Closed thrasibule closed 7 years ago
As far as I am concerned this sounds good, go ahead. Do we have test cases for the ISDA pricer comparing the QL results with some references?
Yes, it's ok for me if you just open a PR without squashing.
Hi, yes, needless to say, in the spirit of the endeavour here. Good point Peter, I endorse it. Best pp
----- Original Message -----
As far as I am concerned this sounds good, go ahead. Do we have test cases for the ISDA pricer comparing the QL results with some references?
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub , or mute the thread .
Great, I'll try to submit a pull request today. Regarding reference cases, I'll add some tests based on the grids that Markit publish here: http://www.cdsmodel.com/cdsmodel/test-grids.html?
Some tests against these values would be perfect. Thanks a lot for your work on this.
This is a revival of issue lballabio/quantlib-old#143. I rebased @pcaspers CDS branch on top of current master here thrasibule/QuantLib@1070866 and fixed a couple bugs. On top of fixing the original issue (adding an extra day to the last period of a cds schedule), this branch adds a new ISDA pricer for cds. Using this new pricer, I can now tie exactly the computations of cds upfronts with bloomberg and the JPM/Markit code. I think this would be a great addition to QuantLib. What's the best way of gettings this merged? I can try to squash the branch into a series of logical commits, but since @pcaspers and @japari did most of the work, I don't want to steal their thunder.