Can I derive the BSM put price from the call price using put-call parity instead of memorizing two formulas?
I would much rather memorize one formula well than two formulas poorly. Is using put-call parity a legitimate exam strategy, and are there gotchas?
Yes, this is a perfectly legitimate strategy used by experienced candidates and traders alike. Memorise one formula deeply, derive the other on the fly. Here is the exact mechanics with the gotchas you need to know.
The European Put-Call Parity Formula (continuous dividends):
Rearranging:
Step-by-step exam application:
Suppose the exam gives you , , , , , and asks for both call and put.
- Compute ,
- Look up ,
- Compute call:
- Apply parity:
You wrote one set of lookups and got both prices. That saves about 3 minutes on the exam.
The four gotchas:
Gotcha 1 — European only. Put-call parity holds only for European options. American puts can be optimal to exercise early, so the parity is replaced by an inequality.
Gotcha 2 — Matching discount factors. Both PV terms use the same and . If the exam gives you a forward price directly instead of , the parity becomes .
Gotcha 3 — Discrete dividends. If the stock pays a known cash dividend before expiry, replace with . The continuous- form assumes a dividend rate, not lump sums.
Gotcha 4 — Cash settlement vs. physical. For cash-settled index options, parity works as stated. For physically settled equity options where the holder must take delivery, parity can break slightly because of dividend timing.
On the exam:
Item-set questions on options frequently give you , , , , , and ask for several derived numbers (call price, put price, delta of call, delta of put, breakeven). Memorising one formula plus put-call parity covers 80% of those. Adding the parity-based delta relationship () covers the rest.
The reverse direction:
If the exam gives you a put price and asks for the call, just rearrange: . Same formula, both directions.
Master Level II with our CFA Course
107 lessons · 200+ hours· Expert instruction
Related Questions
Why is my allocation effect NEGATIVE for a sector that had positive returns?
How do I identify the OPTIMAL sector decision in a Brinson attribution table?
What is the difference between Brinson-Hood-Beebower and Brinson-Fachler? Which is on the exam?
Why does the trust pay tax on income instead of the beneficiary?
How bad are the compressed trust tax brackets really? Show me the dollars.
Join the Discussion
Ask questions and get expert answers.