Options The Cash C.O.W. (Conservative Option Writing)

Imagine how much money you could have made had you sold every option that you have ever purchased? While many traders boast of huge profits attained from a singe long option play, these stories are rare in comparison to those in which traders have lost some, or all, of the premium paid for an option.

In a sense, option buyers are throwing good money after bad in hunt of that one big market move that could return extraordinary profits. Given the fact that markets spend most of their time trading in a range, it is easy to see why few traders experience the abnormal returns that drew them to the markets in the first place.

A less exciting, but more fundamentally sound approach would be to attempt to profit from markets that are trading in a range. The most efficient means of taking advantage of a "quiet" market is to strangle the current range by selling calls above technical resistance and puts beneath support levels.

The logic of a short option strategy, such as a strangle, is similar to that of insurance companies. Insurers collect premium on policies with the expectation of future payouts. By knowing the probability of a claim, they can calculate their expected return for assuming the risk of the policyholder. They are confident that over time they will profit despite their obligation to pay claims.

By nature, options are a depreciating asset. Just as a new car buyer will find that the value of their purchase diminishes once the automobile is driven off of the seller's lot, an option buyer will find that the time value of their long option erodes with every passing minute.

It should be obvious by now that selling options provides traders with an advantage over buyers. After all, a seller of a call option can profit in a declining market environment as well as a market that is trading sideways. In fact, it is possible for a seller of a call to also profit during times of increasing prices given that the market does so at a slow enough pace. A buyer can only profit on a call option if a market rallies over a specific price in a specific time limit.

Nonetheless, traders continue to be lured into long option strategies. This is likely due to the fact that purchasing an option provides traders with unlimited profit potential and the risk is limited to the premium paid. The peril in this type of approach, as mentioned before, lies in the fact that although one's losses are limited it is likely that an option buyer will lose some or all of the value of the option.

The exposure to unlimited losses by option writers is merely theoretical. In theory a market could go up forever, but it isn't likely. Additionally, while most markets can't go to zero (equities excluded), they can drop significantly. However, due to the leverage and risk involved it is imperative to have adjustment strategies in place before a position is executed.

Quick Refresher
An option premium is the actual market price of a particular option at a particular time. Thus it is necessary to understand the fundamentals to option pricing before implementing a short option strategy. The exact price that buyers and sellers are willing to accept at any given time is based on two major factors, intrinsic and extrinsic value.

Simply put, intrinsic value refers to whether or not an option is in the money and to what degree. For example, the intrinsic value of a call is the amount of premium by which the underlying market price is above the strike price (also known as exercise price). Accordingly, a put option is said to have intrinsic value once the market price dips below the strike price. An option with intrinsic value is ideal for an option holder, but creates an undesirable situation for an option writer. If a short option expires in the money, the writer will be assigned a corresponding position in the underlying market. In the case of a short call, the seller will be short the underlying from the stated strike price. Conversely, a trader with a short put will be assigned a long position from the strike price. It is often in the best interest of the option writer to offset a position prior to expiration in the case of an in the money option.

The extrinsic value of an option is a combination of several factors including the strike price relative to the underlying price, market volatility, time to expiration, and demand for that particular option. The goal of an option seller is to profit from the erosion of intrinsic value. Times of increased volatility provide ideal circumstances for option sellers because option premiums are inflated. Similarly, it is helpful to understand that the depreciation of extrinsic value tends to accelerate during the last 30 of an option's life creating an ideal scenario for option selling.

Know the Market Climate
Before executing short option trades, it is imperative that traders analyze the "climate" of the market. The three primary aspects of a market that should be considered are volatility, liquidity and technical indicators.
Perhaps the most important factor to be considered is the liquidity of the market. With the possibility of unlimited risk, traders must be able to easily liquidate an unfavorable position. Options in thinly traded markets tend to have relatively wide bid/ask spreads, which will exaggerate losses and reduce profits. Markets that offer traders ample amounts of liquidity include: stock indices such as the S&P 500 and fixed income such as US Treasuries.

