Why does the ultra long-end of a yield curve invert?Cross Currency Swap Pricing in nowadays environmentImplied forward rates puzzleWhy using the swap curve as riskfree rate and no longer gov bonds?Why does the valuation of the floating leg of a swap only use the next payment?How do you model yield curves for interest rates that have hardly moved?Constructing Swap Curve from LIBORWhy does one-factor short-rate model tend to produce parallel shift of the yield curve?Why should central bank intervention cause inverted yield curve to be less effective as a recession signal?Is the “swap curve” synonymous with the “yield curve”?daycount of the yield curve

Multi tool use
Unexpected route on a flight from USA to Europe
What does Fisher mean by this quote?
Whats the name of this projection?
Why should I "believe in" weak solutions to PDEs?
Why should public servants be apolitical?
Does the length of a password for Wi-Fi affect speed?
Validation and verification of mathematical models
In a topological space if there exists a loop that cannot be contracted to a point does there exist a simple loop that cannot be contracted also?
Could one become a successful researcher by writing some really good papers while being outside academia?
How is the return type of a ternary operator determined?
Where is the rule for moving slowly when searching for traps that’s referenced by Dungeon Delver?
Should I take out a personal loan to pay off credit card debt?
How would I as a DM create a smart phone-like spell/device my players could use?
Is it double speak?
"How do you solve a problem like Maria?"
How would a family travel from Indiana to Texas in 1911?
Does it make sense to occupy open space?
Why do implementations of "stdint.h" disagree on the definition of UINT8_C?
How can I tell if a flight itinerary is fake
How to realistically deal with a shield user?
Why does the ultra long-end of a yield curve invert?
polynomial, find the sum of the inverse roots of this equation.
Can ads on a page read my password?
How can glass marbles naturally occur in a desert?
Why does the ultra long-end of a yield curve invert?
Cross Currency Swap Pricing in nowadays environmentImplied forward rates puzzleWhy using the swap curve as riskfree rate and no longer gov bonds?Why does the valuation of the floating leg of a swap only use the next payment?How do you model yield curves for interest rates that have hardly moved?Constructing Swap Curve from LIBORWhy does one-factor short-rate model tend to produce parallel shift of the yield curve?Why should central bank intervention cause inverted yield curve to be less effective as a recession signal?Is the “swap curve” synonymous with the “yield curve”?daycount of the yield curve
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
$begingroup$
The shape of the yield curve (at least in the GBP Rates market) is upward sloping from the front end up to the long end (i.e. 30y), but then begins to become downward sloping as we go beyond 30y and 40y. (Although, at the time of writing, and I think for the first time ever, the 30s50s curve has become upward sloping.)
I know that the reason for this is: convexity.
However, I'm not entirely sure why the ultra-long end has this extra convexity, and why it is necessary that the extra convexity implies an inversion of the slope.
My thoughts
The extra convexity: In a normal scenario, as we go further out of the curve, our certainty about what kind of interest rate regime we might be in reduces, meaning that the long end has to be flatter than the front end. In order to maintain this flatness, there has to be a point of reasonably high convexity as the front end morphs into the long end. (I.e. steepness manifesting as reasonable expectations morphs into 'who-knows-what-rates-will-be-in-20-plus-years'.) It's reasonable to have a view on where rates will be in 1 to 5 years, maybe even 10, but beyond that you can pretty much forget about it, so there is no need for significant steepness.
But why do we see a change in convexity from 30y+? Why does the curve not just level out beyond 30y? Why does it dip lower?
interest-rates swaps interest-rate-swap yield
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The shape of the yield curve (at least in the GBP Rates market) is upward sloping from the front end up to the long end (i.e. 30y), but then begins to become downward sloping as we go beyond 30y and 40y. (Although, at the time of writing, and I think for the first time ever, the 30s50s curve has become upward sloping.)
I know that the reason for this is: convexity.
However, I'm not entirely sure why the ultra-long end has this extra convexity, and why it is necessary that the extra convexity implies an inversion of the slope.
