3
$\begingroup$

I am reading a research paper, and there is such condition: $$ E_t\Big[\frac{(F_t - S_{t+1})P_t}{S_tP_{t+1}}X\Big]=0 $$

where $E_t$ is expected value. I suspect that $E_t[F_t] = F_t$ because this variable (forward exchange rate) is observable at time $t$. Variable $S_t$ is exchange rate today, $P_t$ is price level in the economy and $X$ is, simply put, another random variable.

Then, it is said that under assumption that all variables are conditionally log-normally distributed, this equation can be rewritten as: $$ E_t(s_{t+1}) = f_t -0.5Var_t(s_{t+1})+Cov_t(s_{t+1}, p_{t+1}) - Cov_t(s_{t+1},x) $$ where $f$, $s$, $p$ and $x$ are logarithms of $S$, $F$, $P$ and $X$.

I don't understand how can the first equation be written this way. How can I represent $E_t(s_{t+1})$ the way it is written here starting with the first equation? Could anyone direct me towards the theory that is used here?

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ Presumably, you make some assumption that implies $f_t$ and $p_{t+1}$ are uncorrelated? $\endgroup$
    – whuber
    Commented Sep 16, 2015 at 23:00
  • $\begingroup$ @whuber♦ I assume that in the text I am reading, this assumption can be made. But I just in general don't understand what the steps are for getting the formula for $E_t(s_{t+1}).$ $\endgroup$
    – forstenn
    Commented Sep 23, 2015 at 13:33
  • $\begingroup$ The assertion in the amended question appears to be incorrect unless you also assume (a) $X$ is independent of $P_{t+1}$ and (b) $X$ has nonzero expectation. $\endgroup$
    – whuber
    Commented Sep 23, 2015 at 14:04
  • $\begingroup$ I rather feel that $X$ (variable which stands for marginal rate of substitution in consumption of an investor) should be dependent on $P_{t+1}$. As for (b), X indeed has nonzero expectation. $\endgroup$
    – forstenn
    Commented Sep 23, 2015 at 19:21
  • $\begingroup$ It's hard to see how to get rid of a covariance term between $X$ and $p_{t+1}$ in the calculation of that expectation, unless the covariance is zero. The presence of $S_t$ and $P_t$ is no problem. $\endgroup$
    – whuber
    Commented Sep 23, 2015 at 20:16

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

The question changed substantially just as this answer was completed. I am retaining the answer because it demonstrates the techniques needed to address the new question.


We have to make assumptions and add conditions in order to justify this calculation: $f_t$, $s_{t+1}$, and $p_{t+1}$ must have a multivariate normal distribution. (This is stronger than assuming they are separately normal.) In this case, the starting condition $\mathbb{E}_t\left[\frac{(F_t - S_{t+1})}{P_{t+1}}\right]=0$ is equivalent to

$$\mathbb{E}_t\left(\frac{F_t}{P_{t+1}}\right) = \mathbb{E}_t\left(\frac{S_{t+1}}{P_{t+1}}\right).$$

Both sides have lognormal distributions, because

$$\log\left(\frac{F_t}{P_{t+1}}\right) = \log(F_t) - \log(P_{t+1}) = f_t - p_{t+1}$$

is a linear combination of jointly normal variables and likewise for the right hand side. Let's compute expectations (relative to the Sigma algebra at time $t$) using basic information about multivariate lognormal distributions and see where this goes:

$$\mathbb{E}_t\left(\frac{F_t}{P_{t+1}}\right) = \mathbb{E}_t\left(\exp(f_t - p_{t+1})\right) = \exp\left(\mathbb{E}_t(f_t - p_{t+1}) + \frac{1}{2}\text{Var}_t(f_t - p_{t+1})\right); \\ \mathbb{E}_t\left(\frac{S_{t+1}}{P_{t+1}}\right) = \mathbb{E}_t\left(\exp(s_{t+1} - p_{t+1})\right) = \exp\left(\mathbb{E}_t(s_{t+1} - p_{t+1}) + \frac{1}{2}\text{Var}_t(s_{t+1} - p_{t+1})\right).$$

Equating the right hand sides and taking logarithms yields

$$\mathbb{E}_t(f_t - p_{t+1}) + \frac{1}{2}\text{Var}_t(f_t - p_{t+1}) = \mathbb{E}_t(s_{t+1} - p_{t+1}) + \frac{1}{2}\text{Var}_t(s_{t+1} - p_{t+1}).$$

Exploiting the linearity of expectation and the bilinearity of covariance converts this into a sum of various expectations, variances, and covariances. Many terms appear on both sides and can be cleared out. Here's what is left:

$$\mathbb{E}_t(f_t) + \frac{1}{2}\text{Var}_t(f_t)- \text{Cov}(f_t, p_{t+1})\\ = \mathbb{E}_t(s_{t+1}) + \frac{1}{2}\text{Var}_t(s_{t+1}) - \text{Cov}(s_{t+1}, p_{t+1}).$$

At time $t$, $f_t$ is constant (almost surely) and therefore can be identified with its expectation. The covariances with random variables are zero and so is its variance. These observations simplify the preceding to

$$f_t = \mathbb{E}_t(s_{t+1}) + \frac{1}{2}\text{Var}_t(s_{t+1}) - \text{Cov}(s_{t+1}, p_{t+1}),$$

which is the desired formula.

$\endgroup$
1
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ ♦ Brilliant! Thank you a lot for your answer. The author in the paper I am trying to understand (Charles Engel, Journal of Empirical Finance 3 (1996), page 150) didn't explicitly mention that the variables have multivariate normal distribution, but it could be the case. Anyway, it's so great that I can unfold the logic now. $\endgroup$
    – forstenn
    Commented Sep 23, 2015 at 19:16

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.