Volatility is an important component of extrinsic value. Thus, during times of increased market volatility option premium tends to be inflated. This provides an advantage to sellers. Volatility can be determined by looking at indicators such as historic or implied volatility available on most charting software or by simply looking at a price chart.

Check the Conditions
Once a market is deemed to be suitable for option selling, a trader should scrutinize the technical condition in order to determine appropriate contract months and strike prices. Trading ranges as well as support and resistance levels should play a big part in short option placement.

Traders should obviously sell call options above significant technical resistance and sell puts below known support levels.
Even if a market succeeds in penetrating known support and resistance, it will likely stall before doing so. To a short option trader, time is money. As mentioned before, every minute that passes diminishes the time value of an option.

Depending on market conditions, it may not be appropriate to write strangles. The purpose of selling options is to increase the probability of success, thus picking tops and bottoms are counterproductive. If a market is entrenched in a definitive uptrend, it doesn't make sense to sell calls. Doing so will likely lead to an unfavorable scenario. On the other hand, selling puts is extremely attractive. Even if the market does reverse and go against the short put position it probably won't do so immediately. Remember, as time goes by, the extrinsic value of an options erodes, providing profits to the seller and losses to the buyer of an option.

Too many short option traders focus on their strike price relative to the underlying market price, when in reality they should pay more attention to the intrinsic break-even point of the trade. Although it becomes an uncomfortable position, options that are in-the-money experience accelerated time value erosion. As long as the market stays within the intrinsic break even it will be a profitable trade at expiration. Patience, combined with humbleness, is a virtue in short option trading. Even markets that are trending do not go straight up or down providing opportunities for exiting uncomfortable short option positions. Traders will find that liquidation out of panic is often not the best remedy to the situation.

Final Thoughts
As with any trading method or system, losing trades are inevitable when trading short option strategies. Thus it is important however to point out that there is substantial risk involved. Many option sellers fall victim to greed. Failure to cut losses short can put traders at the mercy of the market. While the odds of a profitable trade are in the favor of a premium seller, unlimited losses leave the seller extremely vulnerable. For this reason, adjustments and trading plans are crucial to maximizing the results and minimizing losses.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
osho,

With the increasing globilisation, I would tend to agree with Silent.Trader, true non-correlation will be rather difficult to implement.

If you look at the various investment classes;
Productive Assets ( Stocks ) & Commodities will show correlation, Debt ( Bonds ) & Currency will show correlation, Real Property & Interest Rates ( Bonds ) will show correlation.

There will also in times of great political and or economic stress great correlation between everything, regardless of what logic and reason might dictate.

If, you are holding a naked derivative and are FORCED to close, this is where huge damage can be done. If you own the underlying asset, then, even in a bad break, you are not forced to sell, and can wait it out, if you feel it has been an emotional reaction rather than a change in the fundamentals.

And herein lies your major risk. If there is a bad break, as in "87, that was hugely overdone, everything tanked pretty much at the same time. If you are naked Puts, across all classes, and in theory they are uncorrelated, you may find, that they correlate through psychological extremes, rather than mathematical probabilities.

cheers d998
 
Silent.trader
ducati.998

Thanks to both of you. That brings the question how to hedge. ?I have tried credit spreads instead of naked puts whereby I buy a put further down to protect. Maybe 95% of the time that premium given away is wasted. First I was selling naked puts on US stocks only but ended up owning stocks like Ebay and IMCL.

I have moved to indices which are less volatile , sell naked puts well out of the money for just the near month. That has worked well till now but I know I am not protected in a crash.

So it is self insurance. Over 20 years I have made good money and if I lose 20-30% of that I will consider that as a cost. I make sure I donot overtrade as well
 
IMHO hedging through real turmoil is impossible. The best way to survive is to trade prudently. So, don't apply (too much) leverage and keep the maximum loss within acceptable levels. The best, if not only real way to diversify put selling is, as I already wrote, call selling.

I think hedging away the risks is not possible unless you accept loosing your perspectives on a gain and/or accept other risks. It's a trade off between possible gains and risk.
 
