From Time Series of Returns to Option Prices: The Stochastic Discount Factor Approach

Chorro, Christophe; Guégan, Dominique; Ielpo, Florian

doi:10.1007/978-3-662-45037-6_3

From Time Series of Returns to Option Prices: The Stochastic Discount Factor Approach

Christophe Chorro⁴,
Dominique Guégan⁴ &
Florian Ielpo⁵

Chapter
First Online: 22 November 2014

2483 Accesses

Abstract

In the perfect and unrealistic Black and Scholes (J Polit Econ 81:637–659, 1973) world, the dynamics $(S_{t})_{t\in [0,T]}$ of the risky asset, under the historical probability $\mathbb{P}$, is given by the following stochastic differential equation:

$$\displaystyle{ dS_{t} =\mu S_{t}dt +\sigma S_{t}dW_{t} }$$

where $(W_{t})_{t\in [0,T]}$ is a standard Brownian motion under $\mathbb{P}$. In this case, there is no ambiguity in the definition the arbitrage-free price of any European contingent claim with maturity T. In fact, in this complete market which is set in continuous time, this value is none other than the value of any replicating portfolio. Moreover, prices may be expressed in terms of conditional expectations under a unique equivalent martingale measure Q whose density with respect to the historical probability is given by the Girsanov theorem

$$\displaystyle{ \frac{dQ} {d\mathbb{P}} = e^{-\frac{\mu -r} {\sigma } W_{T}-\left (\frac{\mu -r} {\sigma } \right )^{2} \frac{T} {2} } }$$

where r is the constant and continuously compound risk-free rate. Unfortunately, as we have seen in Sect. 2.1, the restrictive underlying hypotheses (constant volatility, independent increments, Gaussian log-returns, etc…) are questioned by many empirical studies and GARCH models appear as excellent alternative solutions to potentially overcome some well-documented systematic biases associated with the Black and Scholes model.

