Reading 54: Currency forward contract question

The formula for the price of a currency forward contract is an easy one to remember, but it helps me to fully conceptualize it in order to memorize it easier.

Anyway, the formula is displayed in the CFAI material as:

[Spot/(1+Rf)^T] x (1 + R)^T

It goes on to say: "recall that in pricing equity forwards, we always reduced the stock price by the PV of the dividends and then compounded the resulting value to the expiration date. We can view currencies in the same way [i.e., just think of the interest as dividends].

If that were the case, wouldn’t the equation look like:

[Spot - (1/(1+Rf)^T] x (1+ R)^T

I guess I just can’t figure out why we’re dividing the Spot Rate by (1+Rf)^T ?

Thanks for the help!

if S and F are specified as DC/FC

S0 * [(1+rDC) / (1+rFC)] ^ T = F

Now a little into the future you have a Price St (Spot).

Value of the Future Contract :

ST/(1+RFC)^T-t - F/(1+RDC)^T-t

is just a simple justaposition of the above - and an easy way to remember.

Logic behind: When you buy a currency forward - you sold your domestic currency and bought the foreign currency. So you receive the foreign interest rate rfc and gave them your domestic interest rate.

so to PV those cash flow streams you divide St by (1+rFC) and F by (1+rDC).

Let’s not get into value yet, I’m still trying to figure out price…

Essentially that’s just the equation I wrote, but rearranged…and I’m still confused. I know this is a very easy formula to memorize, and in fact I already have it memorized, but if I don’t have a solid understanding of HOW the formula works, then I know I’m going to miss questions on the exam.

So, I’m still trying to figure out why the CFAI material is seemingly contradicting itself. If we are reducing the spot price by the amount of interest earned, why isn’t it: {S0 - [1/(1+rFC)^T]} x (1+rDC)^T ?? In the equation that they actually give for the price, the spot price doesn’t seem to be reduced by the value of the interest at all, even though that is what they say is going on…

did you stop after seeing the formula in my type up?

Logic behind: When you buy a currency forward - you sold your domestic currency and bought the foreign currency. So you receive the foreign interest rate rfc and gave them your domestic interest rate.

What he is saying cpk is why when you calculate the forwrd on an asset, you do it like this:

F = S0 * (1+Rf)^T - Dividen(1+Rf)^T, but when you do it with a currency, you do it like:

F = S0$/Y * (1+Rf$)^T / (1+RfY)^T, assuming $ yen.

The book says you think of interest same way as dividend, which is not easily seen from above. They are computed in a different way.

not the time or place to decipher that. learn it and move on.

in my mind currency and interest are two separate beasts, and each has their own complexity.

you learnt in Level I and also in Econ how to get the forward from spot and vice versa. So just move on.

[And from the look of things - the above must be a Schweeser annotation]

I think they are approximately the same, you can think of it like this:

F = S0$/Y * (1+Rf$)^T - S0 * RfY

So that the futures price of the currency is the spot rate rising at the DC interest rate minus the interest on the foreign currency…i.e., same as you would do with a forward on an asset.

No, I read it, and the logic makes sense for value:

Discount the spot price at the rFC, and the forward price at the rDC. And you subtract them because the rDC is what you’re giving up. I get it. I’m just having trouble seeing the connection to price…

Yes, exactly.

But again, in that case, why would we be using S0 twice in the calculation? Aren’t we earning Rf$ on the amount and RfY on the yen amount? And isn't the yen amount 1 (i.e., the spot rate is x units of per 1 unit of Yen)? So shouldn’t the amount discounted by the RfY be 1, not S0?

It is very possible that there is something here that I’m completely missing, but again, I’m just trying to get a solid foundation so that my mind will work flexibly on exam questions, especially for the more advanced derivatives concepts.

Ok, I had to attack it from a different angle, but I think I figured it out (kind of).

If you already know how to do this stuff, don’t bother reading what I’m about to write. But if you’re still lacking a conceptual understanding of the pricing of a currency forward, this may or may not help. In fact, I’d probably just ignore it regardless. Anyway, here’s the answer (kind of) to my question:

The (1+rFC)^T term is actually missing something. The full denominator should be:

(units of foreign currency)[(1+rFC)^T]

The only reason that first term is omitted is because, when using direct quotes, the “units of foreign currency” will ALWAYS equal 1.