My thoughts
The extra convexity: In a normal scenario, as we go further out of the curve, our certainty about what kind of interest rate regime we might be in reduces, meaning that the long end has to be flatter than the front end. In order to maintain this flatness, there has to be a point of reasonably high convexity as the front end morphs into the long end. (I.e. steepness manifesting as reasonable expectations morphs into 'who-knows-what-rates-will-be-in-20-plus-years'.) It's reasonable to have a view on where rates will be in 1 to 5 years, maybe even 10, but beyond that you can pretty much forget about it, so there is no need for significant steepness.
But why do we see a change in convexity from 30y+? Why does the curve not just level out beyond 30y? Why does it dip lower?
interest-rates swaps interest-rate-swap yield
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
convexity is not a qualitative property: it is quantitative. An ultra long swap/bond has more convexity than a 30y swap/bond because mathematically that is a fact. Convexity is not the only driver of the shape of the long end curve. There are multiple drivers and hence the price fluctuates; with much more fluctuation if solely convexity was the only explainer.
$endgroup$
– Attack68♦
8 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The shape of the yield curve (at least in the GBP Rates market) is upward sloping from the front end up to the long end (i.e. 30y), but then begins to become downward sloping as we go beyond 30y and 40y. (Although, at the time of writing, and I think for the first time ever, the 30s50s curve has become upward sloping.)
I know that the reason for this is: convexity.
However, I'm not entirely sure why the ultra-long end has this extra convexity, and why it is necessary that the extra convexity implies an inversion of the slope.
My thoughts
The extra convexity: In a normal scenario, as we go further out of the curve, our certainty about what kind of interest rate regime we might be in reduces, meaning that the long end has to be flatter than the front end. In order to maintain this flatness, there has to be a point of reasonably high convexity as the front end morphs into the long end. (I.e. steepness manifesting as reasonable expectations morphs into 'who-knows-what-rates-will-be-in-20-plus-years'.) It's reasonable to have a view on where rates will be in 1 to 5 years, maybe even 10, but beyond that you can pretty much forget about it, so there is no need for significant steepness.
But why do we see a change in convexity from 30y+? Why does the curve not just level out beyond 30y? Why does it dip lower?
interest-rates swaps interest-rate-swap yield
$endgroup$
The shape of the yield curve (at least in the GBP Rates market) is upward sloping from the front end up to the long end (i.e. 30y), but then begins to become downward sloping as we go beyond 30y and 40y. (Although, at the time of writing, and I think for the first time ever, the 30s50s curve has become upward sloping.)
I know that the reason for this is: convexity.
However, I'm not entirely sure why the ultra-long end has this extra convexity, and why it is necessary that the extra convexity implies an inversion of the slope.
My thoughts
The extra convexity: In a normal scenario, as we go further out of the curve, our certainty about what kind of interest rate regime we might be in reduces, meaning that the long end has to be flatter than the front end. In order to maintain this flatness, there has to be a point of reasonably high convexity as the front end morphs into the long end. (I.e. steepness manifesting as reasonable expectations morphs into 'who-knows-what-rates-will-be-in-20-plus-years'.) It's reasonable to have a view on where rates will be in 1 to 5 years, maybe even 10, but beyond that you can pretty much forget about it, so there is no need for significant steepness.
But why do we see a change in convexity from 30y+? Why does the curve not just level out beyond 30y? Why does it dip lower?
interest-rates swaps interest-rate-swap yield
interest-rates swaps interest-rate-swap yield
asked 8 hours ago
quantyquanty
747 bronze badges
747 bronze badges
$begingroup$
convexity is not a qualitative property: it is quantitative. An ultra long swap/bond has more convexity than a 30y swap/bond because mathematically that is a fact. Convexity is not the only driver of the shape of the long end curve. There are multiple drivers and hence the price fluctuates; with much more fluctuation if solely convexity was the only explainer.
$endgroup$
– Attack68♦
8 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
convexity is not a qualitative property: it is quantitative. An ultra long swap/bond has more convexity than a 30y swap/bond because mathematically that is a fact. Convexity is not the only driver of the shape of the long end curve. There are multiple drivers and hence the price fluctuates; with much more fluctuation if solely convexity was the only explainer.
$endgroup$
– Attack68♦
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
convexity is not a qualitative property: it is quantitative. An ultra long swap/bond has more convexity than a 30y swap/bond because mathematically that is a fact. Convexity is not the only driver of the shape of the long end curve. There are multiple drivers and hence the price fluctuates; with much more fluctuation if solely convexity was the only explainer.