Keywords

Option Price
Risky Asset
GARCH Model
Option Price Model
Scholes Model

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 74.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 99.00; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 119.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
In their paper (see also Sect. 2.7), Heston and Nandi also provided a particular GARCH structure that may be seen as a discrete time counterpart of the so-called Heston (1993) stochastic volatility model replicating one of key features of this continuous time model: the fact that the characteristic function of the log-returns under the risk-neutral distribution had a closed-form expression (see Sect. 3.7). This result is particularly interesting because it underlines that GARCH option pricing models may also be seen as competitive discrete time approximations of the classical models used in continuous time finance with the great advantage that they are easy to estimate because the resulting filtering problem is simple. In particular, they may represent interesting and efficient alternative options to Euler approximation schemes (see Duan et al. 2006 and Lindner 2009).
2.
For example, it is now well-documented that the Black and Scholes model underprices out of the money and short maturity options (see Black 1975) and is not able to reproduce the so-called U-shaped relationship between implied volatility and strike price as remarked in Rubinstein (1985).
3.
In this case, the information filtration $(\mathcal{F}_{t})_{t\in \{1,\ldots,T\}}$ is also generated by the log-returns $(Y _{t})_{t\in \{1,\ldots,T\}}$ and the weak and strong market efficiency hypotheses coincide (see Elliott and Madan 1998).
4.
In the case of the discrete time economy introduced in Sect. 3.1, we can take c _t = Y _t and h(c, s) = se ^c.
5.
It means that, in this case, the relative risk aversion coefficient $c_{t+1}\rho _{t}(c_{t+1})$ is a constant.
6.
This may be seen as a conditional version of the following elementary result concerning two-dimensional Gaussian vectors: When (X, Y ) is a Gaussian vector, $\exists (a,b) \in \mathbb{R}^{2}$ such that X − a −bY is a centered Gaussian random variable independent of Y. The proof derives easily from the fact that the orthogonal projection $\Pi (X)$ of X on the vector space generated by the random variables 1 and Y is an affine function of Y and that $X - \Pi (X)$ is, by construction, a Gaussian random variable independent of Y.
7.
As introduced in Remark A.1 of the Appendix, σ(e ^Z ) is the smallest σ-algebra on $\Omega $ that makes the random variable e ^Z measurable. In particular, a real random variable X defined on $\Omega $ is σ(e ^Z ) measurable if and only if it is of the form X = h(e ^Z ) where $h: \mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ is Borelian.
8.
In Ortega (2012) it is proved that the range of GARCH situations in which the minimal martingale measure exists is rather limited.
9.
As remarked in Heston and Nandi (2000) for Gaussian innovations, this exponential affine parameterization is equivalent to obtaining of Black and Scholes prices for call options with 1 day to expiration.
10.
We will elaborate on this point later on for particular distributions using the intermediate value theorem (see Propositions 3.4.5 and 3.4.8).
11.
When X is a centered random variable such that the mapping $\Psi (u) = \mathit{log}(E[e^{\mathit{uX}}])$ is regular we have $\Psi ^{{\prime}}(0) = E[X] = 0$, $\Psi ^{{\prime\prime}}(0) = \mathit{Var}[X]$, $\frac{\Psi ^{{\prime\prime\prime}}(0)} {(\Psi ^{{\prime\prime}}(0))^{\frac{3} {2} }} = \mathit{sk}[X]$ and $\frac{\Psi ^{{\prime\prime\prime}{\prime}}(0)} {(\Psi ^{{\prime\prime}}(0))^{2}} = k[X] - 3$.
12.
See Example 3.4.1 or Remark 3.4.1 for an intuitive interpretation of this modified Sharpe ratio in terms of risk aversion.
13.
Sometimes it is interesting to work with an unconstrained GH distribution and it is sufficient to consider $\tilde{z}_{t} = \frac{z_{t}-E_{\mathbb{P}}[z_{t}]} {\sqrt{\mathit{Var } _{\mathbb{P} } [z_{t } ]}}$ instead of z _t in (3.4). This is the point of view of Badescu et al. (2011). The only difference between the two approaches is a modification in the parameterization of the model.
14.
In general, we are able to obtain an explicit solution only in particular cases (see Proposition 3.4.7 below). Nevertheless, we can compute it efficiently using refined bracketing methods.
15.
