BKKT, Thank you for the huge windfall today.

lwlee said:
But you get my point? Option as a vehicle is way more riskier than stock trading even naked shorts. You shouldn't tout the "limited" risk of options when it's full destructive force is waiting under the covers. Naked puts versus shorts. There is a reason why naked puts are outlawed at many places but not shorts.

Buying expensive premiums on options only to have it washed away as your time deadline approaches is why call writing is like 80-90% success rate. But the option brokerage love them. I remember when iron condors were the sexiest thing around. Of course brokerages love them, double/triple commissions for all those option positions.
More...

Call writing is overhyped with very paltry returns. What good is winning 90% of your trades, only to lose most if not all your profits in the one trade you lose? When you refer to naked options, like calls---your risk to the upside is unlimited and you are "selling options for premium not, buying." I only buy calls and put options. That is why I do not sell any options for premium and the so called win rate of 90%, I am skeptical of that. See, I win 30% of my options trades so, I am not losing 90% of the time. Also, losing options positions, I sell long before so, I still have leftover premiums even if the trade does not work out. I cap my risk at 2% maximum which means I lost my premiums 100%. Try that with any stock. You cannot. Stop losses only guarantee to get you out but, factoring slippage, you could exit way far from your stop loss.
 
Of course, as a super trader god you print money like its water. We all know how easy it's for you. All these special rules, no naked calls or call writing (which is considered the safest option trading), 2% max risk. 30% winning rate. Lots of rules for something that is "easy".

But for the general population, option trading is much riskier than straight equity trading.

smallfil said:
Call writing is overhyped with very paltry returns. What good is winning 90% of your trades, only to lose most if not all your profits in the one trade you lose? When you refer to naked options, like calls---your risk to the upside is unlimited and you are "selling options for premium not, buying." I only buy calls and put options. That is why I do not sell any options for premium and the so called win rate of 90%, I am skeptical of that. See, I win 30% of my options trades so, I am not losing 90% of the time. Also, losing options positions, I sell long before so, I still have leftover premiums even if the trade does not work out. I cap my risk at 2% maximum which means I lost my premiums 100%. Try that with any stock. You cannot. Stop losses only guarantee to get you out but, factoring slippage, you could exit way far from your stop loss.
More...
 
lwlee said:
Of course, as a super trader god you print money like its water. We all know how easy it's for you. All these special rules, no naked calls or call writing (which is considered the safest option trading), 2% max risk. 30% winning rate. Lots of rules for something that is "easy".

But for the general population, option trading is much riskier than straight equity trading.
More...


There is a huge difference between call writing or naked calls (unlimited risk) and covered call writing (risk free). Stick to stocks but, do not spread false information about stock options for those stupid enough to believe you. You are not doing anyone any favors. Pointless arguing with you about options because you obviously, have no clue what you are talking about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top