Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Exams - Please Limit Discussion to Exam-Related Topics > SoA/CAS Preliminary Exams > Investment / Financial Markets
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions


Investment / Financial Markets Old Exam MFE Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-03-2014, 10:50 PM
lllj's Avatar
lllj lllj is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5,341
Default normal distribution question SOA #64

Getting confused about a negative sign here and it's bugging me.

σ=-.25

Normally if I'm looking for probability(x<#)
I do
(#-mean)/std = z, then N(z) to get probability

So in this case we want prob(lnx<u)=.95 so N(z)=.95 so z=1.645 so
1.645 = (u-1.075)/(-.25√2)
But then taking U=8*e^u that's giving me 13.1

So obviously I'm getting U and L switched somehow but I'm confused?

ugh how do i have a math degree? maybe just too late to be studying.

Last edited by lllj; 07-03-2014 at 11:08 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-03-2014, 10:52 PM
lllj's Avatar
lllj lllj is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5,341
Default

or am i just being stupid and p(X>x) = N(z), not P(X<x)? i'm going to sleep
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-03-2014, 10:53 PM
jcmc2112's Avatar
jcmc2112 jcmc2112 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,448
Default

How'd you get a negtive sigma? O_O
__________________
( ͡ ͜ʖ ͡)
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-03-2014, 11:04 PM
lllj's Avatar
lllj lllj is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5,341
Default

says right in the solution

S(t) =8exp[0.5375t − 0.25Z(t)]


but i did
dY=2SdS+.5*2*(dS)^2
and dS=(α-δ)Sdt+σSdZ
so
dY=2S((α-δ)Sdt+σSdZ)+σ^2*S^2dt
dY/Y=2(α-δ+σ^2)dt+2σdZ

so comparing that to dY/Y=1.2dt-.5dZ,
2σ=-.5
σ=-.25

then i got m=(α-δ-.5σ^2)*2 by finding
2(α-δ+σ^2)=1.2=2(α-δ+(-.25)^2)
(α-δ)=.56875
m=(.56875-.5*(-.25)^2)*2=1.075
..right?

honestly i'm so sick of staring at this stuff though

Last edited by lllj; 07-03-2014 at 11:07 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-07-2014, 09:35 PM
phi349's Avatar
phi349 phi349 is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 32
Default

I had a question about this problem as well, but it was a different point. It's asking for the Higher confidence interval which we find as N^-1= (1-.90)/2 and equals (-1.64485, 1.64485). I then applied the lognormal confidence interval for stock prices by computing S(0)e^(a-d-.5(-.25)^2)*2+(-.25)*sqrt(2)*1.64485 (since it's asking for the higher lognormal interval). But in the solution provided by Actuarial Brew, they use the absolute value of the volatility to compute this. Does any one know why it was done this way? Thanks in advance!
__________________
P FM MFE MLC C IA FA ASA GHCOR
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-07-2014, 09:36 PM
phi349's Avatar
phi349 phi349 is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 32
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jcmc2112 View Post
How'd you get a negtive sigma? O_O
It was provided in the problem as part of a GMB.
__________________
P FM MFE MLC C IA FA ASA GHCOR
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-07-2014, 10:47 PM
lllj's Avatar
lllj lllj is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5,341
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by phi349 View Post
I had a question about this problem as well, but it was a different point. It's asking for the Higher confidence interval which we find as N^-1= (1-.90)/2 and equals (-1.64485, 1.64485). I then applied the lognormal confidence interval for stock prices by computing S(0)e^(a-d-.5(-.25)^2)*2+(-.25)*sqrt(2)*1.64485 (since it's asking for the higher lognormal interval). But in the solution provided by Actuarial Brew, they use the absolute value of the volatility to compute this. Does any one know why it was done this way? Thanks in advance!
maybe this is the same question as mine, since it seems to have to do with a negative sign
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-08-2014, 08:45 PM
lllj's Avatar
lllj lllj is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5,341
Default

by the way just looked at this with a fresh set of eyes, still not making sense.

normal tables/calculators give P(z<N(z))
looking up 1.645 in a table gives P(z<1.645)=P(N(z)<.9)=P(X<x) (X variable, x constant)

z=(x-m)/s

for P(X<U)

1.645=(lnU-m)/s
1.645=(lnU-1.075)/(-.25√2)
U=e^(-1.645*.25√2+1.075)

why does this give me the lower bound helppp. clearly i'm getting something backwards, and i don't feel like this ever gives me a problem on anything besides this one problem.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-08-2014, 11:26 PM
lllj's Avatar
lllj lllj is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5,341
Default

mystery solved? i think the note on pg. 445 might answer my question.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.23011 seconds with 9 queries