What's the difference between equilibrium and arbitrage-free term structure models?
CFA Level II Fixed Income covers term structure models — the curriculum mentions Vasicek, CIR, Ho-Lee, and BDT. I'm lost on when to use which type and what makes one 'equilibrium' vs. 'arbitrage-free.' Can someone explain the key distinctions?
Term structure models generate the evolution of interest rates over time, which is essential for valuing bonds with embedded options. CFA Level II groups them into two families with fundamentally different philosophies.
Equilibrium Models
These models describe how interest rates move based on economic theory. They start from assumptions about the economy and derive the term structure as an output. The model may or may NOT match today's observed yield curve.
Vasicek Model:
dr = a(b - r)dt + sigma x dz
- Mean reversion: Rates are pulled toward long-run mean b with speed a
- Constant volatility: sigma doesn't depend on the rate level
- Flaw: Allows negative interest rates (which was considered a flaw before 2010s negative-rate environments)
Cox-Ingersoll-Ross (CIR) Model:
dr = a(b - r)dt + sigma x sqrt(r) x dz
- Also mean-reverting with the same speed parameter
- Volatility scales with sqrt(r): When rates are near zero, volatility shrinks, preventing negative rates
- More realistic but harder to calibrate
Arbitrage-Free Models
These models are calibrated to EXACTLY match today's observed yield curve. They don't derive the curve from theory — they take it as a given and model how it evolves over time.
Ho-Lee Model:
dr = theta(t)dt + sigma x dz
- Time-dependent drift theta(t): Chosen to match the current term structure exactly
- Constant volatility
- Allows negative rates
- Simplest arbitrage-free model
Black-Derman-Toy (BDT) Model:
Used in binomial interest rate trees
- Calibrated to match both the current yield curve AND current volatility structure
- Log-normal: rates are always positive
- Most commonly used for valuing callable/putable bonds in practice and on the exam
Key Comparison:
| Feature | Equilibrium | Arbitrage-Free |
|---|---|---|
| Matches today's curve? | Not necessarily | Exactly |
| Theoretical basis | Economic equilibrium | No-arbitrage condition |
| Use case | Understanding rate dynamics | Pricing specific securities |
| Risk of mispricing | Yes — model curve may differ from market | No — calibrated to market |
Exam Tip: If a question asks which model type is better for pricing a callable bond, the answer is arbitrage-free (BDT). If it asks which model implies mean reversion as an economic property, the answer is equilibrium (Vasicek or CIR).
Explore term structure modeling in our CFA Level II Fixed Income course.
Master Level II with our CFA Course
107 lessons · 200+ hours· Expert instruction
Related Questions
What exactly is the Capital Market Expectations (CME) framework and why does it matter for asset allocation?
How do business cycle phases affect asset class return expectations?
Can someone explain the Grinold–Kroner model step by step with numbers?
How do you forecast fixed-income returns using the building-blocks approach?
PPP vs Interest Rate Parity for forecasting exchange rates — when do I use which?
Join the Discussion
Ask questions and get expert answers.