arxiv: v2 [math.pr] 8 Dec 2014

Transcription

1 arxiv: v2 [mah.pr] 8 Dec 214 BSDEs DRIVEN BY A MULTI-DIMENSIONAL MARTINGALE AND THEIR APPLICATIONS TO MARKET MODELS WITH FUNDING COSTS Tianyang Nie and Marek Rukowski School of Mahemaics and Saisics Universiy of Sydney Sydney, NSW 26, Ausralia 1 December 214 Absrac We esablish some well-posedness and comparison resuls for BSDEs driven by one- and muli-dimensional maringales. On he one hand, our approach is largely moivaed by resuls and mehods developed in Carbone e al. [3] and El Karoui and Huang [7]. On he oher hand, our resuls are also moivaed by he recen developmens in arbirage pricing heory under funding coss and collaeralizaion. A new version of he comparison heorem for BSDEs driven by a muli-dimensional maringale is esablished and applied o he pricing and hedging BSDEs sudied in Bielecki and Rukowski [1] and Nie and Rukowski [25]. This allows us o obain he exisence and uniqueness resuls for unilaeral prices and o demonsrae he exisence of no-arbirage bounds for a collaeralized conrac when boh agens have non-negaive iniial endowmens. Keywords: BSDE, comparison heorem, arbirage pricing, funding coss Mahemaics Subjecs Classificaion 21): 6H1, 91G4 The research of Tianyang Nie and Marek Rukowski was suppored under Ausralian Research Council s Discovery Projecs funding scheme DP121895).

2 2 T. Nie and M. Rukowski 1 Inroducion The origin of he heory of backward sochasic differenial equaions BSDEs) can be raced back o he work by Bismu [2] and, especially, he paper by Pardoux and Peng [27], who were he firs o consider he general BSDEs driven by a Brownian moion. Since hen, he heory of BSDEs araced a grea ineres because of is applicaion in sochasic conrol heory, PDEs and mahemaical finance see, e.g., [8, 9, 11, 28, 29, 31]). However, despie he fac ha prices of financial asses are usually modeled as semimaringales, applicaions of BSDEs in finance beyond he Brownian seing are relaively rare see, e.g., [4, 5, 17, 22, 24]). The BSDEs driven by a semimaringale were already inroduced by Chiashvili [6], bu since hen BSDEs driven by a general maringale were no exensively sudied. Carbone e al. [3] and El Karoui and Huang [7] examined BSDEs driven by a càdlàg maringale wihou posulaing he predicable represenaion propery PRP), whereas Li [15] examined BSDEs driven by a one-dimensional coninuous maringale enjoying he PRP. In his noe, we firs esablish some resuls for BSDEs driven by one- and muli-dimensional maringales. Our approach is largely moivaed by resuls and mehods developed in Carbone e al. [3] and El Karoui and Huang [7]. However, for simpliciy of presenaion, we only consider here he BSDEs driven by coninuous maringales wih he PRP, whereas in [3, 7] he auhors sudied he BSDEs driven by a càdlàg maringale M wihou posulaing he PRP, bu under he addiional assumpion ha he underlying filraion is quasi-lef coninuous. Under he laer assumpion, he predicable quadraic variaion M of M is coninuous. I is worh noing ha all resuls and a priori esimaes esablished in his noe will sill be valid in his more general framework. Our main goal is o prove he exisence, uniqueness and comparison heorems covering he BSDEs inroduced [1, 25, 26], where he pricing and hedging of coningen claims in financial models wih funding coss is sudied. We menion ha Mocha and Wesray [23] and Tevzadze [32], esablished a comparison heorem for he case of he quadraic growh and, in [32], for a special choice of a generaor. For he linear growh case, Carbone e al. [3] gave he comparison resuls for BSDEs driven by a one-dimensional càdlàg maringale see Theorem 2.2 in [3]). To his end, hey used he Doléans exponenial of a càdlàg maringale and hey imposed he requiremen i is a posiive, uniformly inegrable maringale and, in addiion, saisfies some inegrabiliy condiions see, in paricular, Lemma 2.2 in [3] or equaion 2.6) in Secion 2 of his work), which are no easy o verify and may be oo resricive for applicaions). We sress in his regard ha he resuls from [3, 23, 32] are no sufficien for he purposes sudied in [1, 25, 26], since he assumpions made in hese papers fail o hold in he conex of a ypical financial model. Consequenly, some exensions of he exising comparison heorems for BSDEs driven by muli-dimensional maringales are needed o demonsrae he exisence of non-empy inervals for fair bilaeral prices or bilaerally profiable prices), as well as he monooniciy of prices wih respec o he iniial endowmen of an agen. In Secion 5, we show ha Theorems 3.3 and 4.1 are suiable ools o handle BSDEs derived in marke model wih funding coss when dealing wih a collaeralized conrac. For furher applicaions of resuls from his work, we refer o Secion 5 in [25] and Secion 3.3 in [26]. To summarize, our main goal is o exend resuls from [3] for BSDEs driven by muli-dimensional maringales and o relax raher sringen assumpions posulaed in [3]. This work is organized as follows. In Secion 2, we recall some definiions and resuls from [3] and we consider he exended BSDEs driven by one-dimensional coninuous maringale. In Secion 3, we sudy BSDEs driven by a muli-dimensional coninuous maringale M. We firs obain he exisence, uniqueness, and sabiliy resuls for soluions o hese BSDEs under he assumpion ha he generaor saisfies o m-lipschiz condiion. Nex, we prove he comparison heorem see Theorem 3.3) for BSDEs wih a uniformly m-lipschizian generaor. The goal of Secion 4 is o analyze alernaive assumpions regarding he process m arising in represenaion 3.1) of he quadraic variaion M see Assumpions 4.1 and 4.2). We conclude he paper by demonsraing in Secion 5 ha he assumpions of Theorems 3.3 and 4.1 are saisfied by a paricular class of BSDEs ha arise in he conex of financial models wih funding coss sudied in relaed papers [1, 25, 26]. We also show ha our comparison resul is a suiable ool for deriving he bounds for unilaeral prices of a collaeralized conrac in a financial marke wih funding coss.

3 BSDEs Driven by a Muli-Dimensional Maringale 3 2 BSDEs Driven by a One-Dimensional Maringale Le us sress ha main goal of his work is o examine BSDEs driven by a muli-dimensional maringale. For he sake of compleeness, we firs provide in his secion a minor exension of resuls from Carbone e al. [3] when a one-dimensional driving maringale M is complemened by a predeermined driving process U see equaion 2.2)), which arises in financial applicaions sudied in Secion 5. Moreover, we provide here a discussion of assumpions made in [3], since we aim o relax some of hem in he foregoing secion. We assume ha we are given a filered probabiliy space Ω,G,G,P) saisfying he usual condiions of righ-coninuiy and compleeness. As cusomary, we assume ha he σ-field G is rivial. Le M be a real-valued, coninuous, square-inegrable maringale on his space. We posulae ha M has he predicable represenaion propery wih respec o he filraion G under P. We denoe by M he quadraic variaion process of M, which is a coninuous, increasing, G-adaped process vanishing a zero such ha M 2 M is a coninuous uniformly inegrable) maringale. We inroduce he following noaion, for any non-negaive consan λ, Ĥλ 2 he subspace of all real-valued, G-adaped processes X saisfying [ T ] X 2 := E Ĥ 2 P e λ M X 2 d M <, 2.1) λ L 2 λ he space of all real-valued, G T-measurable random variables η such ha η 2 L := E 2 P [e λ M T η 2] <. λ Noe ha L 2 = L 2 R) is he space of G T -measurable, square-inegrable random variables. 2.1 BSDEs wih a Uniformly Lipschizian Generaor Assume ha we are given a real-valued, coninuous maringale M, a process U, and a random variable η. We consider he following BSDE driven by M and U, wih generaor h and he erminal value η, for [,T], { dy = Z dm h,y,z )d M +du, Y T = η. 2.2) In Secion 2, we work under he following sanding assumpion imposed on he generaor h. Assumpion 2.1 The generaor h : Ω [,T] R R R is a G B[,T]) BR) BR)- measurable funcion such ha h,y,z) is a G-adaped process for any fixed y,z) R R and he process h,,) belongs o Ĥ2 λ. We adop he following definiion of a soluion o BSDE 2.2). I is clear from his definiion ha we resric our aenion o soluions Y,Z) from he space Ĥ2 λ Ĥ2 λ. Definiion 2.1 A soluion o BSDE 2.2) is a pair Y,Z) Ĥ2 λ Ĥ2 λ of processes saisfying 2.2), P-a.s., such ha Z is G-predicable and Y U is a coninuous process. We emphasize ha Definiion 2.1 posulaes he coninuiy of he process Y U, raher han Y. Obviously, if we assume ha U is G-progressively measurable resp. G-predicable or coninuous), hen Y will share his propery as well. For any naural d, we denoe by he Euclidean norm in R d. In his secion, we se d = 1, bu he nex definiion also applies o he muli-dimensional case. Definiion 2.2 We say ha he generaor h saisfies he uniform Lipschiz condiion if here exiss a consan L such ha, for all [,T] and all y 1,y 2,z 1,z 2 R d, h,y 1,z 1 ) h,y 2,z 2 ) L y 1 y 2 + z 1 z 2 ). 2.3)