Is a mrkt crash/correction overdue??

1987 crash>> http://www.lope.ca/markets/1987.html

If ur naked SHORT puts become deep ITM? the margin will be heavily increased and if marg payments are not paid i think most brokers will not allow u to roll position over to a longer month and may risk having all positions closed at massive loss.

Dont forget, the broker needs to protect his company too and must apply the rules. In the event of a mrkt crash there will be hundreds of Option traders faced with this MARGIN problem. If he allows all the traders to roll over positions and the mrkts FALL deeper still, :eek: ur margin will be massively increased and ur problem made even greater and this will send the broker and you down [bankrupt] and possibly all the profits made in the past will NOT be enough to settle the losses. :rolleyes:
Did the indices Options/future's cause the 87 crsh?? Click below:
http://hnn.us/articles/895.html

Bull
 
Last edited:
There has been a lot of rubbish said on this thread about naked options,if you have enough in your account to purchase the shares then selling naked puts is the safest and best way to go!There is no such thing as"unlimited losses"with selling puts,in fact selling puts is less risky than buying stocks!If you buy 1000 shares at $20 your maximum loss is 20k,if you sell 10 puts at 20 strike and receive 2 your maximum loss is 18k!

If I intend to buy stocks I always sell the put first,if I am assigned I get the stock at a knock-down price,if not assigned I keep the premium and start again.

As for covered calls they are regarded as the most conservative options strategy,in the US you are allowed to do them in your IRA account,but if you examine it the risks are exactly the same as naked puts,actually naked puts are better because there are less commissions.

Of course if your going to be stupid and sell thousands of puts that you can't cover then you deserve what you get!

At the end of the day if your day trading or trading options or swing trading it's all about money management,if you can't crack that then you will never make it no matter what you trade!
 
johnk49,

First of all the thread was in response to a knowledge Bot. article that advocated the selling of naked options.

There has been a lot of rubbish said on this thread about naked options,if you have enough in your account to purchase the shares then selling naked puts is the safest and best way to go!There is no such thing as"unlimited losses"with selling puts,in fact selling puts is less risky than buying stocks!If you buy 1000 shares at $20 your maximum loss is 20k,if you sell 10 puts at 20 strike and receive 2 your maximum loss is 18k!

I would have to disagree with you for the following reasons.
When you "sell premium" your return is fixed.
However, your "risk" is not fixed, it can fluctuate, and possibly far above your return, therefore your risk, reward ratio is badly skewed in the wrong proportions.

Also, as Options are derivatives, and carry high leverage, as a %of capital, your losses, should you have to take them are much higher than that of a plain vanilla strategy.

,in fact selling puts is less risky than buying stocks!If you buy 1000 shares at $20 your maximum loss is 20k,if you sell 10 puts at 20 strike and receive 2 your maximum loss is 18k!

Your reasoning here is badly flawed.
You sell 10 "CALLS" @ strike $20............if you have to supply the stock at strike, then your loss is $20K..............but, if the stock has gone to $30, on a nice big gap open, on fabulous news, guess what, now your LOSS IS $30K, so your losses can accelerate very quickly on naked selling of premium. And, typically the premium received on this trade would be being GENEROUS $1 per stock, or a total of $1K..............your R/R could be 1:30 against

Selling the put, your loss is limited to the extent that the stock goes to zero.
Until that zero is reached, you are still on the hook.

Now of course, you can "BUY BACK" or "ROLL" the Options, but this is the risk management that was never discussed. These are only VIABLE prior to being exercised.
You will never know that you will be exercised, as this is random, and adds another wrinkle to the problem.

If I intend to buy stocks I always sell the put first,if I am assigned I get the stock at a knock-down price,if not assigned I keep the premium and start again.

Which of course is valid and sensible.......................assuming you know your stocks.

As for covered calls they are regarded as the most conservative options strategy,in the US you are allowed to do them in your IRA account,but if you examine it the risks are exactly the same as naked puts,actually naked puts are better because there are less commissions.

