MHB What is the formula for calculating future value with increasing interest rates?

Wilmer
Messages
303
Reaction score
0
Code:
YR    RATE      INTEREST      BALANCE
0                             1000.00
1    .03         30.00        1030.00
2    .033        33.99        1063.99
3    .0363       38.62        1102.61
4    .03993      44.03        1146.64
Above is an example of future value of an amount at an incresing rate:
$1000.00 at rate 3% 1st year, then the rate increasing by .10 each year.
As example, year2 rate = .03 * 1.10 = .033

What is the formula to calculate the future value in such circumstances?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Wilmer said:
Code:
YR    RATE      INTEREST      BALANCE
0                             1000.00
1    .03         30.00        1030.00
2    .033        33.99        1063.99
3    .0363       38.62        1102.61
4    .03993      44.03        1146.64
Above is an example of future value of an amount at an incresing rate:
$1000.00 at rate 3% 1st year, then the rate increasing by .10 each year.
As example, year2 rate = .03 * 1.10 = .033

What is the formula to calculate the future value in such circumstances?

I can't see an obvious closed form (rather than a product with one term for each year), but this can be tackled by setting up the differential equation for continuously compounded interest with a linearly increasing interest rate.

The solution is then of the form:

\[ FV(t)=P_0 e^{\frac{r_0*\rho^t}{\log(\rho)}} \]

Where \(P_0,\ r_0\) and \(\rho\) are related to but not quite the principle, the initial interest rate and the annual interest growth factor.

In this case \(P_0\approx 741.228\), \( r_0\approx 0.0281893\) and \( \rho\approx 1.09871\)

CB
 
Thanks CB.
I thought there was a way, since the rates themselves can be "summed" by formula,
(like in example: .03 + .033 + .0363 + .03993 = .13923; .13923 / 4 = ~.0348)
then use an average...but that doesn't quite work...
 
Wilmer said:
Thanks CB.
I thought there was a way, since the rates themselves can be "summed" by formula,
(like in example: .03 + .033 + .0363 + .03993 = .13923; .13923 / 4 = ~.0348)
then use an average...but that doesn't quite work...

We want:

\[ FV(n)=P_0 \prod_{k=1}^n (1+r_0 \rho^{k-1}) , \ \ n\ge 1\]

where \(P_0\) is the principle, \(r_0\) the initial interest rate and \(\rho\) the annual groth factor for the rate.

Now there may be a way to express the product in a "nice" form but I can't see it.

CB
 
Agree. In "looper words":
a=1000:r=.03:i=.10:n=4

FOR y = 1 TO n

k = a * r [this period's interest]

a = a + k [this period's resulting principle]

PRINT y,k,a

r = r * i [update rate]

NEXT y
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top