4 4 T. Nie and M. Rukowski The nex definiion hinges on a minor adjusmen of he erminology used in Carbone e al. [3] and El Karoui e al. [8] Definiion 2.3 We say ha h,η,u) is a λ,l)-sandard parameer if: i) h : Ω [,T] R R R saisfies he uniform Lipschiz condiion 2.3) wih a consan L, ii) he process h,,) belongs o Ĥ2 λ, iii) a random variable η belongs o L 2 λ, iv) a real-valued, G-adaped process U belongs o Ĥ2 λ and U T L 2 λ. The nex resul is an almos immediae consequence of Theorem 2.1 in [3], where he case of U = was examined. Theorem 2.1 Assume ha h,η,u) is a λ,l)-sandard parameer for some λ > λ L) where 2 2L, L 2 2 λ L) :=, 2L 2 +1, L > 2 2. Then BSDE 2.2) has a unique soluion Y,Z) Ĥ2 λ Ĥ2 λ. Moreover, he process Y U saisfies [ ] E P sup e λ M Y U ) 2 <. Proof. Le us se Ŷ = Y U. Then Ŷ = η [,T] T T Z u dm u + ĥu,ŷu,z u )d M u 2.4) where η = η U T and ĥ,ŷ,z ) := h,ŷ +U,Z ). Since, by assumpion, he processes h,,) and U belong o Ĥ2 λ and condiion 2.3) holds, we have ĥ,,) = h,u,) Ĥ2 λ. Moreover, i is easy o check ha η L 2 λ and ĥ saisfies 2.3). Therefore, ĥ, η) is also a λ,l)-sandard parameer and hus BSDE 2.4) has a unique soluion Ŷ,Z) Ĥ2 λ Ĥ2 λ, by virue of Theorem 2.1 in [3]. Moreover, he process Ŷ is coninuous and i saisfies [ ] E P sup <. [,T] e λ M Ŷ 2 We conclude ha he pair Y,Z) wih Y := Ŷ +U Ĥ2 λ is a unique soluion o BSDE 2.2). 2.2 Comparison Theorem: One-Dimensional Case We now focus on he comparison heorem of BSDE driven by a one-dimensional coninuous maringale. Le EM) denoe he Doléans exponenial of a coninuous maringale M, ha is, { E M) := exp M 1 } 2 M. From Novikov scrierion see, for insance, Corollary1.1 in Kazamaki [14]), i is known ha if M T is bounded, hen E P [E M)] = 1 for all [,T]. For a given funcion h : Ω [,T] R R R, we inroduce he following processes Y h = h,y 1,Z) h,y 1 2,Z) 1 Y 1 Y 2 1 {Y 1 Y 2 }, Z h = h,y 2,Z1 ) h,y 2,Z2 ) Z 1 1 {Z Z2 1 Z 2}. From Theorem 2.2 in Carbone e al. [3] see also condiions i) ii) in Lemma 2.2 in [3]), we obain he following version of he comparison heorem for soluions o BSDEs.

5 BSDEs Driven by a Muli-Dimensional Maringale 5 Theorem 2.2 Le h i,η i,u) be a λ i,l i )-sandard parameer and le Y i,z i ) be he unique soluion of he following BSDE, for i = 1,2, { dy i = Z i dm h i,y i,z i )d M +du, Y i T = ηi. 2.5) Suppose ha E ) Zh 1 udm u is a posiive, uniformly inegrable maringale and { } ) 2 E P sup exp Y h 1 ) ) 2 ud M u E T Z h 1 udm u <. 2.6) [,T] If η 1 η 2 and h 1,Y 2,Z 2 ) h 2,Y 2,Z 2 ), P l-a.e., hen Y 1 Y 2 for any [,T]. Alernaively,onecanconsiderhefollowingassumpions: h 1,Y 1,Z 1 ) h 2,Y 1,Z 1 ), P l-a.e., η 1 η 2, E Zh 2 udm u ) is a posiive uniformly inegrable maringale, and { E P sup exp [,T] Then he asserion of Theorem 2.2 is sill valid. } ) Y h 2 u d M u 2E T Z h 2 u dm u ) ) 2 <. Le us make some imporan observaions regarding condiion 2.6) in Theorem 2.2. Since h 1 saisfies he uniform Lipschiz condiion, he processes Y h 1 u and Zh 1 u are boh bounded by L. Nex, if we assume ha M is a coninuous, square-inegrable maringale hen, from Remark 1.3 in [14], we deduce ha he Doléans exponenial E Zh 1 udm u ) is a posiive, uniformly inegrable maringale. Furhermore, ifwe assumeha M T is bounded, hen Zh 1 udm u T is alsobounded and hus, using Novikov s crierion, we conclude condiion 2.7) is saisfied. I is worh sressing ha he posulae ha M T is bounded is very resricive, since i is no likely o hold in furher applicaions of BSDEs driven by a maringale. Remark 2.1 Le us now consider he case where M is a càdlàg maringale. Then he Doléans exponenial EM) is he unique soluion of he SDE E M) = 1+ E u M)dM u. I is known ha EM) is a local maringale and equals we denoe M u = M u M u ) { E M) = exp M M 1 } 2 M 1+ M u )e Mu <u where M = M c as usual, M c sands for he coninuous maringale par of M). If he maringale M is square-inegrable wih M s > 1 and M T is bounded, hen EM) is a posiive, squareinegrable hus uniformly inegrable) maringale see [16] or Remark 1.3 in [14]). Therefore, if ) Zh 1 udm u > 1 and Zh 1 udm u T is bounded, we sill have ha E ) Zh 1 udm u is a posiive, uniformly inegrable maringale. Hence if M T is bounded, hen condiion 2.6) holds. Remark 2.2 To direcly exend he resuls of his subsecion o BSDEs driven by a muli-dimensional maringale M = M 1,...,M d ), one could consider he following generalizaion of BSDE 2.2) dy = Z dm 1 d M h d,y,z ) +du, Y T = η 2.7) wih he R d -valued generaor h d : Ω [,T] R R d R d where1 = 1,1,...,1). Unforunaely, he erm 1 d M h d,y,z ) in 2.7) seems o be raher unracable and hus we focus on BSDE