$endgroup$
– Attack68♦
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
convexity is not a qualitative property: it is quantitative. An ultra long swap/bond has more convexity than a 30y swap/bond because mathematically that is a fact. Convexity is not the only driver of the shape of the long end curve. There are multiple drivers and hence the price fluctuates; with much more fluctuation if solely convexity was the only explainer.
$endgroup$
– Attack68♦
8 hours ago
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I would not say that this is universally acknowledged but here is my view:
Instead of considering par rates, i.e. 10Y and 20Y, consider forward rates, such as 10y and 10y10y. The useful difference here is that forwards do not 'overlap' and therefore incorporate aspects of each other into the price. A 20Y is >50% directly dependent upon the 10Y price for example.
Consider the approximate values of convexity for a $ 1000 PV01 delta IR swap:
- 10Y: $ 1.1
- 10Y10Y: $ 3.1
- 20Y10Y: $ 5.1
- 30Y10Y: $ 7.1
- 40Y10Y: $ 9.1
Now what is the value of gamma (convexity)? Well that depends on the volatility of the rates. If all rates are assumed to have the same volatility, e.g. 50bps per annum then the expected value of each of these over one year is calculated as:
$$ 0.5 times 50^2 times gamma = text[1.4bps, 3.9bps, 6.4bps, 8.9bps, 11.4bps]$$
And that is only for one year, even though these are swaps with a longer tenor.
There are other potential factors that are acknowledged if volatilities are not consistent across the curve, which not only impacts the value of convexities but also affects the mean expectation of where rates will be under a log-normal assumed distribution of prices.
I would recommend chapter 8 of Darbyshire: Pricing and Trading Interest Rate Derivatives which also references Litterman-Scheinkman-Weiss: Volatility and the Yield Curve in its discussion.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Suppose 40yr bond and 30yr bond have the same yield. It is a mathematical fact as @attack68 has pointed out, that the convexity of the 40yr is greater than the convexity of the 30yr bond. So consider the following strategy ; long the 40 yr bond and short the 30yr bond with the same dv01. Then every time the market moves, you make money (get longer when the mkt rallies and shorter when it sells off). The market does not give this for free, so it charges you by making the 40yr bond yield lower.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The 30yr and greater is really a product for insurance companies and sovereigns. Insurance companies dominate the swap and futures market there and are the biggest real money players with hedge funds and dealers typically taking the other side of those trades. This is especially the case in swaptions and exotic structures out there as well. Equity returns and hedging of those instruments drive a lot of the real buying or selling volume there and dominate the real money flow.
New contributor
Edward Watson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "204"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fquant.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f47018%2fwhy-does-the-ultra-long-end-of-a-yield-curve-invert%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I would not say that this is universally acknowledged but here is my view:
Instead of considering par rates, i.e. 10Y and 20Y, consider forward rates, such as 10y and 10y10y. The useful difference here is that forwards do not 'overlap' and therefore incorporate aspects of each other into the price. A 20Y is >50% directly dependent upon the 10Y price for example.
Consider the approximate values of convexity for a $ 1000 PV01 delta IR swap:
- 10Y: $ 1.1
- 10Y10Y: $ 3.1
- 20Y10Y: $ 5.1
- 30Y10Y: $ 7.1
- 40Y10Y: $ 9.1
Now what is the value of gamma (convexity)? Well that depends on the volatility of the rates. If all rates are assumed to have the same volatility, e.g. 50bps per annum then the expected value of each of these over one year is calculated as:
$$ 0.5 times 50^2 times gamma = text[1.4bps, 3.9bps, 6.4bps, 8.9bps, 11.4bps]$$
And that is only for one year, even though these are swaps with a longer tenor.
There are other potential factors that are acknowledged if volatilities are not consistent across the curve, which not only impacts the value of convexities but also affects the mean expectation of where rates will be under a log-normal assumed distribution of prices.
I would recommend chapter 8 of Darbyshire: Pricing and Trading Interest Rate Derivatives which also references Litterman-Scheinkman-Weiss: Volatility and the Yield Curve in its discussion.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I would not say that this is universally acknowledged but here is my view:
Instead of considering par rates, i.e. 10Y and 20Y, consider forward rates, such as 10y and 10y10y. The useful difference here is that forwards do not 'overlap' and therefore incorporate aspects of each other into the price. A 20Y is >50% directly dependent upon the 10Y price for example.
