Quote from RedDuke:
Hello,
....
This is what he said:
They are not risky because you can always cover the one that you sold and sell the following month thus not having a loss. Basically he would sell October Put for $2 and if the price would approach the strike, he would buy back this put for 3 and immediately sell November Put for 3 and thus protecting himself. He did not loose anything except for commissions. It seems like average down, but since this is index it is not as volatile as stock.
.....
Thanks,
redduke
Hi RedDuke,
Please be clever don't follow blindly what a scenario seems to show. When things go wrong, even with european style options things can be worst.
As you write put, you have to take care of some risks. The market drops and you need to meet two choices:
-You wrote american style puts and now you play a wonderful game called "when would I be exercised? I don't know yet, the game goes on."
- you wrote european style puts (most of index options) cause you thought it was safer.
The point is if you are very deep in the money with european put, you will witness that, due to cost of carry, the roll over next month will be very costly.
Without talking about transaction costs, spreads, volty, liquidity holes...you will see that front month is much expensive than back one (don't trust me, price it).
As long as you roll over the position, you lose money. Worst, if there is an interest rate hike (as in a high inflation risk market), once again due to cost of carry, you will lose much more money.
Be careful and price it.
Cheers
BTW an old example of what happen with short puts/covered calls
Assume volty is about 30% (numbers are here to simplify the case) Options are european style. Spot start at 100$. No transaction cost, no spread....interest rate and volty steady...The world is yours.
First month at the beginning spot is worth 100$. You purchase the spot and write a call At The Money for about 3,6$.
At the end, spot is worth now 110$. You are exercised, but you're happy, 3,6% a month. Great. You gonna make it for a living.
Second month starts, you purchase the spot at 110 and write a call ATM strike 110 for 4$.
At the end of the month, the spot is worth about 100. You're not exercised. You own a spot at 110 but you received 3,6+4=7,6. Your global position is a loss of 2,4 and it's as if you bought your spot at 102,4. (useless to notice that it's worst you just bought the spot last month at 100$...)
Month number three, you already own a spot, you decide to write a call ATM strike 100 for 3,6.
At the end of the month, the spot is worth about 90. You're not exercised. You own a spot at 110 but you received 3,6+4+3,6=11,2. Your global position is a loss of 8,8 and it's as if you bought your spot at 98,8.
Month number four, you already own a spot, you decide to write a call ATM strike 90 for 3,2.
At the end of the month, the spot is worth about 100 (THE SAME THE FIRST MONTH).
You're exercised. You sell the spot that you've purchased at 110 for 90 an make a loss of 20$ but you received 3,6+4+3,6+3,2=14,4$. Your global position is a loss of 5,6$.
This to show you that a spot which just came back to its initial level make you write a loss. Course it's not unusual.
The question is: writing options is a broadly known strategy. Over the country, how many millionaires with this type of strategy ? Are the others just too stupid ? I don't think so.
Regards