6 6 T. Nie and M. Rukowski 3.2) driven by a muli-dimensional maringale in which he marix-valued process M can be facorized see equaion 3.1)), alhough we also make some commens abou solvabiliy of BSDE 2.7) in Secion 4.1. Suppose ha we manage o prove he comparison heorem for BSDE 2.7) driven by a mulidimensional maringale analogous o Theorem 2.2. Since he boundedness of M T may fail o hold, ypically, a sraighforward applicaion of a muli-dimensional exension of Theorem 2.2 would no be possible anyway, since i would require o verify he condiions imposed on he Doléans exponenial EM) and his ask is raher hard. In nex secion, we will sudy BSDEs driven by muli-dimensional coninuous maringales, since such BSDEs play an imporan rôle in numerous financial applicaions where marke models wih several risky asses are inroduced and sudied. Our main goal is o esablish a version of a comparison heorem in which, in paricular, he boundedness of M T is no posulaed see Theorem 3.3). 3 BSDEs Driven by a Muli-Dimensional Maringale In his secion, we firs revisi resuls from [3, 7] and we esablish in Secion 3.1 heir exensions o he case when an addiional driving erm U appears in our BSDE under he m-lipschiz condiion 3.3). In Secion 3.2, we sudy he special case when he generaor saisfies he uniform m-lipschiz condiion 3.1). The goal of Secion 3.3 is o esablish he main comparison heorem for BSDEs driven by a muli-dimensional maringale see Theorem 3.3). Le M = M 1,M 2,...,M d ) by, we denoe he ransposiion), where he processes M i, i = 1,2,...,d areconinuous, square-inegrablemaringaleson he filered probabiliy spaceω,g,g,p). We posulae ha M has he predicable represenaion propery wih respec o he filraion G under P. We denoe by M he quadraic cross-) variaion process of M, so ha M akes values in R d d and he i,j)h enry of he marix M is M i,m j. As in [3, 7], we henceforh work under he following sanding assumpion regarding he coninuous process of finie variaion M, so ha i is implicily assumed ha he processes m and Q in equaion 3.1) are given. Assumpion 3.1 We assume ha here exiss an R d d -valued G-adaped process m and a G- adaped, coninuous, bounded, increasing process Q wih Q = such ha, for all [,T], M = m u m u dq u. 3.1) From Proposiion 2.9 in Chaper II of Jacod and Shiryaev [12] see also [7, 23, 24]), we know ha Assumpion 3.1 is me by an arbirary coninuous, square-inegrable maringale and he facorizaion 3.1) of he process M is no unique. For insance, if we se Q := arcan d i=1 Mi,M i ), hen Q is G-adaped, coninuous, increasing process, which is bounded by π 2. Moreover, he Kunia-Waanabe inequaliy shows ha for all 1 i,j d he process M i,m j is absolue coninuous wih respec o Q, and hus he Radon-Nikodym heorem allows us o obain an R d d -valued, G-predicable process D, which is posiive semi-definie. Furhermore, we can facorize D as D = mm for an R d d -valued, G-predicable processes m. In paricular, if M is a d-dimensional Brownian moion, hen we can simply choose Q = for all [,T] and m = I, where I sands for he d-dimensional ideniy marix. Le us make some commens on alernaive echnical assumpions regarding he measurabiliy of m. In some papers, such as [7, 23, 24], he auhors ake m as a predicable process, which can be consruced as above, for insance. However, on he one hand, usually i is sufficien o ake m as an adaped process o obain he well-posedness of BSDEs. On he oher hand, when we consider he sochasic inegral wih respec o M, where m appears in he inegrand, usually i suffices ha m is progressively measurable. In paricular, if Q = which, obviously, implies ha he process M is absoluely coninuous wih respec o he Lebesgue measure), hen i is enough o posulaed ha m is adaped for more deails, see Remark 2.11 in Chaper 3 of Karazas and Shreve [13]).

7 BSDEs Driven by a Muli-Dimensional Maringale 7 I is also clear ha m u m u is a square marix and i is posiive semi-definie, so ha m um u )1 2 is well-defined for noaion, see Remark 3.1). If m u m u is posiive definie, hen m u m u is inverible, and hus we can also define m u m u ) 1 2. Finally, we noe ha if m u is a symmeric marix i.e., m u = m u ), hen m u = m u = m um u )1 2. Regarding he symmery of m in 3.1), observe ha he condiion M = m um udq u wih m being an R d d -valued, G-adaped process is equivalen o M = m u m udq u wih m being a symmeric R d d -valued, G-adaped process. Indeed, i suffices o ake m u = m u m u) 1 2. Therefore, wihou loss of generaliy, we may and do assume ha m akes values in he space of symmeric marices. Remark 3.1 We denoe by a he norm of a d d marix a, where a 2 := Traa ). For a posiive semi-definie marix a, we denoe by a 1 2 he unique square roo of a, i.e., a 1 2a 1 2 = a. Recall ha here exiss an orhogonal marix O and a diagonal marix b wih non-negaive diagonal elemens such ha a = O bo. The square roo of b is also a diagonal marix, denoed by b 1 2, wih diagonal elemens equal o square roos of diagonal elemens of b. Then we se a 1 2 = O b 1 2O. Moreover, if a is posiive definie, hen he inverse of a 1 2, denoed as a 1 2, is well defined. 3.1 BSDEs wih an m-lipschizian Generaor Inhissecion,wesudyhefollowingBSDEdrivenbyad-dimensionalmaringaleM = M 1,...,M d ) and a real-valued, G-adaped process U, for [,T], { dy = Z dm h,y,z )dq +du, 3.2) Y T = η. Recall ha we work under he sanding assumpion ha M saisfies Assumpion 3.1. We also make hroughou he following echnical assumpion regarding he measurabiliy of he generaor h. Assumpion 3.2 Le h : Ω [,T] R R d R be a G B[,T]) BR) BR d )-measurable funcion such ha h,,y,z) is a G-adaped process for any fixed y,z) R R d. Before saing he definiion of a soluion o BSDE 3.2), we need o inroduce some noaion and define suiable spaces of processes in which will search for soluions. To his end, following [3], we firs inroduce he following version of he Lipschiz condiion for he generaor h. Definiion 3.1 We say ha h saisfies he m-lipschiz condiion if here exis wo sricly posiive and G-adaped processes ρ and θ such ha, for all [,T] and y 1,y 2 R, z 1,z 2 R d, h,y 1,z 1 ) h,y 2,z 2 ) ρ y 1 y 2 +θ m z 1 z 2 ). 3.3) We se α 2 = ρ +θ 2 for [,T] and we define he process N := α2 u dq u for [,T]. For a fixed λ, we denoe by Ĥ2,d λ he subspace of all Rd -valued, G-adaped processes X wih he norm given by Ĥ2,d λ X 2 Ĥ 2,d λ [ T ] := E P e λn X 2 dq <. 3.4) Le L 2 λ sand for he space of all real-valued, G T-measurable random variables η such ha η 2 L2 λ = E P [ e λn T η 2] <. 3.5) I is clear ha he spaces in which we will search for soluions depend on he generaor g. In fac, from he nex definiion, i ranspires ha he process m is also used for his purpose.