For Gaussian innovations (see Example 3.4.1) only the first order conditional moment is impacted by the measure change. Here, θ _t ^q induces not only a shift in the conditional skewness of the GH distribution but also an excess kurtosis (exact values for the associated skewness and excess kurtosis are provided in Barndorff-Nielsen and Blaesild 1981).
16.
In this paper, the authors assume that in Eq. (3.4), $z_{t} = \frac{x_{t}-\frac{a}{b}} {\sqrt{ \frac{a}{b^{2 } }}}$ where x _t follows a G _a(a, b) distribution having the density $\frac{b^{a}x^{a-1}e^{-\mathit{bx}}} {\Gamma (a)} 1_{\mathbb{R}_{+}}(x)$.
17.
In these three cases, θ _t ^q has an analytic form: the pricing equations (3.47) have an explicit solution.
18.
Alexander and Lazar (2006) prove that there is no real forecasting improvement introducing more than two components in the mixture.
19.
First, in this model, the Gaussian and the jump components are intrinsically linked: they have up to a constant the same conditional variance because
$$\displaystyle{\mathit{Var}_{\mathbb{P}}\left [\sqrt{h_{t}}z_{t}^{0}\mid \mathcal{F}_{ t-1}\right ] = h_{t}\ \mbox{ and}\ \mathit{Var}_{\mathbb{P}}\left [\sqrt{h_{t}}\sum \limits _{i=1}^{N_{t}}z_{t}^{i}\mid \mathcal{F}_{ t-1}\right ] = h_{t}\lambda (\mu ^{2} +\sigma ^{2}).}$$
We refer the reader to Christoffersen et al. (2012) for a multiple-shock version of the model where the Gaussian and the jump parts have distinct volatility dynamics. Finally, in Duan et al. (2005), the excess return m _t has a very particular form that is chosen for tractability in order to make the solution of the pricing equations (3.47) explicit. Contrary to this approach, we will take in the empirical part a more realistic expression for m _t even if pricing equations have to be solved numerically.
20.
Even if it tends to contradict the monotonic pattern assumed in existing theory for the SDF, recent empirical studies show evidences on possible U-shapes speaking for quadratic parameterizations (Christoffersen et al. 2013).
21.
Let $f: \mathbb{R}^{2} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ be a continuously differentiable function such that f(x ₀, y ₀) = 0 and $\frac{\partial f} {\partial y}(x_{0},y_{0})\not =0$. The implicit function theorem ensures that there exists an open set $U_{x_{0}}$ containing x ₀, an open set $V _{y_{0}}$ containing y ₀ and a continuously differentiable function $g: U_{x_{0}} \rightarrow V _{y_{0}}$ such that
$$\displaystyle{\left \{(x,g(x))\mid x \in U_{x_{0}}\right \} = \left \{(x,y) \in U_{x_{0}} \times V _{y_{0}}\mid f(x,y) = 0\right \}.}$$
In our setting, we just take
$$\displaystyle{f(x,y) = \mathbb{G}_{(Y _{t},Y _{t}^{2})\mid \mathcal{F}_{t-1}}^{\mathbb{P}}(x + 1,y) - e^{r}\mathbb{G}_{ (Y _{t},Y _{t}^{2})\mid \mathcal{F}_{t-1}}^{\mathbb{P}}(x,y).}$$
22.
Even if it is not possible to estimate the free parameter π only using the log-returns (π not being a parameter of the physical dynamics) we will see in Sect. 3.7 that π may be efficiently extracted from option prices or in Chap. 4 that it may be estimated from the so-called VIX.
23.
Nevertheless, Monfort and Pegoraro (2012) proved that a natural extension is possible in the case of the mixture of Gaussian distributions.
24.
In fact, from (3.78), we deduce the empirical call-put parity
$$\displaystyle{\frac{e^{-r(T-t)}} {n} \sum \limits _{i=1}^{n}(\tilde{S}_{ T,i} - K)_{+} + S_{t} = \mathit{Ke}^{-r(T-t)} + \frac{e^{-r(T-t)}} {n} \sum \limits _{i=1}^{n}(K -\tilde{ S}_{ T,i})_{+}}$$
that is equivalent to (3.80).
25.
Using the fact that prices may equivalently be expressed using expectations under the historical probability involving the stochastic discount factor (see (3.12)), Huang (2014) and Huang and Tu (2014) proposed and studied an historical version of the EMS when a risk-neutral model is not conveniently obtained. The price to pay is a computational cost that may be heavy if extra techniques are not used.
26.
Here, there is no particular assumption on the shape of the SDF but relation (3.78) may be seen as an empirical pricing equation.
27.
To be more precise, Heston and Nandi (2000) proved an explicit backward-recursive equation to compute efficiently the moment generating function of the log-returns (see Proposition 3.7.1).
28.
See for instance Hsieh and Ritchken (2005) for comparisons of linear and non-linear modelling in the Gaussian case.
29.
In Christoffersen et al. (2006) and Mercuri (2008), the authors use the same idea with some non-Gaussian innovations combined with very particular affine GARCH specifications.

