Ah yes I get what you're yeah I know the underlying formulas for how the VIX is calculated you can apply that same thing to other single names but what's your point where are you going with this?
I'm not obsessed with synthetics w.r.t. delta1. I am telling you that it's a marketable weekly forward and therefore your interpolation is pointless unless you require something higher freq than weekly. There is no optionality with the synthetic. If you want to waste your time using CS against the VX-monthlies then so be it. I gotta go.
WUT. SN is cash vol bc there is no term structure. The synthetic is D1. You're given a marketable/traded synthetic in the weekly series. How do you not *get* that the weekly synthetic = weekly futures?!
i got some hot tail that is higher priority, the great thing about message forums is it waits, unlike the hot tail. i shall respond later when ive actually thought about it with a clear head
You can't just use an arbitrary spline you f****** dumbass because that's not guaranteed to be arbitrage-free. You're right I am insane for even engaging with you. It just so happens that evolution is so robust you can still be an idiot and do all sorts of stupid things and survive and even make a large amount of money like yourself but that doesn't mean you know what the hell you're talking about. My purposes I cannot be having inconsistencies in my model even if it does happen to be profitable due to whatever fluke or thing you chose to overlook
Cubic spline interpolation is inadequate for estimating implied volatility with synthetics due to its disregard for the no-arbitrage condition, which is critical for a model's validity in financial markets.
It seems there was a misunderstanding. I am aware of the approach of using weekly options to estimate the implied volatility structure, akin to creating a synthetic VIX-like indicator. By utilizing the prices of weekly options, one can derive a snapshot of market expectations of volatility over the short term, potentially without the need for constant rebalancing, thus saving on transaction costs. However, my concern was about ensuring the no-arbitrage condition while employing this method.Using cubic spline interpolation on the implied volatilities derived from these weekly options can indeed provide a smooth curve across different strike prices. Yet, it's crucial that this method adheres to the no-arbitrage condition to prevent any mispricing or incorrect risk assessments. Any methodology that overlooks the no-arbitrage condition could lead to misleading conclusions about the volatility structure, regardless of the data source, be it prices of options or the underlying security.The no-arbitrage condition is fundamental for maintaining a reliable and robust model, ensuring consistency and validity in the financial markets. So, while the approach of using weekly options combined with cubic spline interpolation might offer a way to estimate implied volatility, it's essential to confirm that this method satisfies the no-arbitrage condition to provide a truly accurate representation of the implied volatility structure.