1. Introduction
In classical financial theory, the market is assumed to be arbitrage free and complete, and so standard Brownian motion is often used as noise to characterize the prices of financial derivatives. However, in real-world financial markets, prices often exhibit long-range dependence and non-stationarity, which are inconsistent with the characteristics of standard Brownian motion. Consequently, many authors have proposed using fractional Brownian motion (fBm) to construct market models (see, for examples, Mandelbrot and Van Ness [
1]), with its simple structure and properties in memory noise. Unfortunately, starting with Rogers [
2], there has been an ongoing dispute on the proper usage of fractional Brownian motion in option pricing theory. A troublesome problem arises because fBm is not a semimartingale and therefore, “no arbitrage pricing” cannot be used. Although this is a consensus, the consequences are not clear. The orthodox explanation is simple: fBm is not a suitable candidate for the price process. But, as shown by Cheridito [
3], assuming that market participants cannot react immediately, any theoretical arbitrage opportunities will disappear. On the other hand, in 2003, Hu and ksendal [
4] used the Wick–Itô-type integral to define a fractional market and showed the market was arbitrage free and complete. In that case, the prices of financial derivatives satisfied the following fractional Black–Scholes model:
      with 
, where 
 is a fractional Brownian motion with Hurst index 
, 
 and 
 are two parameters, and the integral 
 denotes the fractional Itô integral (Skorohod integral). For further studies on fractional Brownian motion in Black–Scholes models, refer to works by Bender and Elliott [
5], Biagini [
6], Bjork-Hult [
7], Cheridito [
3], Elliott and Chan [
8], Greene-Fielitz [
9], Necula [
10], Lo [
11], Mishura [
12], Rogers [
2], Izaddine [
13], and additional references cited therein.
In this paper, we consider the application of the quasi-likelihood method in continuous stochastic systems. Our goal is to establish the quasi-likelihood estimations for parameters 
 and 
 in Equation (
1) and to establish their asymptotic behaviors. As is well known, there are many papers on parameter estimation of stochastic differential equations, but the use of the quasi-likelihood method to deal with parameter estimation problems of stochastic differential equations without independent increments has not been seen so far. Clearly, the solution of (
1) does not have independent increments unless 
. We briefly describe the quasi-likelihood method as follows.
Let 
 be a stochastic process such that its distribution contains unknown parameters 
 with 
. Assume that 
 are samples extracted from 
X, and that 
 is the probability function (e.g., density function) of the increment 
 for 
. Since the process 
X generally does not have independent increments, the function
      is generally not a likelihood function. However, we can still use the usual method to obtain an estimator, which is called a quasi-likelihood estimator.
Let 
 be fractional Brownian motion with Hurst index 
 defined on the probability space 
. Consider the fractional Black–Scholes model as follows:
      with 
, where 
, and the stochastic integral is the fractional Itô integral [
14]. By using the Itô formula, we get
      with 
, which is called the geometric fractional Brownian motion (gmfBm).
In this paper, for simplicity, throughout, we let 
H be known. Denote 
 and
Now, let  be known, and let the gmfBm  be observed at some discrete time instants  satisfying the following conditions:
- (C1)
-  and  as . 
- (C2)
- There exists  such that  as . 
We get a quasi-likelihood function of parameter 
 and 
 as follows
      where 
 is the density of the random variable 
. Then, the logarithmic quasi-likelihood function is given by
      with 
, where 
. By using the quasi-likelihood function, we get that the estimators 
 and 
 of 
 and 
 satisfy the equations
When 
, by solving the above equation system, we get the estimators of 
 and 
 as follows:
      where 
 and 
 for every 
. When 
, we have 
 and the random variables
      are independent identical distributions, the above logarithm quasi-likelihood function is a classical logarithm likelihood function, and we have
      and the asymptotic behavior of the two estimators can be easily established, so in the discussion later in this paper, unless otherwise stated, it is assumed that 
.
