|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
All very true, but I think you overestimate the ability to mitigate losses
when it starts to turn, and underestimate the loss potential. I am not
saying it's bad, just very risky. I frequently short uncovered calls and
puts. But, I suggest you configure a sample portfolio, then check it's
value on September 17 If you were really smart, you would cover on Sep. 17,
but what if you expected a bounce and waited to Sep. 21 - then you're dead.
And remember that Sep. 17 was mild compared to Oct. 1987. Sep was a blip on
the radar screen to long-term holders, but if you are short front-month
calls, you couldn't wait it out.
-----Original Message-----
From: cwest@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cwest@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 4:03 PM
To: Free; Omegalist
Subject: RE: please critique this strategy
Your assumption is that you don't do anything to mitigate a loss if the
position begins to implode, however, I for one wouldn't just watch that
happen. There are a number of steps you can take to either quantify an
impending loss or realize a small loss. The simplest is a stop limit which
would work almost as expected on liquid positions. Further, I wouldn't have
all funds committed to one position. A (diversified) portfolio of say 20
different positions where rich deep in the money covered calls are sold
would also obviate the kind of contingency you imply.
-----Original Message-----
From: Free [mailto:free707@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 12:29 PM
To: Omegalist
Subject: RE: please critique this strategy
A 16% drop in 151 days is very possible, then your losses mount
point-for-point. You will win with this several times, then the day-of
reckoning will take it all back.
-----Original Message-----
From: cwest@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cwest@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 1:51 PM
To: Omegalist
Subject: please critique this strategy
Not too long ago a probable and/or realistic annual return that could be
expected was discussed on the list and I believe the consensus was that not
more than 40% p.a. could realistically be expected, barring excessive risk
and an extraordinary "banner" year. I'm raising a strategy for discussion
that has the potential to exceed 40% p.a. that also encompasses several
"trading safely" features, if you will, and can usually support quite large
fills with little slippage.
The goal of the strategy is to sell rich covered call premiums that are
deep-in-the money. In the example I've used QQQ and QQQFJ (Jun'02 36 call).
Not that the latter is the richest, it's just an example. The strategy
includes borrowing against the QQQ units or shares either through a margin
account or privately.
The calculations of this strategy can be viewed at the following link. I
didn't include them in the email because the listserver at eskimo.com seems
to "object" to formatting, html and most attachments.
www.traders2traders.com/myfiles/cwest/QQQexample.htm
<http://www.traders2traders.com/myfiles/cwest/QQQexample.htm> . (Although NS
will probably screw the formatting anyway :-)). BTW, if anyone needs some
space for a time at ../myfiles/yourname/, they're welcome. There are a few
users already.
I look forward to any comments that may expose any not so obvious floors in
the strategy or suggestions to improve its return.
Colin West
|