References

Abramowitz M, Stegun I (1964). Handbook of mathematical functions with formulas, graphs and mathematical tables. Dover, New York
Google Scholar
Aît-Sahalia Y, Lo A (1998) Nonparametric estimation of state-price densities implicit in financial asset prices. J Financ 53:499–547
CrossRef Google Scholar
Aît-Sahalia Y, Lo A (2000) Nonparametric risk management and implied risk aversion. J Econ 94:9–51
CrossRef Google Scholar
Alexander C, Lazar E (2006) Normal mixture GARCH(1,1): applications to exchange rate modelling. J Appl Econ 21:307–336
CrossRef Google Scholar
Back K, Pliska SR (1991) On the fundamental theorem of asset pricing with an infinite state space. J Math Econ 20(1):1–18
CrossRef Google Scholar
Badescu A, Kulperger R (2008) GARCH option pricing: a semiparametric approach. Insur Math Econ 43(1):69–84
CrossRef Google Scholar
Badescu A, Kulperger R, Lazar E (2008) Option valuation with normal mixture GARCH. Stud Nonlinear Dynam Econ 12(2):1–42
Google Scholar
Badescu A, Elliott RJ, Siu TK (2009) Esscher transforms and consumption-based models. Insur Math Econ 45(3):337–347
CrossRef Google Scholar
Badescu A, Elliott RJ, Kulperger R, Miettinen J, Siu TK (2011) A comparison of pricing kernels for GARCH option pricing with generalized hyperbolic distributions. Int J Theor Appl Financ 14(5):669–708
CrossRef Google Scholar
Barndorff-Nielsen OE (1995) Normal inverse Gaussian processes and the modelling of stock returns. Research Report 300, Department Theoretical Statistics, Aarhus University
Google Scholar
Barndorff-Nielsen OE, Blaesild P (1981) Hyperbolic distributions and ramifications: contributions to theory and applications. In: Taillie C, Patil GP, Baldessari BA (eds) Statistical distributions in scientific work, vol 4. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp 19–44
CrossRef Google Scholar
Barone-Adesi G, Engle RF, Mancini LA (2008) GARCH option pricing model in incomplete markets. Rev Financ Stud 21(3):1223–1258
CrossRef Google Scholar
Bertholon H, Monfort A, Pegoraro F (2008) Econometric asset pricing modelling. J Financ Econ 6(4):407–458
Google Scholar
Black F (1975) Fact and fantasy in the use of options. Financ Anal J 31(4):36–41
CrossRef Google Scholar
Black F, Scholes M (1973) The pricing of options and corporate liabilities. J Polit Econ 81:637–659
CrossRef Google Scholar
Bouchaud JP, Potters M (2003) Theory of financial risk and derivative pricing: from statistical physics to risk management. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
CrossRef Google Scholar
Breeden DT, Gibbons MR, Litzenberger RH (1989) Empirical test of the consumption-oriented CAPM. J Financ 44(2):231–262
Google Scholar
Brennan MJ (1979) The pricing of contingent claims in discrete time models. J Financ 24(1):53–68
CrossRef Google Scholar
Bühlmann H, Delbaen F, Embrechts P, Shiryaev AN (1996) No-arbitrage change of measure and conditional Esscher transforms. CWI Q 9:291–317
Google Scholar
Carr P, Madan D (1999) Option valuation using the fast fourier transform. J Comput Financ 2(4):61–73
Google Scholar
Chorro C, Guégan D, Ielpo F (2010) Martingalized historical approach for option pricing. Financ Res Lett 7(1):24–28
CrossRef Google Scholar
Chorro C, Guégan D, Ielpo F (2012) Option pricing for GARCH type models with generalized hyperbolic innovations. Quant Financ 12(7):1079–1094
CrossRef Google Scholar
Christoffersen P, Heston SL, Jacobs K (2006) Option valuation with conditional skewness. J Econ 131:253–284
CrossRef Google Scholar
Christoffersen P, Jacobs K, Ornthanalai C, Wang Y (2008) Option valuation with long-run and short-run volatility components. J Financ Econ 90:272–297
CrossRef Google Scholar
Christoffersen P, Elkamhi R, Feunou B, Jacobs K (2010) Option valuation with conditional heteroskedasticity and non-normality. Rev Financ Stud 23(5):2139–2183
CrossRef Google Scholar
Christoffersen P, Jacobs K, Ornthanalai C (2012) Dynamic jump intensities and risk premiums: evidence from S&P500 returns and options. J Financ Econ 106(3):447–472
CrossRef Google Scholar
Christoffersen P, Heston SL, Jacobs K (2013) Capturing option anomalies with a variance-dependent pricing kernel. Rev Financ Stud 26(8):1963–2006