Our study focuses on the asymptotic properties of two estimators. Given the Gaussian properties of the sample, we expect these estimators to exhibit quadratic variation, facilitating the derivation and simplification of their asymptotic behavior using fractional Brownian motion. To fully characterize this behavior, we rely on key properties of fractional Brownian motion, which not only underpin the theoretical understanding of complex stochastic processes but also provide a foundation for applying quasi-likelihood methods in parameter estimation.
The structure of this paper is as follows. In 
Section 2, we briefly describe the basic properties of fractional Brownian motion. In 
Section 3 and 
Section 4 we discuss the strong consistency and asymptotic normality of the estimator 
 and analyze the asymptotic behavior under the cases where the parameter 
 is known and unknown. To prove these two asymptotic behaviors, we rely on two key results related to fractional Brownian motion. Although these results have been proven for a finite observation interval, they also hold when the observation length 
 tends to infinity. In 
Section 5, we consider the asymptotic behavior of the estimator 
. In 
Section 6, we provide numerical verification and empirical analysis of the estimators 
 and 
. In 
Section 7, we conclude that the proposed fractional Brownian motion quasi-likelihood method performs well theoretically and empirically, offering a practical framework for financial parameter estimation.
  2. Preliminaries
In this section, we briefly recall some basic results on fractional Brownian motion. For more aspects on the material, we refer to Bender [
15], Biagini et al. [
6], Cheridito-Nualart [
16], Gradinaru et al. [
17], Hu [
4], Mishura [
12], Nourdin [
18], Nualart [
19], Tudor [
20], and references therein.
A zero mean Gaussian process 
 defined on a complete probability space 
 is called the fBm with Hurst index 
 provided that 
 and
      for 
. Let 
 be the completion of the linear space 
 generated by the indicator functions 
 with respect to the inner product
When 
, we know that 
, and when 
, we have
      for all 
. The application
      is an isometry from 
 to the Gaussian space generated by 
, and it can be extended to 
. Denote by 
 the set of smooth functionals of the form
      where 
 (
f and all its derivatives are bounded) and 
. The 
derivative operator  (the Malliavin derivative) of a functional 
F of the above form is defined as
The derivative operator 
 is then a closable operator from 
 into 
. We denote by 
 the closure of 
 with respect to the norm
The 
divergence integral  is the adjoint of derivative operator 
. That is, we say that a random variable 
u in 
 belongs to the domain of the divergence operator 
, denoted by 
, if
      for every 
. In this case, 
 is defined by the duality relationship
      for any 
. Generally, the divergence 
 is also called the Skorohod integral of a process 
u and denoted as
      and the indefinite Skorohod integral is defined as 
. If the process 
 is adapted, the Skorohod integral is called the fractional Itô integral, and the Itô formula
      holds for all 
 and 
.
  4. Asymptotic Normality of Estimator
In this section, we examine the asymptotic distribution of 
. We keep the notations from 
Section 3, and denote by 
 and 
 the convergence in distribution and probability, as 
n tends to infinity, respectively. From the structure of estimator 
, one can find its asymptotic distribution depends on the asymptotic distribution of 
. By the definition of 
, we can check that
      for 
, where 
 is given in Lemma 8 and
      with 
. From the proof later given, we find that the two terms 
 and 
 admit same asymptotic velocity under some suitable assumptions of 
. However, when 
 and conditions (C1) and (C2) hold, we know that (see proof of Lemma 9 in the following)
      almost surely, as 
. But 
 converges in 
 for 
, and 
 converges in distribution for 
. This indicates that 
 and 
 do not have the same asymptotic velocity for all 
, which means that such models have inflection points when 
. The reason for this situation is that 
 tends to infinity. If we assume that 
 tends to infinity logarithmically, the scenario is different. The following lemma provides the asymptotic normality of 
, and its proof is given at the end of this section.
 Lemma 9.  Let  be defined in Lemma 2, and let conditions  and  hold.
 -  (1) 
- When , we havewhere  denotes the normal random variable with mean a and variance , and 
-  (2) 
- When , we obtain 
-  (3) 
- When , we have - where . 
