Journal of Applied Mathematics

  • J. Appl. Math.
  • Volume 2014, Special Issue (2013), Article ID 408685, 14 pages.

A Multiperiod Equilibrium Pricing Model

Minsuk Kwak, Traian A. Pirvu, and Huayue Zhang

Full-text: Open access


We propose an equilibrium pricing model in a dynamic multiperiod stochastic framework with uncertain income. There are one tradable risky asset (stock/commodity), one nontradable underlying (temperature), and also a contingent claim (weather derivative) written on the tradable risky asset and the nontradable underlying in the market. The price of the contingent claim is priced in equilibrium by optimal strategies of representative agent and market clearing condition. The risk preferences are of exponential type with a stochastic coefficient of risk aversion. Both subgame perfect strategy and naive strategy are considered and the corresponding equilibrium prices are derived. From the numerical result we examine how the equilibrium prices vary in response to changes in model parameters and highlight the importance of our equilibrium pricing principle.

Article information

J. Appl. Math., Volume 2014, Special Issue (2013), Article ID 408685, 14 pages.

First available in Project Euclid: 1 October 2014

Permanent link to this document

Digital Object Identifier

Mathematical Reviews number (MathSciNet)

Zentralblatt MATH identifier


Kwak, Minsuk; Pirvu, Traian A.; Zhang, Huayue. A Multiperiod Equilibrium Pricing Model. J. Appl. Math. 2014, Special Issue (2013), Article ID 408685, 14 pages. doi:10.1155/2014/408685.

Export citation


  • M. Rubinstein, “The valuation of uncertain income streams and the pricing of options,” The Rand Journal of Economics, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 407–425, 1976.
  • M. J. Brennan, “The pricing of contingent claims in discrete time models,” The Journal of Finance, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 53–68, 1979.
  • S. Bhattacharya, “Notes on multiperiod valuation and the pricing of options,” The Journal of Finance, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 163–180, 1981.
  • A. Bizid and E. Jouini, “Incomplete markets and short-sales constraints: an equilibrium approach,” International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 211–243, 2001.
  • A. Câmara, “A generalization of the brennan-rubinstein ap-proach for the pricing of derivatives,” The Journal of Finance, vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 805–819, 2003.
  • M. Cao and J. Wei, “Weather derivatives valuation and market price of weather risk,” Journal of Futures Markets, vol. 24, no. 11, pp. 1065–1089, 2004.
  • Y. Lee and S. S. Oren, “An equilibrium pricing model for weather derivatives in a multi-commodity setting,” Energy Economics, vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 702–713, 2009.
  • Y. Lee and S. S. Oren, “A multi-period equilibrium pricing model of weather derivatives,” Energy Systems, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 3–30, 2010.
  • P. Cheridito, U. Horst, M. Kupper, and T. A. Pirvu, “Equilibrium pricing in incomplete markets under translation invariant pref-erences,” 2012,
  • R. E. Lucas, Jr., “Asset prices in an exchange economy,” Econometrica, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 1429–1445, 1978.
  • S. Hodges and A. Neuberger, “Optimal replication of contingent claims under transaction costs,” Review of Futures Markets, vol. 8, pp. 222–239, 1989.
  • M. Musiela, E. Sokolova, and T. Zariphopoulou, “Indifference valuation in incomplete binomial models,” Mathematics in Ac-tion, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 1–36, 2010.
  • V. Henderson, “Valuation of claims on nontraded assets using utility maximization,” Mathematical Finance, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 351–373, 2002.
  • M. Musiela and T. Zariphopoulou, “A valuation algorithm for indifference prices in incomplete markets,” Finance and Stochas-tics, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 399–414, 2004.
  • V. Henderson and D. Hobson, “Utility indierence pricing-an overview,” in Volume on Indierence Pricing, R. Carmona, Ed., Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA, 2004.
  • T. A. Pirvu and H. Zhang, “Utility indierence pricing: a time consistent approach,” Applied Mathematical Finance, vol. 20, pp. 304–326, 2013.
  • S. Gordon and P. St-Amour, “A preference regime model of bull and bear markets,” American Economic Review, vol. 90, no. 4, pp. 1019–1033, 2000.
  • N. Barberis and M. Huang, “Mental accounting, loss aversion, and individual stock returns,” The Journal of Finance, vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 1247–1292, 2001.
  • J.-P. Danthine, J. B. Donaldson, C. Giannikos, and H. Guirguis, “On the consequences of state dependent preferences for the pricing of financial assets,” Finance Research Letters, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 143–153, 2004.
  • S. Gordon and P. St-Amour, “Asset returns and state-dependent risk preferences,” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 241–252, 2004.
  • B. Yuan and K. Chen, “Impact of investor's varying risk aversion on the dynamics of asset price fluctuations,” Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 189–214, 2006.
  • T. Berrada, J. Detemple, and M. Rindisbacher, “Asset pricing with regime-dependent preferences and learning,” 2013, http://
  • T. Björk and A. Murgoci, “A general theory of Markovian time inconsistent stochastic control problems,” 2010,
  • H. Wu, “Time-consistent strategies for a multiperiod mean-variance portfolio selection problem,” Journal of Applied Mathematics, vol. 2013, Article ID 841627, 13 pages, 2013.
  • N. Gârleanu, L. H. Pedersen, and A. M. Poteshman, “Demand-based option pricing,” Review of Financial Studies, vol. 22, no. 10, pp. 4259–4299, 2009. \endinput