Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > The information content of implied volatilities...
View graph of relations

The information content of implied volatilities and model-free volatility expectations: evidence from options written on individual stocks

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Published

Standard

The information content of implied volatilities and model-free volatility expectations: evidence from options written on individual stocks. / Taylor, S. J.; Yadav, P. K.; Zhang, Yuanyuan.

In: Journal of Banking and Finance, Vol. 34, 2010, p. 871-881.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{b76536442cfa4354b829e0ced922af28,
title = "The information content of implied volatilities and model-free volatility expectations: evidence from options written on individual stocks",
abstract = "The volatility information content of stock options for individual firms is measured using option prices for 149 U.S. firms during the period from January 1996 to December 1999. Volatility forecasts defined by historical stock returns, at-the-money (ATM) implied volatilities and model-free (MF) volatility expectations are compared for each firm. The recently developed model-free volatility expectation incorporates information across all strike prices, and it does not require the specification of an option pricing model. Our analysis of ARCH models shows that, for one-day-ahead estimation, historical estimates of conditional variances outperform both the ATM and the MF volatility estimates extracted from option prices for more than one-third of the firms. This result contrasts with the consensus about the informational efficiency of options written on stock indices; several recent studies find that option prices are more informative than daily stock returns when estimating and predicting index volatility. However, for the firms with the most actively traded options, we do find that the option forecasts are nearly always more informative than historical stock returns. When the prediction horizon extends until the expiry date of the options, our regression results show that the option forecasts are more informative than forecasts defined by historical returns for a substantial majority (86{\%}) of the firms. Although the model-free (MF) volatility expectation is theoretically more appealing than alternative volatility estimates and has been demonstrated to be the most accurate predictor of realized volatility by Jiang and Tian (2005) for the S&P 500 index, the results for our firms show that the MF expectation only outperforms both the ATM implied volatility and the historical volatility for about one-third of the firms. The firms for which the MF expectation is best are not associated with a relatively high level of trading in away-from-the-money options.",
author = "Taylor, {S. J.} and Yadav, {P. K.} and Yuanyuan Zhang",
year = "2010",
doi = "10.1016/j.jbankfin.2009.09.015",
language = "English",
volume = "34",
pages = "871--881",
journal = "Journal of Banking and Finance",
issn = "0378-4266",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - The information content of implied volatilities and model-free volatility expectations: evidence from options written on individual stocks

AU - Taylor, S. J.

AU - Yadav, P. K.

AU - Zhang, Yuanyuan

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - The volatility information content of stock options for individual firms is measured using option prices for 149 U.S. firms during the period from January 1996 to December 1999. Volatility forecasts defined by historical stock returns, at-the-money (ATM) implied volatilities and model-free (MF) volatility expectations are compared for each firm. The recently developed model-free volatility expectation incorporates information across all strike prices, and it does not require the specification of an option pricing model. Our analysis of ARCH models shows that, for one-day-ahead estimation, historical estimates of conditional variances outperform both the ATM and the MF volatility estimates extracted from option prices for more than one-third of the firms. This result contrasts with the consensus about the informational efficiency of options written on stock indices; several recent studies find that option prices are more informative than daily stock returns when estimating and predicting index volatility. However, for the firms with the most actively traded options, we do find that the option forecasts are nearly always more informative than historical stock returns. When the prediction horizon extends until the expiry date of the options, our regression results show that the option forecasts are more informative than forecasts defined by historical returns for a substantial majority (86%) of the firms. Although the model-free (MF) volatility expectation is theoretically more appealing than alternative volatility estimates and has been demonstrated to be the most accurate predictor of realized volatility by Jiang and Tian (2005) for the S&P 500 index, the results for our firms show that the MF expectation only outperforms both the ATM implied volatility and the historical volatility for about one-third of the firms. The firms for which the MF expectation is best are not associated with a relatively high level of trading in away-from-the-money options.

AB - The volatility information content of stock options for individual firms is measured using option prices for 149 U.S. firms during the period from January 1996 to December 1999. Volatility forecasts defined by historical stock returns, at-the-money (ATM) implied volatilities and model-free (MF) volatility expectations are compared for each firm. The recently developed model-free volatility expectation incorporates information across all strike prices, and it does not require the specification of an option pricing model. Our analysis of ARCH models shows that, for one-day-ahead estimation, historical estimates of conditional variances outperform both the ATM and the MF volatility estimates extracted from option prices for more than one-third of the firms. This result contrasts with the consensus about the informational efficiency of options written on stock indices; several recent studies find that option prices are more informative than daily stock returns when estimating and predicting index volatility. However, for the firms with the most actively traded options, we do find that the option forecasts are nearly always more informative than historical stock returns. When the prediction horizon extends until the expiry date of the options, our regression results show that the option forecasts are more informative than forecasts defined by historical returns for a substantial majority (86%) of the firms. Although the model-free (MF) volatility expectation is theoretically more appealing than alternative volatility estimates and has been demonstrated to be the most accurate predictor of realized volatility by Jiang and Tian (2005) for the S&P 500 index, the results for our firms show that the MF expectation only outperforms both the ATM implied volatility and the historical volatility for about one-third of the firms. The firms for which the MF expectation is best are not associated with a relatively high level of trading in away-from-the-money options.

U2 - 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2009.09.015

DO - 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2009.09.015

M3 - Journal article

VL - 34

SP - 871

EP - 881

JO - Journal of Banking and Finance

JF - Journal of Banking and Finance

SN - 0378-4266

ER -