Quote from damir00:
those "certain circumstances" are any - yes, any - movement of the underlying. if you truly have a counter example, please post it, as it would certainly be a learning experience for me.
a nice discussion from Value Line, complete with spreadsheet...
http://www.valueline.com/edu_options/rep4.cfm
When I use the word "circumstances" I mean more than only underlying movement implied factors. Seems like we are talking about different things.
Quote from NasdaqTrader:
Stock and mutual fund investing are all a gamble,in my opinion,although writing covered calls help reduce your risk and capture premiums.Better investments are real estate and gov't bonds.
Quote from damir00:
(writing covered calls)...has the same risk factor as naked shorting puts.
Quote from aradiel:
Considering he meant stock investment protection, naked shorting puts makes no sense.
Quote from damir00:
maybe i didn't make myself clear: writing covered calls isn't "investment protection", it's the equivalent of naked selling puts.
long stock + short calls = short puts
if you wouldn't recommend naked selling of puts, then you can't recommend writing covered calls since it has exactly the same risk profile.
Im saying that covered and naked positions are not the same thing, period.
You want an example, here it goes: The legislation of certain mutual funds requires that you must maintain a stock position of X% of your money over Y% of the time of the month. In that case, the choice between long stock + short calls and short puts would not be arbitrary, therefore they are not the same thing.
And thanks for the tip, I enjoyed that article over valueline.com.