Consider the approximate values of convexity for a $ 1000 PV01 delta IR swap:
- 10Y: $ 1.1
- 10Y10Y: $ 3.1
- 20Y10Y: $ 5.1
- 30Y10Y: $ 7.1
- 40Y10Y: $ 9.1
Now what is the value of gamma (convexity)? Well that depends on the volatility of the rates. If all rates are assumed to have the same volatility, e.g. 50bps per annum then the expected value of each of these over one year is calculated as:
$$ 0.5 times 50^2 times gamma = text[1.4bps, 3.9bps, 6.4bps, 8.9bps, 11.4bps]$$
And that is only for one year, even though these are swaps with a longer tenor.
There are other potential factors that are acknowledged if volatilities are not consistent across the curve, which not only impacts the value of convexities but also affects the mean expectation of where rates will be under a log-normal assumed distribution of prices.
I would recommend chapter 8 of Darbyshire: Pricing and Trading Interest Rate Derivatives which also references Litterman-Scheinkman-Weiss: Volatility and the Yield Curve in its discussion.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I would not say that this is universally acknowledged but here is my view:
Instead of considering par rates, i.e. 10Y and 20Y, consider forward rates, such as 10y and 10y10y. The useful difference here is that forwards do not 'overlap' and therefore incorporate aspects of each other into the price. A 20Y is >50% directly dependent upon the 10Y price for example.
Consider the approximate values of convexity for a $ 1000 PV01 delta IR swap:
- 10Y: $ 1.1
- 10Y10Y: $ 3.1
- 20Y10Y: $ 5.1
- 30Y10Y: $ 7.1
- 40Y10Y: $ 9.1
Now what is the value of gamma (convexity)? Well that depends on the volatility of the rates. If all rates are assumed to have the same volatility, e.g. 50bps per annum then the expected value of each of these over one year is calculated as:
$$ 0.5 times 50^2 times gamma = text[1.4bps, 3.9bps, 6.4bps, 8.9bps, 11.4bps]$$
And that is only for one year, even though these are swaps with a longer tenor.
There are other potential factors that are acknowledged if volatilities are not consistent across the curve, which not only impacts the value of convexities but also affects the mean expectation of where rates will be under a log-normal assumed distribution of prices.
I would recommend chapter 8 of Darbyshire: Pricing and Trading Interest Rate Derivatives which also references Litterman-Scheinkman-Weiss: Volatility and the Yield Curve in its discussion.
$endgroup$
I would not say that this is universally acknowledged but here is my view:
Instead of considering par rates, i.e. 10Y and 20Y, consider forward rates, such as 10y and 10y10y. The useful difference here is that forwards do not 'overlap' and therefore incorporate aspects of each other into the price. A 20Y is >50% directly dependent upon the 10Y price for example.
Consider the approximate values of convexity for a $ 1000 PV01 delta IR swap:
- 10Y: $ 1.1
- 10Y10Y: $ 3.1
- 20Y10Y: $ 5.1
- 30Y10Y: $ 7.1
- 40Y10Y: $ 9.1
Now what is the value of gamma (convexity)? Well that depends on the volatility of the rates. If all rates are assumed to have the same volatility, e.g. 50bps per annum then the expected value of each of these over one year is calculated as:
$$ 0.5 times 50^2 times gamma = text[1.4bps, 3.9bps, 6.4bps, 8.9bps, 11.4bps]$$
And that is only for one year, even though these are swaps with a longer tenor.
There are other potential factors that are acknowledged if volatilities are not consistent across the curve, which not only impacts the value of convexities but also affects the mean expectation of where rates will be under a log-normal assumed distribution of prices.