CrossRef Google Scholar
Cochrane J (2001) Asset pricing. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Google Scholar
Dalang RC, Morton A, Willinger W (1990) Equivalent martingale measures and no-arbitrage in stochastic securities market models. Stochast Stochast Rep 29(2):185–201
CrossRef Google Scholar
Delbaen F, Schachermayer W (2006) The mathematics of arbitrage. Springer finance series. Springer, Berlin
Google Scholar
Duan JC (1995) The GARCH option pricing model. Math Financ 5:13–32
CrossRef Google Scholar
Duan JC, Simonato JG (1998) Empirical martingale simulation for asset prices. Manag Sci 44:1218–1233
CrossRef Google Scholar
Duan JC, Gauthier G, Simonato JG (2001) Asymptotic distribution of the EMS option price estimator. Manag Sci 47:1122–1132
CrossRef Google Scholar
Duan JC, Ritchken P, Sun Z (2005) Jump starting GARCH: pricing and hedging options with jumps in returns and volatilities. Working Paper, University of Toronto
Google Scholar
Duan JC, Ritchken P, Sun Z (2006) Approximating GARCH-jump models, jump diffusion processes, and option pricing. Math Financ 16:21–52
CrossRef Google Scholar
Eberlein E, Hammerstein EAV (2003) Generalized hyperbolic and inverse Gaussian distributions: limiting cases and approximation of processes. In: Proceedings of the 4th Ascona conference. Birkhauser, Boston
Google Scholar
Eberlein E, Prause K (2002) The generalized hyperbolic model: financial derivatives and risk measures. In: Geman H, Madan D, Pliska S, Vorst T (eds) Mathematical finance-bachelier congress 2000. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 245–267
CrossRef Google Scholar
Elliott R, Madan D (1998) A discrete time equivalent martingale measure. Math Financ 2(8):127–152
CrossRef Google Scholar
Elliott R, Siu TK, Chan L (2006) Option pricing for GARCH models with Markov switching. Int J Theor Appl Financ 9(6):825–841
CrossRef Google Scholar
Embretchs P, Frey R, McNeil AJ (2005) Quantitative risk management. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Google Scholar
Esscher F (1932) On the probability function in the collective theory of risk. Skandinavisk Aktuarietidskrift 15:175–195
Google Scholar
Föllmer H, Schweiser M (1991) Hedging of contingent claims under incomplete information. In: Davis MHA, Elliott RJ (eds) Applied stochastic analysis. Gordon and Breach, London, pp 389–414
Google Scholar
Gerber HU, Shiu SW (1994a) Option pricing by Esscher transforms. Trans Soc Actuar 46:99–191
Google Scholar
Gerber HU, Shiu SW (1994b) Martingale approach to pricing perpetual American options. In: Proceedings of the 4th AFIR international colloqium, transaction of Society of Actuaries, Orlando, pp 659–689
Google Scholar
Gouriéroux C, Monfort A (2007) Econometric specification of stochastic discount factor models. J Econ 136(2):509–530
CrossRef Google Scholar
Guégan D, Ielpo F, Lalaharison H (2013) Option pricing with discrete time jump processes. J Econ Dyn Control 37(12):2417–2445
CrossRef Google Scholar
Hansen LP, Richard SF (1987) The role of conditioning information in deducing testable restrictions implied by dynamic asset pricing models. Econometrica 55(3):587–613
CrossRef Google Scholar
Harrison JM, Kreps DM (1979) Martingales and arbitrage in multiperiod securities markets. J Econ Theory 20(3):381–408
CrossRef Google Scholar
Harrison JM, Pliska SR (1981) Martingales and stochastic integrals in the theory of continuous trading. Stoch Process Appl 11:215–260
CrossRef Google Scholar
Heston SL (1993) A closed-form solution for options with stochastic volatility with applications to bond and currency options. Rev Financ Stud 6(2):327–343
CrossRef Google Scholar
Heston SL, Nandi S (2000) A closed-form GARCH option valuation. Rev Financ Stud 13:585–625
CrossRef Google Scholar
Hsieh K, Ritchken P (2005) An empirical comparison of GARCH option pricing models. Rev Deriv Res 8:129–150
CrossRef Google Scholar
Huang SF (2014) A modified empirical martingale simulation for financial derivative pricing. Commun Stat Theory Methods 43(2):328–334
CrossRef Google Scholar
Huang SF, Tu YT (2014) Asymptotic distribution of the EPMS estimator for financial derivatives pricing. Comput Stat Data Anal 73:129–145
