Selling Premium - Strategy Never Discussed

As an electrical engineer I found MATLAB very easy to learn and use. The problem is that while it's perfect for EE type problems it's not really a full-on programming language so, for example, you wouldn't want to use it to code in any kind of trading algorithm ever. I haven't done a lot with R but my understanding of it is that it is similar. Python is a real language and if you learned it, you would find it much easier to transition to something like C++ if you ever wanted to do some serious coding, although personal preference I'd start with java instead of Python. Final note, you can get Python for free but MATLAB is somewhat expensive if you're not a student.
So to summarize, if you just want to work out the math behind options I'd highly recommend MATLAB. If you want to keep your options open for programming to accomplish actual tasks like trading, Python would be the best of your choices.
Thank you for the coaching.

Regards,
 
Wrong! There is no reason to assume the Sharpe ratio of the S&P 500 approaches 1 over time. In fact, if you assume historical volatility of about 15%, a Sharpe ratio of 1 means that average annual stock market excess returns have 15%. They have been much lower.
It actually does, calculate it over the last 50 years.

That aside, remember the numerator is the portfolio return minus the risk free rate. Your comment assumes the risk free rate was always in the low single digits like today.
You are both correct.

Over the last 25 yrs, SPY Sharpe was ~ 1.

https://6meridian.com/2017/11/could...for-the-sp-500-be-a-signal-of-things-to-come/

Over the last 90 years, ~ 0.4

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4134189-recent-s-and-p-500-returns-excessive-part-iii
 
I've been selling premium for about 3 years, and I have a data sample of a couple of thousand trades. My returns so far are between 25% and 35%, but I think I can improve going forward, since I have learned a few lessons and abandoned a few strategies that were not profitable.

Just interested to see if anyone else trades this way or has any comments.
Here is a look at the returns of mechanically selling ATM puts over a 32 years time frame:

upload_2018-12-7_9-38-12.png


On a risk adjusted basis, it is superior to buy and hold SPY but nowhere with an absolute return of 25%-30%.

On the other hand, you have a method which is different from blindly selling puts. So perhaps you do have an edge. If I were you, I would run some analysis to see if indeed over a long period, such method can eliminate losses and enhance gains. How to do that is beyond my pay grade.

Thank you for sharing.
 
Here is a look at the returns of mechanically selling ATM puts over a 32 years time frame:

View attachment 195460

On a risk adjusted basis, it is superior to buy and hold SPY but nowhere with an absolute return of 25%-30%.

On the other hand, you have a method which is different from blindly selling puts. So perhaps you do have an edge. If I were you, I would run some analysis to see if indeed over a long period, such method can eliminate losses and enhance gains. How to do that is beyond my pay grade.

Thank you for sharing.


It says MECHANICALLY. This is why an individual can make 25 to 30% return selling premium because they are not blindly selling at a fixed strike OTM regularly but they adapt and adjust based on how they read the market. A fund is like a giant dinosaur making mechanically brainless trades based on their model. So don't take what a large dinosaur fund does mechanically as a limitation to what a retail trader can do with more agile decision making powers than a fund trying to go in and out with 1000s of contracts on illiquid strikes.
 
Magic, I really appreciate your post. Here, you just brought up a point that has been bugging me for the longest time: Risk adjusted returns. Usually people referred to as the Sharpe ratio.

I have two questions for you:

1. If I have a method that produces the same risk adjusted return as SPY but a CAGR return that is 2x SPY. Folks here said they are equivalent. Are they?

2. In selecting which instrument to put my bet, should time be a factor? When one integrates over a long time frame, say 10, 20, 30 years, even with the same Sharpe, wouldn't the 2x instrument give me a higher absolute return with the same probability? Here is a quote from an article I read:



3. It is then consistent with financial advisers' advices for investing: The longer the time horizon the higher the risk you should take. But what about trading? How do I deal with risks as a trader?

I'd agree that they're largely equivalent; since you can essentially just lever up the SPY 2x and get the same result. Now if it's an equivalent risk adj strategy to SPY yet uncorrelated to it now we're talking; since you can combine the two and produce an aggregate return superior to either by itself via diversification.

Regarding the 2nd/3rd; in a nutshell I'd take as much risk as you feel is sustainable for very long timeframes. The more risk the more return if you've got time to absorb volatility. Take risk off when path dependency starts to matter more. But too much risk and you're starting to introduce a real chance of failure.

Trading, at least in the distinction I was trying to make, is not like investing. It's an active venture, not a continual one. So the goal should be to find spots where you can take on a lot of [apparent] risk, for a short window of time, and actively manage it. I read a quote from some finance professor once that stuck with me: "We've found that the most successful individuals in business/finance either take the most risk or the least risk out of everybody, and we're still debating which it is."
 