8 8 T. Nie and M. Rukowski Definiion 3.2 A soluion o BSDE 3.2) is a pair Y, Z) of G-adaped processes saisfying 3.2) for all [,T] and such ha: αy,m Z) Ĥ2 λ Ĥ2,d λ, he process Z is G-predicable, and he process Y U is coninuous. Noe ha if, in addiion, he process U is G-progressively measurable resp. G-predicable), hen Y is G-progressively measurable resp. G-predicable) as well. One can objec ha he definiion of a soluion o BSDE 3.2) under he m-lipschiz condiion is somewha arificial, since i is ailored o he mehod of he proof of he exisence and uniqueness heorem see, for insance, Theorem 3.2 in [3]). In he nex subsecion, we will impose a sronger uniform m-lipschiz condiion and we will reduce he complexiy of he definiion of a soluion o BSDE 3.2). The nex definiion is a counerpar of Definiion 2.3 of a λ,l)-sandard parameer. To be more precise, we deal here wih he noion of he λ,m,q,ρ,θ)-sandard parameer bu, for he sake of conciseness, we decided o call i simply a λ, m)-sandard parameer. Definiion 3.3 We say ha he riple h,η,u) is a λ,m)-sandard parameer if: i) h : Ω [,T] R R d R saisfies he m-lipschiz condiion wih processes ρ and θ, ii) he process α 1 h,,) belongs o Ĥ2 λ, iii) a random variable η belongs o L 2 λ, iv) U is a real-valued, G-adaped process such ha αu Ĥ2 λ and U T L 2 λ. The proof of he nex resul hinges on Theorem 3.2 in Carbone e al. [3]. Theorem 3.1 Le h,η,u) be a λ,m)-sandard parameer for some λ > 3. Then BSDE 3.2) has a unique soluion Y,Z) such ha αy,m Z) Ĥ2 λ Ĥ2,d λ. Moreover, he process Y U saisfies [ ] E P sup e λn Y U ) 2 <. [,T] Proof. We se Ŷ := Y U, so ha 3.2) becomes Ŷ = η T Z u dm u + T ĥ,ŷu,z u )dq u 3.6) where η := η U T and ĥ,ŷ,z ) := h,ŷ +U,Z ). Since h,,) Ĥ2 λ, αu Ĥ2 λ and 3.3), we have ĥ,,) = h,u,) Ĥ2 λ. Moreover,i is easy o check ha η L 2 λ and he funcion ĥ saisfies 3.3). Therefore, ĥ, η) is a λ,m)-sandard parameer as well. Consequenly, from Theorem 3.2 in [3], we deduce ha BSDE 3.6) has a unique soluion Ŷ,Z) such ha αŷ,m Z) Ĥ2 λ Ĥ2,d λ. Moreover, Ŷ is coninuous and saisfies E P[ sup [,T] e λnŷ ] 2 <. I is now no hard o check ha Y,Z) wih Y := Ŷ +U is a unique soluion o BSDE 3.2) and αy,m Z) Ĥλ 2 Ĥ2,d λ, since αŷ Ĥ2 λ and αu Ĥ2 λ. We also have he following sabiliy resul, which exends Proposiion 3.1 in [3]. Proposiion 3.1 Le h i,η i,u i ) be a λ,m)-sandard parameer wih λ > 3 and le Y i,z i ) be he soluion o he following BSDE, for i = 1,2, { dy i = Z i, dm h i,y i,zi )dq +du i, Y i T = ηi. 3.7) If we denoe Y = Y 1 Y 2, Z = Z 1 Z 2, U = U 1 U 2, η = η 1 η 2 and h = h 1 h 2, hen [ ] E P sup e λn Y U ) 2 + αy 2 + m Z 2 K Ĥ 2 λ Ĥ 2,d 1 λ [,T]

9 BSDEs Driven by a Muli-Dimensional Maringale 9 where K 1 is a consan and [ ] = η U T 2 L2 + αu 2 + α 1 h,y 2 U 2,Z 2 ) 2. λ Ĥ 2 λ Ĥ 2 λ Proof. From Theorem 3.2, we know ha here exiss a unique soluion Y i,z i ) of BSDEs 3.7) for i = 1,2. Le Ŷ i = Y i U i and Ŷ = Ŷ 1 Ŷ2. Then, similarly as in he proof of Proposiion 3.1 in [3], we obain noe ha he value of a consan K 1 may vary from place o place in wha follows) αŷ 2 Ĥ 2 λ + m Z 2 Ĥ 2,d λ and hus αy 2 Ĥ 2 λ + m Z 2 Ĥ 2,d λ Indeed, since [ ] K 1 η U T 2 L2 + αu 2 + α 1 h,ŷ 2,Z 2 ) 2 λ Ĥ 2 λ Ĥ 2 λ K 1. We will now show ha E P [ sup [,T] T Ŷ = η U T Zu dm u + 3.8) e λnŷ ] 2 K ) T an applicaion of he Iô formula o e λnŷ 2 yields e λnŷ 2 = e λnt η U T ) T T h 1 u,y 1 u,z1 u ) h2 u,y 2 u,z2 u ))dq u, e λnuŷ T uzudm u λ e λnu α 2 uŷ u 2 dq u e λnuŷ uh 1 u,y 1 u,z 1 u) h 2 u,y 2 u,z 2 u))dq u. The Burkholder-Davis-Gundy inequaliy and sandard calculus yield [ ] [ E P sup K 1 [,T] e λnŷ 2 + αŷ 2 Ĥ 2 λ + m Z 2 Ĥ 2,d λ ]. From 3.8), i now follows ha 3.9) is valid, which complees he proof of he proposiion. 3.2 BSDEs wih a Uniformly m-lipschizian Generaor Our nex goal is o analyze alernaive assumpions under which he exisence, uniqueness, and comparison heorems for BSDE 3.2) can be esablished. To his end, we consider he case where he processes ρ and θ in 3.3) are bounded, ha is, here exiss a consan L > such ha ρ,θ L for all [,T]. Since he process Q in Assumpion 3.1 is bounded, under he assumpion ha he processes ρ and θ are bounded as well, he process N is bounded and hus he classes of processes and random variables saisfying he inequaliies 3.4) and 3.5) do no depend on he choice of λ. In oher words, he ses Ĥ2,d λ and L 2 λ norms Ĥ2,d λ and Ĥ2,d are independen of λ. Hence we may ake λ = and, since he are equivalen, for our furher purposes, he space Ĥ2,d λ may be formally idenified wih Ĥ2,d. Similarly, he norms and L2 are equivalen in ha case, so ha we L2 λ may idenify he spaces L 2 λ and L 2 = L 2 R). Finally, we observe ha he norms Ĥ2,d are obviously independen of N hus also of ρ and θ). and L2 To summarize, if he processes ρ and θ are bounded, hen he spaces Ĥ2,d λ and L 2 λ do no depend on λ, ρ and θ. Therefore, if he processes ρ and θ in he m-lipschiz condiion for h are bounded, hen we may assume, wihou loss of generaliy, ha ρ = θ = L for all [,T]. Then he process α = L+ L 2 is consan as well.