But no-one was talking about covered calls.
Naked Puts are like chalk and cheese compared to Covered Calls. Totally different.

At the end of the day if your day trading or trading options or swing trading it's all about money management,if you can't crack that then you will never make it no matter what you trade!

Amen
cheers d998
 
Last edited:
Quote by Johnk49:
There has been a lot of rubbish said on this thread about naked options,if you have enough in your account to purchase the shares then selling naked puts is the safest and best way to go!There is no such thing as"unlimited losses"with selling puts,in fact selling puts is less risky than buying stocks.
==================================================================

Johnk,
I was mainly refering to index Put selling.
Are you saying there is NO risk in selling puts indices :?: Do you have any idea what kind of margin will be charged if position goes 100-300 pts ITM? Also, how much time do U think ur broker gives u to meet the margin payments? and what happens to ur positions if margin payments are not paid?

If ur positions were on Margin call? would ur broker allow U to roll positions without first settling the margin call? He would be mad to let u do so. If my broker was to allow traders to roll positions without first settling the margins calls, do u know what I'll do? I'll get the hell out of that company and find one that does NOT allow that facility.

There are many strategies that says limited gain with unlimited loss potential. What is generally meant is that ur account could get wipe'd out and still be left owing the brokers a LOT of money.

Ducati,
I totally agree with ur comments.

Happy trading
Bulldozer
 
Last edited:
Ducati,you have not read my posting correctly,I never even mentioned calls!The example that I gave was perfectly correct.

As for covered calls and naked puts they are exactly the same risk!The only difference is you pay less commissions with naked puts.I do this for a living you know?

As for index puts I don't personally use them because I like to own stocks that people have paid me to own,but many people do sell puts and calls on the indices with strike prices 50,60,70 points away from the current price.Obviously everyone has their own risk tolerance,if you are very conservative you can turn these naked puts and calls into Condors making it the least riskiest strategy of all with a success rate of 90%+.

With respect,you people don't seem to understand options very well,in which case you shouldn't be trading them anyway without further study.I base my conclusions on the fact that it was said that covered calls and naked puts were as different as chalk and cheese,anyone who trades options for a living as I do woud know that covered calls and naked puts have exactly the same risk profile.

Finally,do you trade stocks without a stop-loss?Do you trade futures without a stop-loss?If you are going to sit there with your arms folded like a fool and do nothing to manage your poitions then you deserve what you get.As I said in my previous posting this game is all about money management it doesn't matter what you trade!
 
BTW Ducati,I forgot to mention your example of selling calls on a $20 stock for 2 and the stock gapping up to $30,your loss is not 30k as you state it is 8k!!!!

As I said,if you don't know options . . . . . .
 
johnk49 said:
BTW Ducati,I forgot to mention your example of selling calls on a $20 stock for 2 and the stock gapping up to $30,your loss is not 30k as you state it is 8k!!!!

As I said,if you don't know options . . . . . .

That depends on the volatility element of the calls price, which might double or triple the premium.
 
johnk49,

Ducati,you have not read my posting correctly,I never even mentioned calls!The example that I gave was perfectly correct.

And from your previous post,

As for covered calls they are regarded as the most conservative options strategy,in the US you are allowed to do them in your IRA account,but if you examine it the risks are exactly the same as naked puts,actually naked puts are better because there are less commissions.

Obviously I must be in some strange parallel universe.

As for covered calls and naked puts they are exactly the same risk!The only difference is you pay less commissions with naked puts.I do this for a living you know?


The risk between a covered call, and naked put is categorically not the same.
Just employ basic common sense......Covered Call, you OWN the UNDERLYING STOCK to offset your risk on the Option you have written. Assuming you buy the stock lower than the call strike, you make profit from PREMIUM + DIFFERENCE IN STOCK PRICE

Naked Put, you own NOTHING.......all you receive is premium.
How is this risk the same.............................its not.
Your loss if exercised is ............Credit....Premium received
.........................................................Debit ....Cost of buying Stock Put to you. ( Stock, if selling, may drop further, increasing your loss, if stock rises, loss is reduced, if it rises far enough, you may show an eventual profit. )

Now to make this work, you must WANT TO BUY THE STOCK.
If that is the case, then fine, you reduce your purchase price.

