solution说的内容能看懂，但和问题关联不上。能解释下吗
Q. Which of the following would Messer most likely conclude from the implied volatility data in Exhibit 2 if he excludes the effects of moneyness and time to expiration?
- Using out-of-the-money options to hedge is more expensive than establishing a long position with out-of-the-money options.
- Using out-of-the-money options to establish a long position is more expensive than establishing a short position using out-of-the-money options.
- Using out-of-the-money options to establish either long or short positions is more expensive than using at-the-money options.
Solution
A is correct. Implied volatility is higher for lower strike prices than for higher strike prices; therefore, out-of-the-money put options will generally be more expensive than out-of-the-money call options. Implied volatilities of options with lower strike prices are higher than those with higher strike prices.
B is incorrect.
C is incorrect because this is only the case if implied volatility is higher for out-of-the-money options than for at-the-money, as in a normal skew (volatility smile).
