, 1996, Employee stock option exercises: An empirical analysis, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 21, 5-43.
Hull, J. and A. White, 2004, How to value employee stock options, Financial Analysts Journal, 60, 114-119.
Ingersoll, J. E., 2006, The subjective and objective evaluation of incentive stock options, The Journal of Business, 79, 453-487.
Jain, A. and A. Subramanian, 2004, The intertemporal exercise and valuation of employee options, The Accounting Review, 79, 705-743.
Jennergren, L. P. and B. Naslund, 1993, A comment on “Valuation of executive stock options and the FASB proposal”, The Accounting Review, 68, 179-183.
Kulatilaka, N. and A. J. Marcus, 1994, Valuaing employee stock options, Financial Analysts Journal, 50, 46-56.
Lambert, R., D. Larcker and R. Verrecchia, 1991, Portfolio considerations in valuing employee compensation, Journal of Accounting Research, 29, 128-149.
Leung, T. and R. Sircar, 2009, Accounting for risk aversion, vesting, job termination risk and multiple exercises in valuation of employee stock options, Mathematical Finance, 19, 99-128.
Longstaff, F. A. and E. S. Schwartz, 2001, Valuing American Options by Simulation: A simple least-squares approach, Review of Financial Studies, 14, 113-147.
Meulbroek, L. K., 2001, The efficiency of equity-linked compensation: understanding the full cost of awarding executive stock options, Financial Management, 30, 5-20.
Raupach, P., 2003, The valuation of executive stock options – How good is the standard? Working Paper, Goethe University.
Roger, L. C. G. and J. Scheinkman, 2007, Optimal exercise of executive options, Finance and Stochastics, 11, 357-372.
Sircar, R. and W. Xiong, 2007, A general framework for valuating incentive options, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 31, 2317-2349.

指導教授

張傳章(Chuang-Chang Chang)

審核日期

2011-6-24

推文