However, this is a different proposition to selling naked put premium as a strategy, this is a STOCK strategy, combined with an option play.........big difference.

if you are very conservative you can turn these naked puts and calls into Condors making it the least riskiest strategy of all with a success rate of 90%+.

Spread strategies, such as the Condor, also known as flat-top butterfly, or, top-hat spread, is hardly the same as selling naked calls or puts.
You have limited risk, but also limited profit.

Finally,do you trade stocks without a stop-loss?Do you trade futures without a stop-loss?If you are going to sit there with your arms folded like a fool and do nothing to manage your poitions then you deserve what you get.As I said in my previous posting this game is all about money management it doesn't matter what you trade

Trade stocks without a stoploss.........absolutely.
Don't trade Futures, so irrelevant.

cheers d998
 
NedKelly said:
That depends on the volatility element of the calls price, which might double or triple the premium.


At expiration 8k would be your loss no matter what the volatility was.

As I said,I never sell calls because there would be no advantage to me.I sell puts both for a nice income and to acquire stocks at knock down prices.If I am assigned the stock I will sell covered calls on it continually collecting premium.

I look at it this way,if you buy stocks or options there is only one way to profit and that is if the stock or option moves in the right direction,add to that,if it is an option the Theta is daily eroding away stealing your money!With puts the Theta is working to your advantage even at weekends!If the stock moves up a little you win,if the stock moves up a lot you win,if the stock stays the same you win,if it goes down a little you win,if it really tanks then you are still better of than if you had bought the stock outright!
 
Ducati,don't you read my posts through?

I said I sell puts to acquire stocks at knockdown prices if I am not assigned then I keep the premiums and move on.

Concerning cc's and naked puts let's examine the risk.If I buy 1000 XYZ at $20 and I sell 10 calls at strike 20 for 2 and the stock tanks down to $10 my loss is 10k minus the premium received which makes it 8k.If,on the other hand,I sell 10 naked puts at strike 20 and receive 2 and the stock tanks to 10 I will be assigned the stock at 20 which makes my loss 10k minus 2 equals 8k,exactly the same as the cc.The risk profile is exactly the same except with the naked put you pay less commissions!
 
johnk49

BTW Ducati,I forgot to mention your example of selling calls on a $20 stock for 2 and the stock gapping up to $30,your loss is not 30k as you state it is 8k!!!!

As I said,if you don't know options

Oh dear, here we go again...............

You sell 10 "CALLS" @ strike $20............if you have to supply the stock at strike, then your loss is $20K..............but, if the stock has gone to $30, on a nice big gap open, on fabulous news, guess what, now your LOSS IS $30K, so your losses can accelerate very quickly on naked selling of premium. And, typically the premium received on this trade would be being GENEROUS $1 per stock, or a total of $1K..............your R/R could be 1:30 against

The key sentence is......"if you have to supply the stock at strike".
This means, your Premium was sold at a Strike Price of $20.
You are Exercised at your Strike Price.....$20
However, the Stock is now trading at $30

So doing the sums, we have;
Premium received on 1000 shares at $1..........= credit $1000
Strike Price $20
Cost of Stock...........................................................= debit $30,000
Sell Stock at $20....................................................= credit $20,000
Net loss..................................................................= debit $9000 + commissions

Now, obviously I have been lazy and not worked through the debits and credits.Your net loss is $9000 + commissions, however, your risk is not limited to that simple figure. ( And this was the point that I was trying to make, too quickly.)

Why not?

The reason being that the Stock price can conceivably go to infinity, but lets just say it went to $100...............now you need $100K to purchase the stock.............don't have it sir? Better sell your house pronto then. Your risk only ends, once you have purchased the stock.