In other words, the CFA formula that I wrote in the first post can be better understood by doing the multiplication first, then dividing.

We can think of this as:

Compound S0 at the domestic interest rate, as you would with the price of any other forward. This amount should be equal to the amount that we would have if we exchanged DC for FC (at S0), invested at the foreign risk-free rate, and then converted back to DC. Here’s the key: We know every value in order to do this, except at time=0 we do not know what the final spot rate will be. We can call this E(ST) for sake of this post. So basically, we have to solve for this unkown spot rate that will make these two values equal. That “spot rate” is actually the price of the contract.

So, using numbers from the CFA text for sake of example, if S0 = .5987 /CHF, and compounded at the domestic interest rate for 180 days gives us .61472 dollars. Now, we should have an equal amount of dollars (.61472) at the end of the following transaction: we exchange .5987 dollars for 1 CHF, invest 1 CHF at the rFC (4.75%), and convert it back to dollars at T. So again, we know what the final dollar amount _should_ be (0.61472 dollars), and we know how many CHF we have after compounding that forward at the rFC (1.02315 CHF), but what we _don't_ know is the exchange rate that would make these two equal. Again, that unkown exchange rate (earlier I called it E(ST)) is basically the **price** of the forward contract. So to solve for that number, we divide 0.61472 dollars by 1.02315 CHF and that gives us 0.60081 /CHF, which is the correct price of the contract.

In order to tie the concepts back to my original question:

Basically, I was confused why we would compound the dollar amount forward, and then just discount it back again (albeit at the foreign interest rate). DON’T think of it like that. We are compounding the dollar amount forward, but the dividing by (1+rFC)^T is really just a way to “solve for x” to make sure that the price of the contract is equal whether we start with dollars and compound forward, or start with dollars, convert to CHF, invest, then convert back to dollars. So again, that bottom term is really (1)(1+rFC)^T, but obviously the one is not needed. If our exchange rate was somehow X amont of DC per 2 units of FC, then we would not simply be dividing by the foreign interest rate anymore, we’d be dividing by the foreign interest rate multiplied by the amount of foreign currency that we would have invested at that rate. Again, it just so happens that this number will always be 1 when using direct quotes.

Conclusions:

  1. This is BY FAR the longest post I have ever written, and should probably be ignored unless you want to waste some time and then be more confused at the end.

  2. It works best for me to think about compounding S0 forward at rDC, and then dividing by the amount of FC compounded at the rFC, rather than dividing first and then multiplying, like CFA has it.

S0 is not appearing twice, the second one is the interest part only, just like a dividend yield. That’s the closest I can make it to forwards on an equity…but it’s not perfect.

Guys, I need some help on this topic too, on reading 54 Example 5:

Problem:

The Spot rate for British Pounds is $1.76. The U.S. risk free rate is 5.1%, and the U.K risk-free rate is 6.2%. both are componded annually, one year forward contracts are currently quoted at a rate of $1.75.

Question:

Identify a strategy with which a trade can earn a profit at no risk by engaging in a forward contract, regardless of her view of the pound’s likely movements. Cafully describ the transactions the trader would make . Show the rate of return that would be earned from this transaction. Assume the trader’s domestic currency is US dollars.

Answer:

foward rate= $1.76/1.062*1.051=$1.7418

With the forward contract selling at $1.75, it is slighly overpriced. Thus, the trader should be able to buy the currency and sell a foward contract to earna return in excess of the risk-free rate at no risk. the specific transactions are as follows:

  1. take $1.76/1.062=$1.6573. Use it to buy 1/1.062= 0.9416 pounds

  2. sell a fowrad contract to deliver 1 pound in one year at the price of &1.75

  3. hold the position fo one year, collecting interest at the U.K. risk free rate of 6.2%. The 0.9416 pound will grow to 0.9416*1.062=1 pound

  4. at expiration, deliver the pound and receive $1.75. This is a return of 1.75/1.6573 - 1=0.0559

my confusion:

  1. what does $1.76/1.062 represent? I understand foward rate= $1.76/1.062*1.051=$1.7418, but what does $1.76/1.062 represent?

  2. “Use it to buy 1/1.062= 0.9416 pounds”, what does this represent? use 1 pound devide by rate in UK risk free rate? what does this really mean?

CAN SOME ONE HELP ME PLZZZ?