10 1 T. Nie and M. Rukowski Definiion 3.4 We say ha h saisfies he uniform m-lipschiz condiion if here exiss a consan L > such ha, for all [,T] and all y 1,y 2 R, z 1,z 2 R d, h,y 1,z 1 ) h,y 2,z 2 ) L y 1 y 2 + m z 1 z 2 ) ). 3.1) In view of Definiion 3.4 and he preceding discussion regarding he spaces Ĥ2,d propose he following modificaion of Definiion 3.3. λ and Ĥ2,d Definiion 3.5 We say ha he riple h,η,u) is an m, L)-sandard parameer if: i) h : Ω [,T] R R d R saisfies he uniform m-lipschiz condiion wih a consan L, ii) he process h,,) belongs o Ĥ2, iii) a random variable η belongs o L 2, iv) U is a real-valued, G-adaped process such ha U Ĥ2 and U T L 2., we By a raher sraighforward applicaion Theorem 3.1 and Proposiion 3.1, we obain he following resuls for BSDEs wih generaors saisfying he uniform m-lipschiz condiion. The proofs of boh resuls are almos immediae and hus hey are omied. Theorem 3.2 If h,η,u) is an m, L)-sandard parameer, hen BSDE 3.2) has a unique soluion Y,Z) such ha Y,m Z) Ĥ2 Ĥ2,d. Moreover, he process Y U saisfies [ ] E P sup Y U ) 2 <. [,T] Proposiion 3.2 Le h i,η i,u i ) be an m, L i )-sandard parameer and le Y i,z i ) be he soluion o he following BSDE, for i = 1,2, { dy i = Z i, dm h i,y i,zi )dq +du i, Y i T = ηi. 3.11) If we denoe Y = Y 1 Y 2, Z = Z 1 Z 2, U = U 1 U 2, η = η 1 η 2 and h = h 1 h 2, hen [ E P sup U ) [,T]Y 2] + Y 2 + m Z 2 K Ĥ 2 Ĥ 2,d 1 where K 1 is a consan and = [ ] η U T 2 L2 + U 2 + h,y 2 U 2,Z 2 ) 2. Ĥ 2 Ĥ Comparison Theorem: Muli-Dimensional Case Our nex goal, and in fac he main moivaion for his work, is o exend Theorem 2.2 o BSDE 3.2) driven by a muli-dimensional maringale. I is worh noing ha in [23, 32], he auhors esablished some versions of he comparison heorem for BSDEs wih generaors saisfying he quadraic growh condiion. For his purpose, hey needed o make some addiional assumpions. In he paper by Mocha and Wesray [23], he comparison heorem is proven using he θ-echnique under he posulae ha m, he erminal value η, and soluion Y 1 and Y 2 haveexponenial momens of all orders see Theorem 5.1 in [23]). Tevzadze [32] examined he case when he erminal condiion is bounded, and he focussed on bounded soluions Y complemened by BMO maringale componen. He esablished he comparison heorem using he linearizaion echnique under a cerain inegrabiliy condiion imposed on he process mm ) 1 h,y,z, Z) see condiion L.2) in Theorem 2 in [32]). Le us remark ha even if he generaor is uniformly m-lipschizian, his resul requires he race Tr[mm ) 1 ] o be bounded, which is used he ensure he validiy of condiion L.2) see Remark on page 12 in [32]). We will discuss his condiion in more deail laer on see Assumpion 4.1).

11 BSDEs Driven by a Muli-Dimensional Maringale 11 In our framework, when dealing wih he BSDEs wih a uniformly m-lipschizian generaor, we do no need he boundedness of Tr[mm ) 1 ] since, by using he linearizaion echnique, we can obain comparison heorem under sandard assumpions. The crucial difference is ha in he proof of Theorem 3.3 we ake he densiy process q differen o he one employed in [32]. Throughou his subsecion, we work under Assumpions complemened by he following sanding assumpion. Assumpion 3.3 The marix m in represenaion 3.1) of he process M is inverible for all [,T]. The inveribiliy of m allows us o define he auxiliary funcion ĥ,y,z) := h,y,m 1 z) where h is an arbirary generaor saisfying he uniform m-lipschiz condiion. Then he funcion ĥ is uniformly Lipschizian, since 3.1) enails ha ĥ,y 1,z 1 ) ĥ,y 2,z 2 ) L y 1 y 2 + z 1 z 2 ). 3.12) Le us denoe Z k,i = m Z k ) i for k = 1,2 and i = 1,2,...,d. For every j = 2,...,d and [,T], we define he following processes δ Y ĥ = ĥ,y 1 1 2, Z ) ĥ,y, Z ) 1 Y 1 Y 2 δ Z1 ĥ = 1 {Y 1 Y 2 }, ĥ,y 2, Z,1 1, Z,2 1,..., Z,d 1 ) ĥ,y 2, Z,1 2, Z,2 1,..., Z,d 1 ) Z,1 1 Z 1,1 2 { Z1,1 Z,1 2 }, δ Zj ĥ = ĥ,y 2,..., Z,j 1 2, Z,j 2, Z,j+1 1,..., Z,d 1 ) ĥ,y 2,..., Z,j 1 2, Z,j 1, Z,j+1 1,..., Z,d 1 ) Z,j 1 Z 1,j 2 { Z1,j Z,j 2 }, and wrie δ Zh := δ Z1 h,...,δ Zd h ). We are now in a posiion o esablish he following comparison heorem in which Assumpion 4.1 is no posulaed. Theorem 3.3 We posulae ha Assumpion 3.1 holds wih a G-progressively measurable process m and Assumpions are valid. We consider he following wo BSDEs, i = 1,2, { dy i = Z i, dm h i,y i,z i )dq +du i, Y i T = ηi. 3.13) Assume ha: i) he riple h i,η i,u i ) is an m, L i )-sandard parameer for i = 1,2, ii) he processes h i,,y,z), i = 1,2 are G-progressively measurable for every fixed y,z) R R d, iii) U 1 and U 2 are G-progressively measurable processes such ha he process U 1 U 2 is decreasing. If η 1 η 2 and h 1,Y 2,Z 2 ) h 2,Y 2,Z 2 ), P l-a.e., hen Y 1 Y 2 for every [,T]. Proof. Since h i,η i,u i ) is an m, L i )-sandard parameer for i = 1,2, BSDE 3.13) has a unique soluion Y i,z i ) such ha Y i,m Z i ) Ĥ2 Ĥ2,d. Le us denoe Y = Y 1 Y 2, Z = Z 1 Z 2, η = η 1 η 2, U = U 1 U 2, and h = h 1,Y 2,Z 2 ) h 2,Y 2,Z 2 ). Also, le us wrie a = δ Y ĥ 1 and b = δ Zĥ 1. Noicing ha ĥ,y,m z) = h,y,z), we deduce ha he pair Y,Z) solves he following linear BSDE { dy = Z dm a Y +b m Z +h )dq +du, Y T = η. Since assumpion i) implies ha he generaor h 1 saisfies he uniform m-lipschiz condiion 3.1) wih a consan L 1, i is clear ha he funcion ĥ1 is uniformly Lipschizian wih he same consan and hus he processes a and b are bounded, specifically, a L 1 and b d L 1 for all [,T].

12 12 T. Nie and M. Rukowski Le us wrie c := mm and le us define he densiy process q by he following expression { q := exp a u dq u + b u c 1 2 u dm u 1 } b u 2 dq u. 2 From equaion 3.1), we have d M = c dq and hus b u c 1 2 u dm u T = T bu ) Tr[ c 1 2 bu u c 1 2 u c u ]dq u = T b u 2 dq u d L 2 1 Q T. Recall ha he increasing process Q is assumed o be bounded. Hence q is a sricly posiive process and, from Novikov s crierion, he inequaliy [ ] E P sup < 3.14) q 2 [,T] is valid. Moreover, an applicaion of he Iô formula yields dq = q b c 1 2 dm +q a 1 2 b 2) dq q Tr = q b c 1 2 dm +q a dq, and hus, by anoher applicaion of he Iô formula, we obain dq Y ) = q Z dm q a Y +b m Z +h )dq +q du [ b c 1 2 ) b c 1 2 c ]dq +Y q b c 1 2 dm +Y q a dq +d Y,q ) = q Z +Y b c 1 2 dm q b m Z +h )dq +q du +q Tr[ Z b c 1 2 c ]dq ) = q Z +Y b c 1 2 dm q h dq +q du +q b m Z b c 1 2 Z )dq ) = q Z +Y b c 1 2 dm q h dq +q du where he las equaliy holds since m = m m ) = c 2. Since Y,m Z) Ĥ2 λ Ĥ2,d λ and inequaliy 3.14) holds, he process M given by M := q Y q Y + q u h u dq u q u du u = ) q u Z u +Y u b u c 1 2 u dmu 3.15) is a local maringale. From Theorem 3.2, we also have ha, for i = 1,2, [ ] E P sup Y i U) i 2 <, 3.16) [,T] and hus we may check ha M is a uniformly inegrable maringale see he las par of he proof). Consequenly, i is equal o he condiional expecaion of is erminal value, which in urn implies ha T T ] G q Y = E P [q T η + q u h u dq u q u du u. Since we assumed ha η = η 1 η 2, h = h 1,Y 2,Z 2 ) h 2,Y 2,Z 2 ) for all [,T] and he process U is decreasing wih U 1 U2 =, we conclude ha he inequaliy Y holds for all [,T]. To complee he proof, i now remains o demonsrae ha he local maringale M, which is given by 3.15), is uniformly inegrable. Le us firs consider he erm q Y. Since U is a decreasing process, we have ha U U T + U and hus, since U T is assumed o belong o L 2, ) E P sup U 2 2E P UT 2 + U 2) <. 3.17) [,T]

