As a Market Maker, when do you adjust your spreads?

Quote from 76132:

Hey, thanks again for the response. I've read or actually skimmed (it was hard to absorb/understand everything) through Allen Baird's Market Making book, and he mentions that options traders do tend to stay delta neutral. He also mentions always staying vega positive.
Delta neutral is probably universal. As far as the rest of the greeks, you have to understand that MMs tend to get the garbage no one else wants. It is then their job to offset that risk as best as possible. Over time, all the good luck and bad luck evens out, and they are left with the profit on the spread.

I was wondering if this was true for actual market makers and in reality, do most market makers stay vega positive? If that is true, would you say some form of the long butterfly strategy is most commonly used to stay vega positive? Would you also see long straddles or strangles here and there - I don't think MMs use these two but I don't know why not?
MMs tend to be more aggressive in making markets on teh side that would "lock" in a profit for them, or bring their greeks more neutral or to their advantage. If you sat there and only made markets so that you could have the best potions on at all times, no one would do business with you. It is mostly risk management, not so much trading. Very different mentality than what you are used to thinking.

Let me try to translate it to see if I understand haha.

With some software, you can make parallel shifts of your mass quote (which reflects what you think the probability distribution of the underlying asset's future price is) by just moving the price of the ATM option. However, you can also change the skewness or kurtosis of the curve by changing the prices of the different 'nodes' or strike prices.
Essentially yes. You can parallel shift the curve up/down, rock it around a pivot steeper/shallower, or the angle at which the curve enters the wings.

So I guess the thought process goes like this:
As you receive new market information, your outlook on the price of the underlying will change. This change affects what you think the probability distribution of the future prices of the underlying will be, which changes what you think the implied volatility of the option should be. Based on what you think the new probability distribution will be, you adjust the prices of your options at the different strike prices accordingly.
Not really, although some market makers will sometimes do things based on the client. I know of many instances where a MM took a trade, and almost immediately exited the position he just entered a few seconds earlier at a loss, and went double the direction of what he had just made a market in the direction of the client. This is art, and some traders have a nose for inside information. The information flow is also different in a pit than on the screen. Much much harder on the screen. Option traders trade vola and things that depend on vola. The underlying direction is not what matters, although if you are getting it cheaply, I don't know anyone, MM or otherwise, that doesn't like being long gamma.

While this is going on, you also have to adjust the spread of your bid/offer based on the 3 factors you listed before.

As a seat holder you are required to make markets a certain % of the time in the allocations you have. Different size MMs use different strategies, but sometimes you are very wide with no intent on ever being filled, just meeting your regulatory obligation. When you do make tight markets, it is often to offset something in your current inventory - to manage risk. You build a book at first with lots of risk (never delta risk overnight but you may hold it for a bit), and slowly manage risk around it. You are constantly thinking about what is about to expire, and at the same time building your book for the farther out months. Your home runs can be in any of the greeks, but front month positions are where your home runs mostly come from because it is where you tend to try to get long gamma (gamma->infinity as expiration nears.)

Ideally, MMs over the long run make the spread over many trades by working into positions they want, staying as close to delta neutral as possible, and hit a home run here and there because of good luck by being long gamma. In a way, they are trading yield, not price. They get rich because of leverage, size, a steady theta income, and managing that leverage very very carefully. Easy to say, immense skill to do right.

With all this stuff going on, how much room is there for game theory, i.e. if another MM has prices listed that are different from yours, what may he be thinking? Do traders have time to factor that into their decisions? Do MMs compete intensely against each other?

Thanks again for the responses. They are very helpful!
There is always room for game theory. But look, I am a chess player and a bridge player. There is a great deal of game theory here too, but you can become a damn good chess or bridge player never having heard of any of these things. The money is made by understanding how to trade vola with size positions, and manage risk until you get the opportunity to lock that profit in.
 
Back
Top