CrossRef Google Scholar
Jackwerth J (2000) Recovering risk aversion from option prices and realized returns. Rev Financ Stud 13:433–451
CrossRef Google Scholar
Jacod J, Shiryaev A (1998) Local martingales and the fundamental asset pricing theorems in the discrete-time case. Financ Stochast 2:259–273
CrossRef Google Scholar
Kreps DM (1981) Arbitrage and equilibrium in economics with infinitely many commodities. J Math Econ 8:15–35
CrossRef Google Scholar
Lindner AM (2009) Continuous time approximations to GARCH and stochastic volatility models. In: Andersen TG, Davis RA, Kreiss JP, Mikosch T (eds) Handbook of financial time series. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 481–496
CrossRef Google Scholar
Lucas RE (1978) Asset prices in an exchange economy. Econometrica 46:1429–1445
CrossRef Google Scholar
Mainardi F, Rogosin S (2006) The origin of infinitely divisible distributions: from de Finetti’s problem to Lévy-Khintchine formula. Math Methods Econ Financ 1:37–55
Google Scholar
Menn C, Rachev ST (2005) A GARCH option pricing model with α-stable innovations. Eur J Oper Res 163:201–209
CrossRef Google Scholar
Mercuri L (2008) Option pricing in a garch model with tempered stable innovations. Financ Res Lett 5(3):172–182
CrossRef Google Scholar
Monfort A, Pegoraro F (2012) Asset pricing with second-order Esscher transforms. J Bank Financ 36(6):1678–1687
CrossRef Google Scholar
Ortega JP (2012) GARCH options via local risk minimization. Quant Financ 12(7):1095–1110
CrossRef Google Scholar
Pratt JW (1964) Risk aversion in the small and in the large. Econometrica 32:122–136
CrossRef Google Scholar
Rosenberg JV, Engle RF (2002) Empirical pricing kernels. J Financ Econ 64:341–372
CrossRef Google Scholar
Rubinstein M (1976) The valuation of uncertain income streams and the pricing of options. Bell J Econ 7:407–425
CrossRef Google Scholar
Rubinstein M (1985) Nonparametric tests of alternative option pricing models using all reported trades and quotes on the 30 most active CBOE option classes from August 23, 1976 through August 31, 1978. J Financ 40:455–480
CrossRef Google Scholar
Schachermayer W (1992) A Hilbert space proof of the fundamental theorem of asset pricing in finite discrete time. Insur Math Econ 11(4):249–257
CrossRef Google Scholar
Schoutens W (2003) Lévy processes in finance: pricing financial derivatives. Wiley, New York
CrossRef Google Scholar
Schroder M (2004) Risk neutral parameter shifts and derivatives pricing in discrete time. J Financ 59:2375–2402
CrossRef Google Scholar
Siu TK, Tong H, Yang H (2004) On pricing derivatives under GARCH models: a dynamic Gerber-Shiu approach. N Am Actuar J 8:17–31
Google Scholar
Walker JS (1996) Fast fourier transforms, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton
Google Scholar
Yuan ZS, Chen GM (2009a) Strong consistency of the empirical martingale simulation option price estimator. Acta Math Appl Sin (English Series) 25(3):355–368
CrossRef Google Scholar
Yuan ZS, Chen GM (2009b) Asymptotic normality for EMS option price estimator with continuous or discontinuous payoff functions. Manag Sci 55:1438–1450
CrossRef Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Maison des Sciences Economiques, Université Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne Centre d’Economie de la Sorbonne, Paris, France
Christophe Chorro & Dominique Guégan
Lombard Odier Darier Hentsch & Cie, Genève, Switzerland
Florian Ielpo

Authors

Christophe Chorro
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Dominique Guégan
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Florian Ielpo
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Chorro, C., Guégan, D., Ielpo, F. (2015). From Time Series of Returns to Option Prices: The Stochastic Discount Factor Approach. In: A Time Series Approach to Option Pricing. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45037-6_3

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45037-6_3
Published: 22 November 2014
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-662-45036-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-662-45037-6
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsEconomics and Finance (R0)