Derivatives, LOS weight share 0.5 percent of the 365 Level I learning outcomes.
The formula uses the present value of the strike price, never the strike price itself, and the exam plants the answer a candidate gets by forgetting to discount as one of the wrong choices on almost every put-call parity question.
Answer these three first. Getting them wrong now is normal, and it helps the lesson stick. Reveal the answers when you're done, then read on.
1. A European call on a non-dividend-paying stock trades at $8. The stock is $52, the strike is $50, the risk-free rate is 4%, and the option expires in one year. Using put-call parity, the value of the corresponding European put is closest to:
2. The left side of the put-call parity equation, C + PV(X), is best described as:
3. Put-call parity holds as an exact equality only for:
Five to ten minutes on this one unit: what the exam wants, the idea in plain words, then straight into the trap and the practice.
The exam wants you to calculate any one of C, P, S or PV(X) from put-call parity given the other three, construct the six named synthetic positions, and determine the correct four-leg arbitrage trade when parity is violated.
Put-call parity links a European call, a European put, the underlying and a risk-free bond into one equation, because two specific portfolios are built to have identical payoffs at expiration: C + PV(X) = P + S. The left side, a fiduciary call, is a long call plus a risk-free bond investment of PV(X) that grows to exactly X by expiration. The right side, a protective put, is a long put plus a long position in the underlying itself. If the stock finishes above the strike, both portfolios pay the stock price. If it finishes below the strike, both portfolios pay exactly X. Because the payoffs match in every scenario, the two portfolios must carry the same value today, and that equality is the whole formula.
The strike price must always enter the equation as its present value, never at face value. PV(X) = X / (1 + r)^T under discrete compounding, or X x e^(-rT) under continuous compounding, whichever convention a question specifies. The raw strike price X only ever appears in the description of the expiration payoff, never inside the present-value form of the parity equation itself, and substituting X directly for PV(X) is the exam's single most frequently planted wrong answer.
Rearranging the same equation solves for whichever of the four variables a question leaves out: P = C + PV(X) - S to solve for the put, C = P + S - PV(X) to solve for the call, S = C - P + PV(X) to solve for the stock. Subtracting P and PV(X) from both sides of the original equation gives the put-call forward parity relationship, C - P = S - PV(X), which says a synthetic forward, long call, short put, same strike and expiration, replicates a position economically equivalent to holding the underlying financed at the risk-free rate. Every other synthetic position, synthetic call, synthetic put, synthetic stock, synthetic bond, comes from rearranging the same formula to isolate a different term, and each one almost always carries a bond leg; a synthetic position with no bond component in the answer choices is very likely missing a piece.
When the two sides of the equation are not equal, the correct arbitrage sells the entire overpriced portfolio and buys the entire underpriced one, never a single instrument that looks mispriced on its own. If the fiduciary call side exceeds the protective put side, the fiduciary call is overpriced: sell the call and borrow PV(X), while buying the put and buying the stock. If the protective put side is larger instead, the trade reverses: sell the put and short the stock, while buying the call and investing PV(X). The trade is always four legs, executed together, never one leg in isolation.
This equality holds exactly only for European-style options, because its derivation depends on holding both portfolios all the way to expiration and confirming the payoffs match at that one point in time. An American option's holder can exercise early, which breaks the guaranteed payoff match the derivation depends on, and the exact equation becomes an inequality instead. A question that specifies European options is telling you the equation applies exactly as written; American options are the exception this exam expects you to catch.
A European put option with a strike price of $50 and one year to expiration trades at $6. The underlying stock trades at $48. The risk-free rate is 5 percent annually, discretely compounded. What is the value of the corresponding European call, by put-call parity? PV(X) = $50 / (1.05)^1 = $47.62. Solving parity for the call: C = P + S - PV(X) = $6 + $48 - $47.62 = $6.38. The call should be worth about $6.38.
Same inputs: put price $6, strike $50, stock $48, risk-free rate 5 percent, one year to expiration. Compute PV(X) first, then rearrange parity to solve for the call yourself.
P = $6, X = $50, S = $48, r = 5% (discrete), T = 1 year. Find C using put-call parity.
Using the strike price X directly instead of its present value PV(X) is the exam's most frequently placed wrong answer; the formula always requires the strike discounted back to today at the risk-free rate, never its face value.
Verbatim from the 2026 CFA Level I topic outline. Every practice question and key rule below is tagged to one of these where the stem and explanation make the match clear.
Written from this module's own lesson and the 2026 CFA Level I topic outline, in teaching order, each tagged to the learning outcome it belongs to where that is clear.
The formula is C + PV(X) = P + S for European options on a non-dividend-paying underlying, where PV(X) is the present value of the strike price. The left side, the fiduciary call, is a long call plus a risk-free bond investment of PV(X) that grows to X by expiration. The right side, the protective put, is a long put plus a long position in the underlying. At expiration, tracking both portfolios across every possible stock price shows they always pay identically, S when S exceeds X, X when S is below X, so their present values, and therefore their costs today, must be equal or a riskless arbitrage would exist.
