If an option is underpriced/overpriced in the marketplace, how come we have to take a short/long position on the underlying asset as well.
Wouldn’t taking a short/long position on just the option (depending on what the option is being valued at in the marketplace) be enough to generate arbitrage profit?
Suppose that the spot price of the stock is $50 and you’re considering a 6-month call option with a strike of $60. BSM says that it should be priced at $1.35, but the market price is $3.00.
How, exactly, are you going to make an arbitrage profit by taking a long or short position only in the option?
If you short the call option (since the market price of this option is 3.00) then writing the calll option (aka taking a short position) you would generate profit on the option.
Not sure what the role of taking an position on the underlying asset would produce in this scenario.
Because the option is overpriced, we will short the call options and purchase a number of shares of stock determined by the hedge ratio or delta factor.
The net amount of outlay is the cost of the stock minus the premium received from the call short.
To fund the outlay, you would borrow at the risk free rate.
In a binomial model, the # of stocks to buy is hS and the amount to borrow is PV(–hS– + c–).
In the BSM describes above, the # stocks is N(d1)S and the amount to borrow is –N(d2)^(e–rT)X
something like that…
now or you have eliminated price risk (assuming your model is correct, if the stick moves up or down you still have hedged away the risk with the stock) and you’re not using your own money.