I would recommend chapter 8 of Darbyshire: Pricing and Trading Interest Rate Derivatives which also references Litterman-Scheinkman-Weiss: Volatility and the Yield Curve in its discussion.
answered 8 hours ago
Attack68♦Attack68
4,3723 silver badges21 bronze badges
4,3723 silver badges21 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Suppose 40yr bond and 30yr bond have the same yield. It is a mathematical fact as @attack68 has pointed out, that the convexity of the 40yr is greater than the convexity of the 30yr bond. So consider the following strategy ; long the 40 yr bond and short the 30yr bond with the same dv01. Then every time the market moves, you make money (get longer when the mkt rallies and shorter when it sells off). The market does not give this for free, so it charges you by making the 40yr bond yield lower.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Suppose 40yr bond and 30yr bond have the same yield. It is a mathematical fact as @attack68 has pointed out, that the convexity of the 40yr is greater than the convexity of the 30yr bond. So consider the following strategy ; long the 40 yr bond and short the 30yr bond with the same dv01. Then every time the market moves, you make money (get longer when the mkt rallies and shorter when it sells off). The market does not give this for free, so it charges you by making the 40yr bond yield lower.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Suppose 40yr bond and 30yr bond have the same yield. It is a mathematical fact as @attack68 has pointed out, that the convexity of the 40yr is greater than the convexity of the 30yr bond. So consider the following strategy ; long the 40 yr bond and short the 30yr bond with the same dv01. Then every time the market moves, you make money (get longer when the mkt rallies and shorter when it sells off). The market does not give this for free, so it charges you by making the 40yr bond yield lower.
$endgroup$
Suppose 40yr bond and 30yr bond have the same yield. It is a mathematical fact as @attack68 has pointed out, that the convexity of the 40yr is greater than the convexity of the 30yr bond. So consider the following strategy ; long the 40 yr bond and short the 30yr bond with the same dv01. Then every time the market moves, you make money (get longer when the mkt rallies and shorter when it sells off). The market does not give this for free, so it charges you by making the 40yr bond yield lower.
answered 2 hours ago
dm63dm63
8,3781 gold badge9 silver badges34 bronze badges
8,3781 gold badge9 silver badges34 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The 30yr and greater is really a product for insurance companies and sovereigns. Insurance companies dominate the swap and futures market there and are the biggest real money players with hedge funds and dealers typically taking the other side of those trades. This is especially the case in swaptions and exotic structures out there as well. Equity returns and hedging of those instruments drive a lot of the real buying or selling volume there and dominate the real money flow.
New contributor
Edward Watson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The 30yr and greater is really a product for insurance companies and sovereigns. Insurance companies dominate the swap and futures market there and are the biggest real money players with hedge funds and dealers typically taking the other side of those trades. This is especially the case in swaptions and exotic structures out there as well. Equity returns and hedging of those instruments drive a lot of the real buying or selling volume there and dominate the real money flow.
New contributor
Edward Watson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The 30yr and greater is really a product for insurance companies and sovereigns. Insurance companies dominate the swap and futures market there and are the biggest real money players with hedge funds and dealers typically taking the other side of those trades. This is especially the case in swaptions and exotic structures out there as well. Equity returns and hedging of those instruments drive a lot of the real buying or selling volume there and dominate the real money flow.
New contributor
Edward Watson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
The 30yr and greater is really a product for insurance companies and sovereigns. Insurance companies dominate the swap and futures market there and are the biggest real money players with hedge funds and dealers typically taking the other side of those trades. This is especially the case in swaptions and exotic structures out there as well. Equity returns and hedging of those instruments drive a lot of the real buying or selling volume there and dominate the real money flow.
New contributor
Edward Watson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Edward Watson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 5 hours ago


Edward WatsonEdward Watson
111 bronze badge
111 bronze badge
New contributor
Edward Watson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Edward Watson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Quantitative Finance Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fquant.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f47018%2fwhy-does-the-ultra-long-end-of-a-yield-curve-invert%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
qFiCaDpd 9UFQ5MIH 2,HrjE26kc5e6,l1S,4AX8JIwn feAmj97aCcPE3pOI,IBqiDXiIPqp1lC Nq2ij,6c
$begingroup$
convexity is not a qualitative property: it is quantitative. An ultra long swap/bond has more convexity than a 30y swap/bond because mathematically that is a fact. Convexity is not the only driver of the shape of the long end curve. There are multiple drivers and hence the price fluctuates; with much more fluctuation if solely convexity was the only explainer.
$endgroup$
– Attack68♦
8 hours ago