[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

please critique this strategy

PureBytes Links

Trading Reference Links


we would have to include the QQQ price of about $40,000 in the calculation,
and add this to the $12,000 in margin for the short calls. None of this sum
of $52,000 would bear any interest, nor would there be any dividends, nor
could it be used as collateral for anything else if we want our short calls
to be covered. That money will be wholly tied-up in the position.

As regards early assignment, the problem is that assignment is an event over
which we have no control. Whether it increases or decreases the ROI depends
on a number of factors, most notably the price of QQQ at that time.

The delta aspect you mention will become totally moot the moment the QQQ
really tanks, a possibility that should not be ignored for a responsible
risk analysis.

Regarding volatilities, it is erroneous to expect calls to have much less
volatility than puts in the case of a crash. Due to put-call parity, a type
of arbitrage is possible that will tend to keep these volatilities pretty
much in line with each other, temporary imbalances notwithstanding. Even
during the 1987 crash, call implied volatilities went up sky high.

And yes, the profit graph for the covered call position will be the same as
for the naked puts. We cannot simply discard one of the variables. If we
were to leave out the price of the stock from the calculation, we would not
be analyzing *covered* calls any more, but naked calls.

Hope this helps.

Michael Suesserott