PV(X) = X / (1+r)^T under discrete compounding, or X multiplied by e^(-rT) under continuous compounding, whichever convention the question specifies. The raw strike price X appears only in the expiration payoff description, never in the present-value form of the parity equation itself; substituting X directly for PV(X) is the exam's most frequently placed wrong-answer trap on this topic, and the word 'continuously compounded' in a question stem is the explicit signal to use the exponential form rather than the discrete one.
Compute both sides of the equation numerically: if the fiduciary call side (C + PV(X)) exceeds the protective put side (P + S), the fiduciary call is overpriced, sell the call and borrow PV(X) (a short bond), while buying the put and buying the stock; if the protective put side exceeds the fiduciary call side, the reverse trade applies, sell the put and short the stock, while buying the call and investing PV(X) (a long bond). The profit locked in today equals the exact difference between the two sides, and it is realized regardless of where the stock price ends up at expiration, because the four legs' payoffs cancel exactly.
Subtracting P + PV(X) from both sides of C + PV(X) = P + S gives C - P = S - PV(X), the put-call forward parity relationship, stating that a synthetic forward (long call, short put, same strike and expiration) replicates a position economically equivalent to holding the underlying financed at the risk-free rate. Rearranging further for other combinations produces the full set of synthetic positions, for example a synthetic long call equals long put plus long stock plus a short bond (borrowing PV(X)); the sign on the bond term always indicates the correct direction, a positive PV(X) term means invest (lend), a negative PV(X) term means borrow, and treating this sign carelessly is a frequent source of error when constructing a synthetic position.
Authored only where a key rule has an arbitrary number, list, or formula shape worth a memory device; a module with none of those has no tricks here, on purpose.
Write PV(X) = X/(1+r)^T (or X e^(-rT) for continuous compounding) as a first, separate step before substituting into the parity formula, rather than plugging the strike price straight in.
The left side of C + PV(X) = P + S contains no put at all, it is a call and a bond; the right side contains no call, it is a put and the stock.
The trade is always four legs; identifying which whole side is more expensive, then executing all of that side's legs together, is what locks in the riskless profit.
Authored, ordered steps for answering this module's question types; a calculation module's calculator-dependent step ends with a bracketed BA II Plus keystroke sequence.
Condensed from the key rules and tricks above, nothing new. What you'd want on one index card the night before.
Pick an answer, say how sure you are, then reveal. Every wrong choice gets its own explanation. 10 question(s) available for this unit.
A European call option on a non-dividend-paying stock has a premium of $8. The stock trades at $52, the exercise price is $50, the risk-free rate is 4% per year, and the option expires in one year. Using put-call parity, the value of a European put option with the same exercise price and expiration is closest to:
How sure are you?
Unit: option-replication-using-put-call-parity
Using put-call parity, which of the following positions is most likely a synthetic long call?
How sure are you?
Unit: option-replication-using-put-call-parity
A trader observes: C = $5, P = $3, S = $48, X = $50, r = 5%, T = 1 year. Which statement best describes the situation?
How sure are you?
Unit: option-replication-using-put-call-parity
Put-call parity is formally expressed as C + PV(X) = P + S. What does the LEFT side of this equation represent, most likely?
How sure are you?
Unit: option-replication-using-put-call-parity
A European put option with X = $55 and T = 6 months trades at $6. The stock trades at $50. The risk-free rate is 6% per year (continuous compounding). The European call price from put-call parity is closest to:
How sure are you?
Unit: option-replication-using-put-call-parity
Which of the following most likely explains why put-call parity applies only to European options and not American options?
How sure are you?
Unit: option-replication-using-put-call-parity
An analyst uses put-call parity to construct a synthetic long stock position. Which combination is most likely correct?
How sure are you?
Unit: option-replication-using-put-call-parity
A fiduciary call portfolio and a protective put portfolio on the same stock have these current values: Fiduciary call = $14.20, Protective put = $12.80. An arbitrageur should most likely:
How sure are you?
Unit: option-replication-using-put-call-parity
An investor wants to replicate the payoff of a long call option using put-call parity, but only has access to the underlying stock, a risk-free bond, and a put option with the same strike and expiration, not the call itself. Combining the put-call parity relationship with basic algebra, the investor should most likely construct the synthetic long call by:
How sure are you?
Unit: option-replication-using-put-call-parity
Using put-call FORWARD parity, an investor wants to synthetically create a long forward contract position using options only, no direct forward or stock position. Combining put-call forward parity with the standard put-call parity relationship, the investor should most likely:
How sure are you?
Unit: option-replication-using-put-call-parity
Answer the questions above, then press the button.