Search results

It was an innocent typo. He meant Fool Service Brokerage :)

I haven't seen a $25 stock gap to $500 since observing former_mmaker trades on the FANTEX :D

If you buy the stock at 50, take in a buck from call premium and it drops to 40, how is that psychologically better than selling a put for a buck, buying the stock for 50 and it dropping to 40? $9 down is $9 down :(

There are a number of problems with your strategy. Deep ITM will have more slippage (larger spreads). The number of transactions (commissions) will likely be higher since all legs are ITM. You have the potential to save on commissions only if the legs (short) are OTM and expire. Early...

FWIW, I recently learned that you can set up a template under IB's Account Management which will break down the margin charges issue by issue (the daily statement presents an aggregate total).

Man those are good mushrooms are good! As the underlying continues to move against you, the delta of the newly sold option will decrease while that of the short option that you're defending will remain constant at one. As they slowly suuuuck the cash from your account, your next light bulb...

If I had a "hypothetical" situation where 2 stocks correlated well in a 1:2 movement together, I would take something akin to a 2:1 long/short equity pair (so expected movement of 2% vs 2%) and do what I do in my pairs trading --- try to trade the trend as well as take advantage of the intraday...

Before going forward, I present to the jury that there's insufficient information to do more than speculate at some hypothetical possibilities. Be that as it may... What's distracting is the 2:1 relationship. You can't be long ABC and short XYX or short ABC and long XYZ in equal amounts...

OK, let me try to cobble something relevant together. A "hypothetical" intraday 2:1 price movement relationship does not give you any edge unless you can figure out the direction and catch some trend. Otherwise, as noted in you 4 hour numbers, you haven't gotten anywhere, particularly when...

Yes, if a closed end fund is listed for options. No for open end funds.

When you use real symbols (AAPL and ORCL), that implies real world. ABC and XYZ implies theoretical.

If you start with a ridiculous assumption and layer on more ridiculous assumptions, what do you end up with? Even if you had a very high correlation, selling a naked option on expiration day is no more than a crap shot in the dark. The whole point of a pairs strategy is to take advantage of...

If this is true then how do you explain that in the past 100 days, ORCL has risen 35% and AAPL had appreciated almost double that?

Here are two sites to read. Perhaps there's something of interest there for you. Perhaps they're a meaningless waste of time. http://luminouslogic.com/a-pairs-trading-example.htm http://www.investopedia.com/articles/trading/04/090804.asp

When you have a week like that I bet that you'll focus more on trying to have another week like that rather than trading just for the hell of it IOW, you'll try to extend the run based on what got you that far. :)

Can you provide an idea of how much you saved by going with unbundled pricing? I spoke with IB and they couldn't give me a ball park number because of the add/remove liquidity factor.

If you found a good correlation b/t the two with an oscillation around the mean of the comparative relative strength, you could explore a pairs possibility with the underlyings. OK, back to mocking xflat's rotten fruit :)

I'm sorry to hear that there's a worm in your Apple.

No need to see it. It took less than 10 seconds to do a comparative relative strength chart. The hypothesis is bogus.

Isn't that a function of the real world versus the thoeretical? I inferred from the OP's question that he was looking at a pricing model.