13 BSDEs Driven by a Muli-Dimensional Maringale 13 Then, by combining 3.14) wih 3.17), we obain ) )] 1/2 [ )] 1/2 E P sup q Y [E P sup q 2 E P sup Y 2 [,T] [,T] [,T] )] 1/2 [ ) 2 [E P sup q 2 E P sup Y U 2 +E P sup [,T] [,T] where we also used 3.16) o esablish he las inequaliy. [,T] U 2 )] 1/2 < Now le us consider he inegral q uh u dq u. Since he generaors h 1 and h 2 saisfy he uniform m-lipschiz condiion, here exiss some consan K, which may vary from line o line in he following discussion, such ha he process h = h 1,Y 2,Z 2 ) h 2,Y 2,Z 2 ) saisfies h K h 1,,) + h 2,,) + Y 2 + m Z 2 ). Since Y 2,m Z 2 ) Ĥ2 Ĥ2,d and h i,,) Ĥ2, we see ha h Ĥ2. Therefore, using he boundedness of Q, we ge ) ) 1/2 ) T ) 1/2 E P sup q u h u dq u E P sup q u h u 2 dq u Q 1/2 T KE P q u h u 2 dq u [,T] [,T] T ) 1/2 ) KE P sup q h u 2 dq u [,T] ) T )] 1/2 K [E P sup q 2 E P h u 2 dq u < [,T] wherehe las inequaliyholds in view of 3.14) andhe previouslyesablishedproperyha h Ĥ2. Finally, we focus on he erm q udu u. From 3.14) and 3.17), we have ) ) )] 1/2 E P sup q u du u E P U T U sup q [E P U T U 2 E P sup q 2 <. [,T] [,T] [,T] Consequenly, from he definiion of M, we obain ) E P sup M <, [,T] which implies ha M is a uniformly inegrable maringale. Remark 3.2 If η 1 η 2 and h 1,Y 1,Z 1 ) h 2,Y 1,Z 1 ), P l-a.e., hen one can also prove ha Y 1 Y 2 for every [,T]. Remark 3.3 In he above proof, we needed o ensure ha he sochasic inegral b u m u m u) 1 2 dmu, 3.18) and hus also he process q, are well defined. From he monograph by Karazas and Shreve [13] see Chaper 3, Definiion 2.9), we know ha he sochasic inegral 3.18) is well defined when he processes b and m are G-progressively measurable. For his reason, we require ha he processes m, U i, as well as he process h i,y,z), for any fixed y,z) R R d, are G-progressively measurable. Furhermore, from [13] Chaper 3, Remark 2.11), if Q = in 3.1), hen he sochasic inegral 3.18) is well defined, provided ha he processes b and m are G-adaped no necessarily G-progressively measurable). Therefore, when Q =, he adapedness is sufficien. Le us menion ha in our financial applicaions, we usually have Q = see [1, 25, 26]). In Secion 5, we provide an example of a financial marke model, in which we may ake Q =.

14 14 T. Nie and M. Rukowski 4 BSDEs wih a Lipschizian Generaor I is fair o acknowledge ha he concep of a uniformly) m-lipschizian generaor, alhough very convenien for he mahemaical analysis of BSDE 3.2), can be seen as somewha arificial from a more pracical poin of view. Indeed, ypically a paricular class of BSDEs arises in a naural way when solving problems wihin a given framework, so he shape of he BSDE and is generaor is imposed by he problem a hand, raher han arbirarily posulaed. The goal of his secion is o provide a link beween BSDEs 3.2) wih uniformly m-lipschizian generaors and some classes of BSDEs arising in various applicaions o sochasic opimal conrol and financial mahemaics. We will also make some perinen commens on solvabiliy of BSDEs given by 2.7). 4.1 BSDEs wih a Uniformly Lipschizian Generaor In he case of BSDEs driven by a Brownian moion, i is common o suppose ha he generaor is uniformly Lipschizian, as we also posulaed in he case of BSDEs driven by a one-dimensional maringale see condiion 2.3)). By conras, mos of exising sudies of BSDEs driven by a mulidimensional maringale hinge on he posulae ha he generaor saisfies some form of he m- Lipschiz condiion. The laer choice seems o be moivaed mainly by mahemaical convenience. Since our comparison heorem requires he generaor o be uniformly m-lipschizian, he following naural quesion hus arises. Suppose ha a generaor h saisfies he uniform Lipschiz condiion 2.3). Does his mean ha h saisfies he uniform m-lipschiz condiion 3.1) as well? To answer his quesion, we need o ake a closer look on he erm m appearing in facorizaion 3.1). In he case of a general process m, he following assumpion may be inroduced. Assumpion 4.1 There exiss a consan K m > such ha, for all [,T], m + m m ) 1 2 Km. 4.1) As shown in he nex lemma, condiion 4.1) is a convenien way of ensuring ha he uniform m- Lipschiz condiion 3.1) for a generaor h holds. I is fair o acknowledge, however, ha condiion 4.1) has a shorcoming ha i is no saisfied in a ypical marke model and hus is usefulness is somewha limied in he conex of problems arising in financial mahemaics. Lemma 4.1 Under Assumpion 4.1, he generaor h saisfies he uniform Lipschiz condiion 2.3) if and only if i saisfies he uniform m-lipschiz condiion 3.1). Proof. I is clear ha when 3.1) is combined wih 4.1) hen condiion 2.3) holds for some consan L. To show ha he converse implicaion is valid as well, we assume ha 2.3) holds wih a consan L. Under Assumpion 4.1, we have ha m m ) 1 2 K m, which implies ha he eigenvalues of m are all greaer han or equal o λ m := 1/K m. Consequenly, we obain m z 2 = z m m z Λ m z 2 where Λ m = λ 2 m. Therefore, upon seing L = Lmax1,K m ), we conclude ha 3.1) is valid. I is clear ha Assumpion 4.1 implies ha here exiss a consan k m such ha m k m > for all [,T]. Then he random variable M T given by 3.1) is bounded, since he process Q was assumed o be bounded. Moreover, from above lemma, we know ha under Assumpion 4.1, all he resuls in Secion 3 hold for BSDEs 3.2) wih a uniformly Lipschizian generaor. We argue ha Assumpion 4.1 would be also convenien when dealing wih BSDE 2.7), which has he following form dy = Z dm 1 d M h d,y,z )+du, Y T = η, 4.2) wih he generaor h d : Ω [,T] R R d R d saisfying he measurabiliy Assumpion 3.2.