  4.1. The Asymptotic Distribution of  When  Is Known
In this subsection, we obtain the asymptotic distribution of 
, provided 
 is known. By (
8), Lemma 3, and the fact that 
, for all 
, we get
        with 
.
 Lemma 10.  Let the condition  hold, , and denote  -  (1) 
- For , we have  as . 
-  (2) 
- For , we have , as , provided that condition  holds with . 
-  (3) 
- For , we have - as n tends to infinity, provided that condition  holds with . 
 Proof.  Let 
. By Lemma 7 we have
          for all 
. Clearly, 
 for 
 and 
 for 
 if 
. It follows from (
15) that
          as 
n tends to infinity under the conditions of statements (1) and (2).
We now verify statement (3). Let 
. It follows from Lemma 2 that
          as 
n tends to infinity, provided that 
 since
          as 
n tends to infinity.    □
  Theorem 3.  Let μ be known and let conditions (C1) and (C2) hold
 -  (1) 
- Let  and , then, as , we have 
-  (2) 
- Let , then, as , we have 
 Proof.  Let 
. Then, we have
Moreover, we have 
 for 
, and
          for all 
 and 
.
For statement (1), we have
          for all 
, and by (
23) and (
24), we also have
          since 
 for 
. Combining these with (
21), (
23), Lemma 9, Lemma 10, and Slutsky’s theorem, we obtain statement (1).
For statement (2), we have
          for all 
 if 
. It follows from (
23) and (
24) that
          for all 
 since 
. Combining these with (
21), (
23), Lemma 9, Lemma 10, and Slutsky’s theorem, we obtain statement (2) because 
.    □
  Theorem 4.  Let μ be known and . If conditions (C1) and (C2) hold with . We then haveas n tends to infinity, where  is given in Lemma 9.   Proof.  By (
8), Lemma 3, and the fact 
, for all 
, we get
On the other hand, we have
          when 
. Therefore, the asymptotic normality follows from  (
26), (
27), Lemma 9, and Slutsky’s theorem, and we get
          when 
 and as 
n tends to infinity.    □
   4.2. The Asymptotic Distribution of  When  Is Unknown
In this subsection, we consider the asymptotic distribution of estimator 
 when 
 is unknown. Based on (
10), Lemma 4, and the fact that 
, we obtain the following result
        with 
, where 
. As a corollary of Lemma 4, the following lemma provides an estimate for the remainder term
 Lemma 11.  Let conditions  and  hold.
 -  (1) 
- For , we have  
-  (2) 
- For , we have , provided . 
 Proof.  By Lemma 7 and the proof of Lemma 4, we get
          for all 
. Clearly, 
 and 
 for all 
. Moreover, when 
, we have
Similarly, 
 for all 
 and
          for all 
. Noting that 
 and 
 for all 
, we obtain that
          converges almost surely to 0 for 
 and that it converges almost surely to 0 for 
 provided 
. Thus, the lemma follows from Lemma 4 and (
30).    □
  Theorem 5.  Let μ be unknown and let conditions (C1) and (C2) hold.
 -  (1) 
- For , if , we have 
-  (2) 
- For , we have 
 Proof.  Clearly, we have 
 for all 
 and
          for 
, and moreover
          for all 
. It follows that
          for all 
, and 
 for all 
, and
          for all 
, since 
 for 
 and 
 for all 
. Combining this with (
29), Lemma 9, Lemma 11, and Slutsky’s theorem, we obtain the theorem.    □
  Lemma 12.  Let conditions  and  hold with . For , we have  Proof.  Similar to the proof of Lemma 11, we get
          for all 
. It follows from Lemma 7 and Lemma  2 that
          as 
n tends to infinity.    □
  Theorem 6.  Let  and μ be unknown. If conditions  and  hold with , we then haveas n tends to infinity, where  is given in Lemma 9.  Proof.  Let 
. By (
10), Lemma 4, and the fact that 
, we get
Therefore, using Equations (
33) and (
34) and Lemma 9, we have
          when 
 and as 
n tends to infinity.    □
   4.3. Proofs of Lemmas in Section 4
In this subsection, we complete the proof of Lemma 9.