On that scenario,
Credit $1000 premium
Debit $100,000 Cost of Stock
Credit $20,000 Sale of stock
Net loss $79,000 + commissions

There has been a lot of rubbish said on this thread about naked options,if you have enough in your account to purchase the shares then selling naked puts is the safest and best way to go!There is no such thing as"unlimited losses"with selling puts,in fact selling puts is less risky than buying stocks!If you buy 1000 shares at $20 your maximum loss is 20k,if you sell 10 puts at 20 strike and receive 2 your maximum loss is 18k!

If we are going to be accurate, then your calculation is also incorrect, in both attempts.
cheers d998
 
ducati998 said:
johnk49





Oh dear, here we go again...............



The key sentence is......"if you have to supply the stock at strike".
This means, your Premium was sold at a Strike Price of $20.
You are Exercised at your Strike Price.....$20
However, the Stock is now trading at $30

So doing the sums, we have;
Premium received on 1000 shares at $1..........= credit $1000
Strike Price $20
Cost of Stock...........................................................= debit $30,000
Sell Stock at $20....................................................= credit $20,000
Net loss..................................................................= debit $9000 + commissions

Now, obviously I have been lazy and not worked through the debits and credits.Your net loss is $9000 + commissions, however, your risk is not limited to that simple figure. ( And this was the point that I was trying to make, too quickly.)

Why not?

The reason being that the Stock price can conceivably go to infinity, but lets just say it went to $100...............now you need $100K to purchase the stock.............don't have it sir? Better sell your house pronto then. Your risk only ends, once you have purchased the stock.

On that scenario,
Credit $1000 premium
Debit $100,000 Cost of Stock
Credit $20,000 Sale of stock
Net loss $79,000 + commissions



If we are going to be accurate, then your calculation is also incorrect, in both attempts.
cheers d998



My calculations are perfectly correct!If you remember we sold the puts and the calls for 2 which makes the loss on your example 8k not"30k"and even if my calculations were wrong(which they are not)I think 8k is nearer 9k than 30k,don't you agree?
 
johnk49,

I read them, and as I said, Selling Puts because you want the Stock, is a Stock strategy, not an Options strategy

I said I sell puts to acquire stocks at knockdown prices if I am not assigned then I keep the premiums and move on.

Lets examine one at a time,

Concerning cc's and naked puts let's examine the risk.If I buy 1000 XYZ at $20 and I sell 10 calls at strike 20 for 2 and the stock tanks down to $10 my loss is 10k minus the premium received which makes it 8k.

XYZ.............Debit $20K
10 Calls.....Credit $2000 @ Strike $20

Stock Price Falls to $10
Net loss $8000............agreed............and this is a COVERED CALL.
We were discussing NAKED CALLS

If,on the other hand,I sell 10 naked puts at strike 20 and receive 2 and the stock tanks to 10 I will be assigned the stock at 20 which makes my loss 10k minus 2 equals 8k,exactly the same as the cc.The risk profile is exactly the same except with the naked put you pay less commissions!

Sell 10 Naked Puts @ Strike $20
Credit ...........$2000
Stock falls to $10
Debit $20,000 from purchase of stock
Sell @ $10..........credit $10,000
Net loss...............debit $8000

Correct, agreed.
And you think this is a sensible strategy?
Your maximum profit is $2000
Your loss, here is $8000, however, your potential loss is in theory higher, as the Stock could go to zero, and your loss would then be $18K, with still only the same potential reward.

Now, the reason the RISK PROFILE is different, is that if the Stock only went to $0.01, with the Naked Option, your loss is a realised or actualised loss of $17,999.99.
However with the Covered Call, you hold the Stock for a paper loss of $17,999.99, and later the stock recovers to $20............you now have a $2K profit + any dividends paid.

So worst case scenario, you risk $18K, for a maximum return of $2K.
That is a poor ratio.

cheers d998
 
Last edited:
johnk49,

My calculations are perfectly correct!If you remember we sold the puts and the calls for 2 which makes the loss on your example 8k not"30k"and even if my calculations were wrong(which they are not)I think 8k is nearer 9k than 30k,don't you agree?