15 BSDEs Driven by a Muli-Dimensional Maringale 15 To he bes of our knowledge, due o is complexiy, he BSDE of his shape was no ye sudied in deail in he exising lieraure. Under Assumpions 3.1 and 4.1, BSDE 4.2) may be represened as follows dy = Z dm 1 m m h d,y,z )dq +du, Y T = η, 4.3) wherewemakeheassumpionhaher d -valuedgeneraorh d isuniformlylipschizian,specifically, here exiss a consan L d > such ha, for all [,T] and all y 1,y 2 R, z 1,z 2 R d, h d,y 1,z 1 ) h d,y 2,z 2 ) L d y1 y 2 + z 1 z 2 ). The following proposiion shows ha he classes of BSDEs3.2) and4.3) wih uniformly Lipschizian generaors are essenially equivalen. Proposiion 4.1 Under Assumpions 3.1 and 4.1, he problem of solving BSDE 4.3) wih a uniformly Lipschizian R d -valued generaor h d is essenially equivalen o solving BSDE 3.2) wih a uniformly Lipschizian real-valued generaor h. Proof. Assume firs ha he R d -valued generaor h d in BSDE 4.3) is uniformly Lipschizian. Then we define he associaed real-valued generaor h by seing h,y,z) := 1 m m h d,y,z). In view of he inequaliy m K m see Assumpion 4.1), i is clear ha he generaor h is also uniformly Lipschizian. This means ha BSDE 4.3) can be reduced o BSDE 3.2) wih a uniformly Lipschizian generaor h. Hence if he answer o he well-posedness problem for BSDE 3.2) is posiive, hen he same propery is enjoyed by BSDE 4.3). Conversely, we observe ha o any real-valued generaor h we may associaed he R d -valued generaor h d. To his end, we may simply ake h d := mm ) 1 h,,...,). Since now he real-valued generaor h is assumed o be uniformly Lipschizian, in view of he inequaliy mm ) 1 2 K m, we conclude ha he associaed R d -valued generaor h d is also uniformly Lipschizian. Therefore, if a resul yielding he exisence and uniqueness of a soluion o BSDE4.3) wih a uniformly Lipschizian generaor h d is available, hen his resul covers BSDE 3.2) as well. Le us now consider he comparison heorem for BSDEs 4.3). Suppose ha he generaor h d is uniformly Lipschizian and, in addiion, m,u are G-progressively measurable and h d,,y,z) is G-progressively measurable for every fixed y,z) R R d. Then one can esablish a version of he comparison heorem for BSDEs 4.3) by eiher using Theorem 3.3 or direcly from he resuls of Tevzadze [32] in he laer case, by employing also he boundedness of M T ). In such case, he assumpion ha h 1,Y 2,Z 2 ) h 2,Y 2,Z 2 ), P l-a.e., should be replaced by 1 mm h 1 d,y 2,Z 2 ) 1 mm h 2 d,y 2,Z 2 ), P l a.e., which seems o be cumbersome o verify. For he reasons explained above, we leave his ask for a fuure sudy, and we henceforh focus on alernaive assumpions on a generaor ha, as will be shown in Secion 5, are saisfied by BSDEs arising in marke models wih funding coss. 4.2 BSDEs wih a Uniformly X-Lipschizian Generaor We sress ha Assumpion 4.1 covers he case when he process m in 3.1) is no explicily known. In a ypical applicaions, we have more informaion abou he shape of he generaor h and perhaps also he process m. The moivaion for he seup sudied in his subsecion comes from various applicaions of BSDEs in financial mahemaics see, e.g., he seminal paper by El Karoui e al. [8]). To specify our seup, we sar by defining he marix-valued process X, which is given by X 1... X 2... X := ).... X d where he auxiliary processes X i, i = 1,2,...,d are assumed o be G-adaped.

16 16 T. Nie and M. Rukowski The auxiliary processes X i, i = 1,2,...,d arise naurally in some applicaions, so here heir choice is no arbirary, bu depends on a paricular applicaion a hand. In some insances, i may happenhax i = M i forallibu, ypically, heprocessesx i andm i willbedifferen, albeiheyare usually closely relaed. For insance, he maringales M i, i = 1,2,...,d and he auxiliary processes X i, i = 1,2,...,d may be obained from a predeermined family of some underlying processes eiher hrough inegraion or by solving sochasic differenial equaions driven by processes from his family. For an explici illusraion of he las saemen, we refer o Secion 5. In his subsecion, we posulae ha he generaorhcan be represenedas h,y,z) = g,y,x z) for some funcion g : Ω [,T] R R d R saisfying Assumpion 3.2. Then BSDE 3.2) can be represened as follows { dy = Z dm g,y,x Z )dq +du, 4.5) Y T = η. Suppose ha equaion 3.1) holds for some R d d -valued, G-adaped process m and he generaor h,y,z) = g,y,x z) where he funcion g saisfies he uniform Lipschiz condiion. We are now going o address following naural quesion: under which assumpions abou M,m and X, he generaor h saisfies he uniform) m-lipschiz condiion? We firs observe ha o ensure ha he generaor h saisfies he m-lipschiz condiion, i suffices o posulae ha a sricly posiive lower bound for he norm m exiss. However, o ensure ha h saisfies he uniform m-lipschiz condiion, we sill need o posulae, in addiion, ha he processes X i are bounded as well. To sum up, if we posulae ha he process m is bounded away from zero and he processes X i, i = 1,2,...,d are bounded, hen he generaor h is boh uniformly Lipschizian and uniformly m-lipschizian. Obviously, he boundedness of he driving maringale is a very resricive condiion, since i is unlikely o be saisfied in mos applicaions. Forunaely, in a ypical applicaion, one has more informaion abou he driving maringales, which can be used o describe a suiable class of generaors. This observaion allows us o inroduce Assumpion 4.2 and o argue ha he comparison heorem can sill be applied, despie he fac ha Assumpion 4.1 fails o hold. In Assumpion 4.2, we will employ he following sandard definiion of ellipiciy. Definiion 4.1 We say ha an R d d -valued process γ saisfies he ellipiciy condiion if here exiss a consan Λ > such ha d γ γ ) ij a ia j Λ a 2 for all a R d and [,T]. 4.6) i,j=1 For he jusificaion of he nex assumpion in he conex of financial models driven by a mulidimensional Brownian moion, see Secion 5. Assumpion 4.2 The R d d -valued, G-adaped process m in equaion 3.1) is given by m m = X γ γ X where γ = [γ ij ] is a d-dimensional square marix of G-adaped processes saisfying he ellipiciy condiion 4.6). The following definiion is naural when dealing wih a generaor h,y,z) = g,y,x z). Definiion 4.2 We say ha a generaor h saisfies he uniform X-Lipschiz condiion if here exiss a consan L such ha, for every y 1,y 2 R and z 1,z 2 R d, h,y 1,z 1 ) h,y 2,z 2 ) L y 1 y 2 + X z 1 z 2 ) ). 4.7)

17 BSDEs Driven by a Muli-Dimensional Maringale 17 Le us noe ha condiion 4.7) is equivalen o he following condiion: here exiss a consan L such ha, for every y 1,y 2 R and z 1,z 2 R d, h,y 1,z 1 ) h,y 2,z 2 ) L d ) y 1 y 2 + X i zi 1 zi 2 ) i=1 4.8) where z k = z 1 k,z2 k,...,zd k ) for k = 1,2. I is worh emphasizing ha his condiion is frequenly saisfied by generaors of BSDEs are obained by analyzing he dynamics of rading sraegies see, for insance, he generaor f l given by 5.6)). The nex lemma shows ha a combinaion of condiions 4.6) and 4.7) ensures ha a generaor is uniformly m-lipschizian. Lemma 4.2 If Assumpion 4.2 holds and he generaor h is uniformly X-Lipschizian, hen h is uniformly m-lipschizian wih L = Lmax 1,Λ 1/2) where Λ is he consan of Definiion 4.1. Proof. Assumpion 4.2 yields, for every z R d, By combining 4.7) and 4.9), we obain m z 2 = z m m z = z X γ γ X z Λ X z ) h,y 1,z 1 ) h,y 2,z 2 ) L y 1 y 2 + X z 1 z 2 ) ) L y ỹ + LK m z 1 z 2 ), and hus he generaor h saisfies he uniform m-lipschiz condiion wih L = Lmax 1,Λ 1/2). We are in a posiion o esablish he exisence and uniqueness resul for BSDE 3.2) under eiher of Assumpions 4.1 and 4.2. Noe ha if Assumpion 4.1 is posulaed, hen we assume, in addiion, ha he processes X i, i = 1,2,...,d are bounded. Theorem 4.1 Assume ha he generaor h can be represened as h,y,z) = g,y,x z) where he funcion g : Ω [,T] R R d R saisfies he uniform Lipschiz condiion, so ha here exiss a consan L such ha, for every y 1,y 2 R and z 1,z 2 R d, g,y 1,z 1 ) g,y 2,z 2 ) L y 1 y 2 + z 1 z 2 ). 4.1) Le he process h,,) belong o Ĥ2, he random variable η belong o L 2, and U be a real-valued, G-adaped process such ha U Ĥ2 and U T L 2. Assume ha one of he following holds: i) he process m saisfies Assumpion 4.1 and he process X is bounded, ii) he process m saisfies Assumpion 4.2 some consan Λ >. Then BSDE 3.2) has a unique soluion Y,Z) such ha Y,m Z) Ĥ2 Ĥ2,d. Moreover, he processes Y and U saisfy [ ] E P sup Y U 2 <. [,T] Proof. i) We firs posulae ha Assumpion 4.1 holds and he process X i is bounded for every i = 1,2,...,d. One can deduce ha h saisfies he uniform m-lipschiz condiion wih a consan L, which depends on he bounds for X i for i = 1,2,...,d, as well as on he lower bound for m. Therefore, he saemen is an immediae consequence of Theorem 3.2. ii) Since h,y,z) = g,y,x z) where he funcion g saisfies he uniform Lipschiz condiion, i is clear ha h saisfies he uniform X-Lipschiz condiion wih L = L. From Assumpion 4.2 and Lemma 4.2, we deduce ha h saisfies he uniform m-lipschiz condiion L = Lmax 1,Λ 1/2). Hence, once again, he asserion follows by an applicaion of Theorem 3.2.

