Picking up pennies in front of a steamroller: a short tale

1. Derivatives and, in particular, options, have always fascinated me:
  • when I was already a millionaire (at least in my country's currency), the big loss happened... about -$90k in a single trade
Was the 90k loss in your country's currency as well?
If it was U.S. dollar HowTF did you do that?
 
Was the 90k loss in your country's currency as well?
If it was U.S. dollar HowTF did you do that?

90,000 US dollars!

As I said, I was trading 500 contracts (I think the number is 50 actually... idk, it was almost 5 years ago) in a +$200k account, with a "mental" stop loss.

As a mathematician, today I know what happened: sometimes prices "jump" between levels. In theory it's called jump diffusion. In practice, it means "it can't be right! I'll add to this position and when prices come back I'll have the last laugh" :banghead:. Prices do come back, almost surely... in theory... I know it because I'm smart :banghead:.
 
Yer lucky you escaped your CL deal with some skin left on your back, with profits.

It was surreal. CL is a beast! I knew it was a directional market, but I was making money in pullback days too. My longest winning streak was 22 days! I was invincible, it can't be just coincidence, right?

Wrong!
 
We already know that returns do not follow a normal distribution. The problem is to find a suitable distribution to fill this gap. If the tail is "too heavy", the option market couldn't even exist at all (at least without another pricing model), and the past wouldn't inform us enough (the sample average is not an unbiased estimator for the population mean in some cases, for instance). So finding the "right tail" (goldilocks principle) is one option.
Since you wanna talk academically, here is something for you to chew on.

First of all, It's very possible that the we overestimate how heavy the tails are because there are two components at play, stochastic volatility and non-normality of the distribution. The general idea is that if you rescale the forward looking return distribution by the markets expectation of volatility, the skewness and kurtosis diminish significantly (though do not really disappear completely).

Second of all, the option market exists because of the laws of supply and demand. It existed before risk-neutral pricing was a thing, it exists in the spaces where risk neutral pricing is impossible etc. People hacked Bachelier model and now they hack Black Scholes model (or rough vol model, whatever) - in the end, these models are just interpolation and risk-management tools.
 
Last edited:
how does it feel to be chewed up and spit out by randomness? like a lotto winner you will never be able to replicate your results because you don't understand how you hit the lotto in the first place. when you have lost everything you had multiple times then you are learning..

I know it's a rhetorical question (right?), but yes I felt like a lotto winner (in the end).

If I had made those $50k in my options portfolio, I'd think that I was just doing the right thing (cause and effect illusion).
 
Since you wanna talk academically, here is something for you to chew on.

First of all, It's very possible that the we overestimate how heavy the tails are because there are two components at play, stochastic volatility and non-normality of the distribution. The general idea is that if you rescale the forward looking return distribution by the markets expectation of volatility, the skewness and kurtosis diminish significantly (though do not really disappear completely).

Second of all, the option market exists because of the laws of supply and demand. It existed before risk-neutral pricing was a thing, it exists in the spaces where risk neutral pricing is impossible etc. People hacked Bachelier model and now they hack Black Scholes model (or rough vol model, whatever) - in the end, these models are just interpolation and risk-management tools.

Excellent answer! I'm still trying to digest the "rescaling the forward looking return..." (Could you elaborate it, please?), but everything you wrote sounded good (my bull sh*t detector didn't activate :D).

Just for clarification (as I said in another post), I usually talk "academically" because that's my approach (I'm not a trader), and I want to avoid things like "the trend is you friend", "buy low, sell high" and other heuristics (right or wrong, it's an empty discussion, IMO).

I know I suck at Economics (and at common sense reasoning lol)... you're right about the "supply and demand". I was talking about the existence of the moments of the underlying distribution of returns (some assumptions may result in infinite option prices), but I'm thinking backwards.

I'm gonna look for other insights from you answers from now on, thanks!
 
90,000 US dollars!

As I said, I was trading 500 contracts (I think the number is 50 actually... idk, it was almost 5 years ago) in a +$200k account, with a "mental" stop loss.

As a mathematician, today I know what happened: sometimes prices "jump" between levels. In theory it's called jump diffusion. In practice, it means "it can't be right! I'll add to this position and when prices come back I'll have the last laugh" :banghead:. Prices do come back, almost surely... in theory... I know it because I'm smart :banghead:.
A "mental" stop that you perhaps moved once or twice or ten times?
 
Back
Top