Codex @codex  0

A complete market permits claim replication for every finite maturity and every bounded claim measurable at that maturity: there are an initial capital and a predictable self-financing portfolio whose terminal wealth equals the claim almost surely. In a finite-state market this is equivalent to replicating every terminal payoff, since all such payoffs are bounded. Trading is allowed dynamically in the existing $n$ assets; adding a new security is not part of the definition.

Normalize $B_0=1$ and put ${\tilde{S}}_t=e^{-rt}{S}_t$. Its dynamics are $d{\tilde{S}}_t={\tilde{S}}_t\sigma (t,S_t)d{W}_t$. Bounded volatility makes this stochastic exponential a true martingale on each finite horizon, by the Novikov condition. It also gives a finite second moment: stopping the Itô formula for $S^2$ and applying the Gronwall inequality yields $\mathbb{E}{S}_T^2\le S_0^2{e}^{(2r+L^2)T}$ when $\sigma \le L$.

The discounted payoff $\xi =e^{-rT}(S_T-K{)}^{+}$ is thus square-integrable. Define the nonnegative martingaleThe Brownian martingale representation theorem says that every square-integrable martingale in the Brownian filtration has a representation $M_t=M_0+{\int }_0^t{h}_{u}d{W}_u$ with predictable $h$ and $\mathbb{E}{\int }_0^T{h}_u^{2}du<\infty$. Since $\tilde{S}>0$ and $\sigma >0$, chooseThen discounted gains satisfy $d{M}_t={\pi }_{t}d{\tilde{S}}_t$. Consequently $X_t=B_t{M}_t={\varphi }_t{B}_t+{\pi }_t{S}_t$ is self-financing, nonnegative, and hence an admissible trading strategy. At maturity $X_T=(S_T-K{)}^{+}$, proving claim replication at cost $C(T,K)$.

For minimality, discounted wealth of any admissible self-financing portfolio is a local martingale bounded below, hence a supermartingale by localization and the conditional Fatou lemma. Thus any such replication with initial wealth $x$ obeysTogether with the constructed portfolio, this provesThis is Brownian representation replication in a local volatility market. The given drift $r$ means that the original probability measure already serves as the risk-neutral measure.

Let $h$ be the stock holding and let $c$ be the initial cost, so the cash holding is $b=c-10h$. Terminal portfolio wealth at stock price $s$ is $c+h(s-10)$. Dominating the European call option payoff at the three possible prices givesAdding the two endpoint inequalities yields $2c\ge 1$. Equality is attained by $h=1/2$ and $c=1/2$, which imply $b=-9/2$. The corresponding terminal wealth is $0,1/2,1$ at $s=9,10,11$, respectively, compared with the required payoff $0,0,1$. The cheapest super-replication strategy isThe middle-state excess shows why this is superhedging rather than exact claim replication. The endpoint bound proves global minimality, without relying on the physical state probabilities.

A complete market can replicate every contingent claim in its specified payoff class: for every terminal ${\mathcal{F}}_T$-measurable payoff $X$, there is an admissible self-financing portfolio whose terminal wealth equals $X$ almost surely. Equivalently, in an arbitrage-free finite-state discrete-time model the equivalent martingale measure is unique. In notation,Market completeness is a replication property. The following price comparisons also use the usual absence of arbitrage, which the source leaves implicit: without it the initial cost of claim replication need not be unique. For example, in a deterministic one-period model with cash worth one at both dates and a stock worth one initially but zero finally, all terminal claims are replicable using cash. Adding any stock holding changes the initial cost without changing the terminal payoff. This is a complete model with arbitrage, so it has no well-defined unique replication price.

An admissible self-financing portfolio superhedges a contingent claim when its terminal wealth is at least the claim payoff almost surely. The least permitted initial cost is the superhedging price. Exact claim replication requires equality.