I'd agree that they're largely equivalent; since you can essentially just lever up the SPY 2x and get the same result. Now if it's an equivalent risk adj strategy to SPY yet uncorrelated to it now we're talking; since you can combine the two and produce an aggregate return superior to either by itself via diversification.
Interesting you said that. According to one academic study, that was how Buffett made his outsize returns:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3197185

http://docs.lhpedersen.com/BuffettsAlpha.pdf
 
maximumpossiblesuffering gets it: "One of the keys, which you are adhering to is avoiding the use of leverage. It is hard to blow up an cash only account." I also agree with your other points.

Those who compare my approach to James Coudrier of OptionSellers.com or Karen the SuperTrader are missing the point entirely. They lost everything when they no longer had the capital to cover their positions and were liquidated for margin requirements. In Karen's case, she tried to conceal the disaster with outright fraud. I will never receive a margin call because I set the cash aside to cover the position when I open it.

Karen was using short strangles with unlimited risk potential. Vomma was exponential whenever her position experienced volatility in either direction. I don't do that stuff.

Neither is my approach a martingale strategy. Martingales are exposed to open-ended risk. I am not. Every time I buy a put back for more than I received and sell a new one, I am actually mitigating my loss compared to an outright stock holder, with the possibility of closing at a small loss or even a profit while the stock owner must wait for full recovery.

But yes, I have losses. If MSFT goes to zero tomorrow, I'll lose a lot. But how many dire warnings do you see for stock investors, "it could go to zero and you will lose everything"? It's just a knee-jerk reaction so many people have when the word "option" is brought up. Options were invented to manage risk, and that's what they do if used properly.

I probably do have an irrational bias about going long. I'm just more comfortable receiving my profit up front and then seeing how much of it I can keep, rather than hoping for a large enough move before expiration to counter the eroding time value before I can make a profit. Going long does have a lot more profit potential. It just suits my temperament to hit singles and doubles. I usually struck out when I swung for the fences.

Selling equity options instead of the index helps me diversify. I do have stock-specific risk, but it's spread out over several different stocks. How would I diversify if I had everything in the index? Then I would have index-specific risk.

As many people have missed the point, CSP is a conservative strategy, esp. if you diversify your target across several stocks. You can also buy index puts with lower vols to further reduce your systematic risks. I am an index option seller since 2003 to trade Taiwan index options. Here in Taiwan we have only one weeklies which prevents us from rolling down our ITM upfront weeklies to the next week.
 
Last edited:
I mentioned that I had sold Dec 7 WLL 31 puts on Tuesday as an example of what might happen when a trade moves against me. I thought it might be useful to update throughout in real time. When I opened, the stock was at 32.01 and I received a premium of 67 cents. By the end of day, the stock had dropped below the strike to 30.82.

WLL is an oil stock, and it has been subject to the incredible gyrations in the oil market this week as well as the amazing whipsawing we have all seen in the general market. On Thursday (market was closed Wed.) WLL traded as low as 27.50, a full 3.5 points below my strike. Had the stock remained there, I could have rolled down one strike for even credit at around 28. Below 28 and I would have had to pay a small debit, still retaining plenty of my original premium.

As it happened, oil went up on Friday, responding to news of possible OPEC cuts, and WLL rallied. I bought to close yesterday afternoon with the stock at 30.05 for a premium of 1.00. I simultaneously sold Dec 14 30.5 strike for a premium of 1.72. WLL closed at 29.90, 60 cents below the new strike.

So I have now collected 1.39 (.67 - 1.00 + 1.72). I have moved my original entry point down to 30.5 from 31. So my break even point if I'm assigned at that price is 29.11, 79 cents below the current stock price. If WLL closes above 30.50 next Friday, I have a $1390 profit on a $31000 investment for two weeks (4.5% or 116% annualized). If it stays below 30.5, I'll roll down and out again, collecting more premium, until I am underneath it.

Surely some of you are beginning to see this is an attractive prospect for a trade that moves against you. Had I simply bought the stock at 32.01, I'm now down $2110 and must either take the loss or wait for recovery. I think many of the traders here would have advised me to buy the puts back at 1.00, take the $330 loss, and move on to the next trade. I prefer the rolling down method.

Oh, and as an added bonus, the cash I have "invested" to cover the trade, $30500, is still in my account, collecting interest, about half the T-Bill rate.

The trade is still open, we'll see what happens.

The key is to trade volatile stocks that have enough premium to allow you to roll down with a credit.
 
To clarify.. i was in the trade for 28 days.. I always sold about a month before expiration and in the last 5 days it started running.
That's gamma risk. Aim to get out around 21 days before expiration to limit it. (IMHO, IME)
 
Interesting you said that. According to one academic study, that was how Buffett made his outsize returns:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3197185

http://docs.lhpedersen.com/BuffettsAlpha.pdf

Interesting stuff. Almost a risk parity-esqe style. FWIW A business partner and I opened a portfolio in June and have been levered between 3 - 4.5x all year. I like the idea of finding the asset mix you like best and levering it up to a risk target. If you're holding risks for the long-term more or less blindly there's better ways to go about it than 100% long stocks imo.
 
Back
Top