 Proposition 1.  Let the conditions in Lemma 1 hold.
 -  (1) 
- For , we havein distribution, where 
-  (2) 
- For , we havein distribution. 
-  (3) 
- For , we havein , where  denotes a Rosenblatt random distribution with . 
The lemma is an insignificant extension for some known results, and its proof is omitted (see, for examples, Theorem 5.4, Proposition 5.4, Theorem 5.5 in Tudor [
20]). In fact, for 
, such convergence have been studied and can be found in Breuer and Major [
23], Dobrushin and Major [
24], Giraitis and Surgailis [
25], Nourdin [
26], Nourdin and Reveillac [
27] and Tudor [
20]. On the other hand, for more material on the Rosenblatt distribution and related process, refer to Tudor [
20].
Proof of Lemma 9.  Let 
 be given. We have
We also have 
 for 
 and
          for 
. On the other hand, by Taylor’s expansion, we may prove
          for 
 if 
. It follows from Lemma 7 that 
 for 
 and
          for 
. Combining the above three convergences and the proof of Lemma 8, we obtain that
          for 
 and
          for 
. Thus, by (
16) and Proposition 1, to end the proof, we check that
          for all 
 under some suitable conditions for 
. By the fact
          with 
 and 
, we get that
          for all 
, where 
 for 
.
Now, in order to end the proof, we estimate the last three items in (
42) in the two cases 
 and 
.
Cases I: 
. Clearly, the sequence
          converges. It follows that
          and
          as 
n tends to infinity. Combining these with Lemma 8 and (
42), we obtain convergence (
41) for all 
. Thus, by Proposition 1, (
16), (
39), and Slutsky’s theorem, we obtain the desired asymptotic behavior
          for all 
, and statement (1) follows.
Cases II: 
. From
          and Taylor’s expansion, we get that
          as 
n tends to infinity, which implies that
          as 
n tends to infinity. Similarly, we also have
          and
          as 
n tends to infinity. On the other hand, we have
          as 
n tends to infinity, where 
 denotes the classical Beta function. It follows from Taylor’s expansion that
          for all 
, as 
n tends to infinity. Combining these with Lemma 8 and (
42), we obtain convergence (
41) for all 
 if 
. Thus, we obtain the desired asymptotic behavior
          for all 
 by Proposition 1, (
16), and (
40), and statement (2) follows.
Now, we verify statement (3). Let 
. By Lemma 7, we have
          and moreover, from the proof of statement (2) in Lemma 9, we also have
          where 
. Noting that
          admits a normal distribution for all 
, we see that
          from (
52). It follows from (
16), statement (3) in Proposition 1, and (
51) that
          as 
n tends to infinity. Moreover, by (
51) we obtain
Combining this with (
54), (
53), and Proposition 1, we get
          as 
n tends to infinity. Finally, by Proposition 1, (
53), (
55), and Slutsky’s theorem, we obtain
Thus, the three convergences in statements (2) and (3) follow.    □
   6. Numerical Simulation and Empirical Analysis
In this section, the effectiveness of the proposed estimator is validated through numerical simulations. The results demonstrate that the estimator exhibits strong applicability and reliable performance in practical scenarios. To further assess the precision of the two estimation methods, Monte Carlo simulations were conducted in MATLAB 2017b, where the simulated estimates were compared against the true values, and their mean values and standard deviations were calculated to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the estimator’s performance. In addition, real trading data from the Chinese financial market were retrieved via the Tushare Pro platform using Python 3.10. With the known value of H, the parameters  and  were estimated, and track plots were generated in MATLAB and compared with the logarithmic closing prices of the stock, thereby further validating the effectiveness of the pseudo-likelihood estimation.