You are not on the same page.
This thread was discussing the selling of NAKED PREMIUM.
Not COVERED PREMIUM or variations thereof.

My first calculation was based on the GROSS DOLLAR amount that the trader would require to close the position should he be exercised, ie $30K

The reason that I posted $30K, was that if the trader did not possess the required cash, he was in deep trouble.

The NET LOSS, assumes that he had the available cash to close his position, and the net loss becomes $9K + commissions.

What you have failed to notice is that you utilised the figure of $2K received as premium, I used only $1K

In my previous post, I have utilised your $2K premium.
However, you are still mixing and matching different strategies.
The plain fact is that NAKED SELLING returns a very poor risk , reward , ratio.
You pride yourself on money management, this is very poor risk and money management.

cheers d998
 
ducati998 said:
johnk49,

I read them, and as I said, Selling Puts because you want the Stock, is a Stock strategy, not an Options strategy



Lets examine one at a time,



XYZ.............Debit $20K
10 Calls.....Credit $2000 @ Strike $20

Stock Price Falls to $10
Net loss $8000............agreed............and this is a COVERED CALL.
We were discussing NAKED CALLS



Sell 10 Naked Puts @ Strike $20
Credit ...........$2000
Stock falls to $10
Debit $20,000 from purchase of stock
Sell @ $10..........credit $10,000
Net loss...............debit $8000

Correct, agreed.
And you think this is a sensible strategy?
Your maximum profit is $2000
Your loss, here is $8000, however, your potential loss is in theory higher, as the Stock could go to zero, and your loss would then be $18K, with still only the same potential reward.

So worst case scenario, you risk $18K, for a maximum return of $2K.
That is a poor ratio.

cheers d998

LOL,at last your seeing the light!

The point I'm making is that you could have just bought the stock and your loss would still be same!Are you so good that you will never have a stock go against you??

If you really fancy a stock instead of just buying it outright sell the put,if the stock tanks then it's your analysis that was wrong not the puts fault!You say you don't use stop-losses,fair enough but anyone can have a stock go against them even the best,the point is your going to take that loss anyway so you might as well sell the put in the first place and not take as great a loss.

Let's say you have done your analysis and you have found a stock that you would really like to own and it's trading at $20 and the put is selling for 2,instead of just buying the stock for 20k sell the put for 2k and if the stock is assigned to you you will have acquired it for 18k instead of 20k.Someone has paid you to have something that you wanted in the first place!
 
johnk49

The problem arose simply as the discussion was at cross purposes, and completely different strategies were being put on the table.

Now, a question for you..........no right or wrong answer, I'm curious.

I SELL you a PUT that is in the money. Expiry in July
It has Intrinsic value of $2
Time value of $1

The Stock starts to recover, and the Intrinsic value drops to $1.50
Time value, drops by $0.10

Ignoring the sale to a market maker, or you are the market maker, would you exercise the option, or potentially let it expire?

Same question with a November expiry, Stock starts to move towards out of the money
Intrinsic $2
Time $2.50

cheers d998
 
ducati998 said:
johnk49

The problem arose simply as the discussion was at cross purposes, and completely different strategies were being put on the table.

Now, a question for you..........no right or wrong answer, I'm curious.

I SELL you a PUT that is in the money. Expiry in July
It has Intrinsic value of $2
Time value of $1

The Stock starts to recover, and the Intrinsic value drops to $1.50
Time value, drops by $0.10

Ignoring the sale to a market maker, or you are the market maker, would you exercise the option, or potentially let it expire?

Same question with a November expiry, Stock starts to move towards out of the money
Intrinsic $2
Time $2.50

cheers d998


Ducati,it is rare for an option to be exercised before options expiration day.I have literally sold thousands of puts and covered calls over a long period of time and I have only ever been assigned once in all that time.Most option"buyers"never intend to exercise their option they will generally close their position for a gain or a loss,also I think it's important to remember that options expirations day is actually Saturday not friday as many think,so when the market closes friday you are still open to market movement!
 
Top