18 18 T. Nie and M. Rukowski 5 BSDEs in Marke Models wih Funding Coss We will now demonsrae ha he comparison heorem esablished in Secion 3 can be applied o obain lower and upper bounds on unilaeral prices in a marke model under funding coss. For he deailed analysis of issues relaed o he posulaed rading mechanism, he no-arbirage propery of he marke, and he pricing and hedging of a collaeralized conrac, he reader is referred o [1, 25, 26]. In his secion, we will focus on he rôle of BSDEs in producing inequaliies yielding he range of fair bilaeral prices. 5.1 Risky Asses and Funding Accouns Le us firs recall he following seing of [1] for he marke model. Throughou he paper, we fix a finie rading horizon dae T > for our model of he financial marke. Le Ω,G,G,P) be a filered probabiliy space saisfying he usual condiions of righ-coninuiy and compleeness, where he filraion G = G ) [,T] models he flow of informaion available o all raders. For convenience, we assume ha he iniial σ-field G is rivial. All processes inroduced in wha follows are implicily assumed o be G-adaped and any semimaringale is assumed o be càdlàg. Fori = 1,2,...,d, wedenoeby S i he ex-dividend price ofhe ihriskyassewih he cumulaive dividend sream A i. The risk-free lending resp., borrowing) cash accoun B l resp., B b ) is used for unsecured lending resp., borrowing) of cash. We denoe by B i,b funding accoun associaed wih he ih risky asse. The corresponding shor-erm ineres raes r l,r b,r i,b are non-negaive and bounded processes, he bounded processes B l and B r saisfy db l = rb l d l and db b = rb b b d wih B l = Br = 1, so ha he inequaliies Bl 1 and Bb 1 hold for all [,T]. Finally, we also inroduce he funding accouns B C,l and B C,b for he margin accoun represened by a process C. I is assumed hroughou ha r l r b and r l r i,b for all [,T]. For convenience, we inroduce he marix-valued process S given by S 1... S 2... S := S d The discouned cumulaive prices of risky asses are given by he following expressions = B l ) 1 S i + Bu l ) 1 da i u S i,l,cld,] where A i is he dividend process of he ih risky asse, so ha d S i,l,cld = B l ) 1 ds i rl Si d+dai ). 5.1) The following assumpion corresponds o Assumpions 3.1 and 4.2 see also Assumpion 4.2 in [25]). Noe ha here P l is a probabiliy measure equivalen o P on Ω,G T ). Assumpion 5.1 We posulae ha: i) he process S l,cld = S 1,l,cld,..., S d,l,cld ) is a coninuous, square-inegrable, P l,g)-maringale and has he predicable represenaion propery wih respec o he filraion G under P l, ii) here exiss a G-adaped, bounded, increasing process Q such ha he equaliy S l,cld = m l um l u) dq u 5.2) holds, where a G-adaped process m l is such ha he d-dimensional square marix m l is inverible and admis he represenaion m l m l ) = Sγγ S 5.3) where a d-dimensional square marix γ of G-adaped processes saisfies he ellipiciy condiion 4.6).

19 BSDEs Driven by a Muli-Dimensional Maringale 19 I is worh noing ha Assumpion 5.1 can be easily me when he prices of risky asses are given by he diffusion-ype model. For example, we may assume ha each risky asse S i, i = 1,2,...,d has he ex-dividend price dynamics under P given by ds i = S i µ i d+ d j=1 ) σ ij dw j, S i >, or, equivalenly, he d-dimensional process S = S 1,...,S d ) saisfies ds = S µ d+σ dw ) where W = W 1,...,W d ) is he d-dimensional Brownian moion, µ = µ 1,...,µ d ) is an R d - valued, F W -adaped process, σ = [σ ij ] is a d-dimensional square marix of F W -adaped processes saisfying he ellipiciy condiion see Definiion 4.1). We now se G = F W and we recall ha he d-dimensional Brownian moion W enjoys he predicable represenaion propery wih respec o is naural filraion F W. Hence his propery is shared by he P l -Brownian moion W, which is defined by equaion 5.4). Assuming ha he corresponding dividend processes are given by A i = κi u Si udu, we obain d S i,l,cld = B l ) 1 ds i +da i r l S i d ) = B l ) 1 S i d S l,cld µ i +κ i r l ) d+ d j=1 σ ij dw j If we denoe µ+κ r l = µ 1 +κ 1 r l,...,µ d +κ d r l ), hen he above equaion becomes µ = B l ) 1 S +κ r l ) ) d+σ dw. We se a := σ 1 µ+κ r l ) and we define he probabiliy measure P l equivalen o P on Ω,FT W) by seing d P l { T dp = exp a dw 1 T } a 2 d. 2 From he Girsanov heorem, we obain d S l,cld = B l ) 1 S σ d W where he process W := W 1, W 2,..., W d ), which is given by d W := dw +a d = dw +σ 1 µ +κ r l )d, 5.4) is a Brownian moion under P l. Therefore, if he processes µ, σ and κ are bounded, hen he process S l,cld is a coninuous, square-inegrable, P l,f W )-maringale. In his sense, he probabiliy measure P l is an equivalen maringale measure for he presen seup. Furhermore, S l,cld and m l saisfy condiions 5.2) 5.3) wih Q := and γ := B l ) 1 σ for all [,T]. Obviously, m l m l ) is inverible and hus all condiions in Assumpion 5.1 are saisfied. One should observe ha i is naural o idenify he processes S l,cld and S wih he processes M and X in Secion 4.2, respecively. The following assumpion corresponds o Assumpions 3.1 and 4.1 see also Assumpion 4.1 in [25]). Noe ha i requires he prices of risky asses o be bounded. Assumpion 5.2 We posulae ha: i) he process S l,cld = S 1,l,cld,..., S d,l,cld ) is a coninuous, square-inegrable, P l,g)-maringale and has he predicable represenaion propery wih respec o he filraion G under P l, ii)hereexissanr d d -valued, G-adapedprocessmsuchha5.2)holdswherem l m l )isinverible and here exiss a consan K m > such ha, for all [,T], m l + ml ml ) ) 1 2 Km, 5.5) iii) he price processes S i, i = 1,2,...,d of risky asses are bounded. ).