  6.1. Numerical Simulation
First, we emphasize that in all the figures presented below, the sample size was fixed at , and the time step was chosen as . The parameters were set to  and . In the analysis of the asymptotic distribution, the number of replications, i.e., the simulated sample paths, was specified as . For the sake of notational consistency, we denote  throughout the subsequent discussion. To assess the effectiveness and robustness of the proposed estimation method, we designed two primary experimental scenarios:
- 1.
- Case with Partially Known Parameters - In the case where the parameter  -  is known, we estimated the parameter  -  and further examined its estimation path, quantile–quantile plot, and asymptotic distribution. The corresponding results for the estimator  -  are presented for  -  ( Figure 1- ) and  -  ( Figure 2- ). 
- In the case where the parameter  -  is known, we estimated the parameter  -  and examined its estimation path and asymptotic distribution. Similarly, figures present the estimation paths and asymptotic distribution of  -  when  -  ( Figure 3- ) and  -  ( Figure 4- ). 
 
- 2.
- Case with Completely Unknown Parameters - In this scenario, where both  -  and  -  are unknown, we estimated both parameters simultaneously and analyzed their estimation paths and asymptotic distributions. Figures present the estimation paths and asymptotic distribution of  -  and  -  when  -  ( Figure 5-  and  Figure 6- ) and  -  ( Figure 7-  and  Figure 8- ). 
 
Case 1: The asymptotic behavior of the estimators of  and  when  is known.
Case 2: The asymptotic behavior of the estimators of  and  when both parameters are unknown.
From the above figures, it can be observed that for different values of H, the numerical simulation results of the convergence and asymptotic properties of the estimators  and  are largely consistent with the theoretical predictions. The discrepancies are minor, indicating that the obtained estimates exhibit a high degree of accuracy.
In addition, to investigate the asymptotic behavior of the proposed estimators for different sample sizes, we considered three sample sizes: , 2000, and 3000. The comparison of theoretical variance with empirical variance, as well as the corresponding errors, was carried out. The specific experimental design is outlined as follows:
- Table 1- : Theoretical variance, empirical variance, and their errors for parameter  -  when  -  is known. 
 
- Table 2- : Theoretical variance, empirical variance, and their errors for parameter  -  when  -  is known. 
 
- Table 3- : Joint analysis of the variance estimates and errors for both parameters when  -  and  -  are unknown. 
 
The discrepancies are minor, indicating that the obtained estimates exhibit a high degree of accuracy.
  6.2. Empirical Analysis
To further evaluate the performance of the proposed model and estimation method in a real-world market setting, we conducted an empirical analysis using Heilan Home Co., Ltd. Jiangyin, Jiangsu Province, China (stock code: 600398), a representative stock from the Chinese A-share market. Daily closing price data were retrieved via the Tushare Pro platform using Python, covering the period from 28 December 2000, to 26 August 2025. Data cleaning and preprocessing were carried out to ensure consistency. As supported by the theoretical results in 
Section 3, the estimators were consistent as the sample size 
; therefore, the full sample period was employed to guarantee robustness. The Hurst exponent of the stock return series was first estimated using the R/S method, yielding 
, which suggested the presence of long-memory effects.
Based on this, the key model parameters 
 and 
 were estimated within the quasi-likelihood framework proposed in this paper. To provide an intuitive evaluation of model fit, simulated price track were generated in MATLAB using the estimated parameters and compared with the actual closing prices observed. The comparison demonstrated that the model captured the overall price dynamics effectively, thereby confirming both the applicability of the mixed fractional Brownian motion Black–Scholes framework and the reliability of the proposed quasi-likelihood estimation method on real financial data. Furthermore, we simulated stock price tracking using both the fractional Brownian motion model proposed in this study and the classical Black–Scholes model. The comparative results are presented in 
Figure 9 and 
Figure 10. As illustrated, our proposed model provides a notably better fit to the observed price dynamics, particularly in capturing volatility clustering and the long-memory behavior inherent in the price process. These results further highlight the advantages and practical applicability of our model in financial data modeling and empirical analysis.