Learn / Track IV / lesson 1 of 4
Random walks and Brownian motion
The continuous-time model of a price, the one strange rule of Itô calculus, and why the median path drifts below the mean.
From coin flips to Brownian motion
Take a random walk that steps every units of time. As it converges to Brownian motion (also called a Wiener process), with three defining properties:
- .
- Increments over non-overlapping intervals are independent.
- .
The variance grows linearly with time, so the typical size of a move grows with . That is where every in finance comes from.
Geometric Brownian motion
Prices are modelled as growing proportionally, with proportional noise:
is the drift (expected return) and the volatility. The solution is
so is normal and is lognormal. The hero chart on the home page is exactly this formula; drag its sliders to feel how widens the fan.
Where the minus sigma squared over two comes from
In ordinary calculus, . In stochastic calculus there is an extra term, because is not negligible: it behaves like . Itô’s lemma says that for a smooth function ,
with . Applying it to gives
The is the same volatility drag you met in returns: the expected price grows at , but the median price — the typical path — grows at only .
An asset with and (crypto-like) has a median growth rate of a year. Its expected value rises over time while the typical outcome falls towards zero. A few explosive paths carry the average. Run it in the path simulator.
Hitting probabilities
A useful closed form: for Brownian motion with drift and volatility , starting at 0, the probability of ever touching a level below (with ) is . Applied to log-prices, this gives the odds that a position ever hits its stop before drifting away — the continuous cousin of gambler’s ruin.
Limits of the model
GBM assumes constant volatility, no jumps and independent increments. Real markets violate all three: volatility clusters, gaps happen, and microstructure creates short-term reversal. Extensions include stochastic volatility (Heston), jump-diffusion (Merton), and mean-reverting processes (Ornstein–Uhlenbeck). GBM remains the baseline because it is simple, tractable and right about the most important thing: risk scales with .