Share This Article:

Are Securities Also Derivatives?

Abstract Full-Text HTML XML Download Download as PDF (Size:304KB) PP. 430-441
DOI: 10.4236/ajor.2012.23051    4,705 Downloads   6,597 Views   Citations
Author(s)    Leave a comment

ABSTRACT

This paper has used the Arbitrage Theorem (Gordan Theorem) to show that first, all securities are derivatives for each other, and they are priced by the same risk neutral probability measure. Second, after the firm changes its debt-equity ratio, the equityholders can always combine the new equity with other existing securities to create a home-made equity which will give exactly the same time-1 payoff of the old equity. That is, we have a capital structure irrelevancy proposition: changes in firms’ debt-equity ratios will not affect equityholders’ wealth (welfare), and equityholders’ preferences toward variance are irrelevant. Third, when the firm moves from a more certain project to a more uncertain one, the time-0 price of equity will increase, but (because the time-1 payoff of common bond has an upper bound) the time-0 price of common bond will decrease. Fourth, different labor contractual arrangements will not affect the time-0 price of labor input. When the firm moves from a more certain project to a more uncertain one, the time-0 price of labor input will increase if it is under the share or the mixed contract.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Cite this paper

K. Chang, "Are Securities Also Derivatives?," American Journal of Operations Research, Vol. 2 No. 3, 2012, pp. 430-441. doi: 10.4236/ajor.2012.23051.

References

[1] F. Black and M. Scholes, “The Pricing of Options and Corporate Liabilities,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 81, No. 3, 1973, pp. 637-654. doi:10.1086/260062
[2] J. Cox, S. Ross and M. Rubinstein, “Option Pricing: A Simplified Approach,” Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 7, No. 3, 1979, pp. 229-263. doi:10.1016/0304-405X(79)90015-1
[3] K. P. Chang, “A Reconsideration of the Modigliani- Miller Propositions,” 2004. http://ssrn.com/abstract=657921
[4] F. Modigliani and M. Miller, “The Cost of Capital, Corporation Finance and the Theory of Investment,” American Economic Review, Vol. 48, No. 3, 1958, pp. 261-297.
[5] M. Miller, “The Modigliani-Miller Propositions: After Thirty Years,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 2, No. 4, 1988, pp. 99-120. doi:10.1257/jep.2.4.99
[6] S. Ross, R. Westerfield and J. Jaffe, “Corporate Finance,” McGraw-Hill, New York, 2010.
[7] R. Brealey, S. Myers and F. Allen, “Principles of Corporate Finance,” McGraw-Hill, New York, 2006.
[8] S. Cheung, “Private Property Rights and Sharecropping,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 76, No. 6, 1968, pp. 1107-1122. doi:10.1086/259477
[9] R. Litzenberger and H. Sosin, “The Theory of Recapitalizations and the Evidence of Dual Purpose Funds,” Journal of Finance, Vol. 32, No. 5, 1977, pp. 1433-1455. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.1977.tb03346.x
[10] C. Huang and R. Litzenberger, “Foundations for Financial Economics,” Elsevier Science Publishing, New York, 1988.

  
comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2019 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.