Something is not right..

tommcginnis said:
(IMO) You aren't missing a thing.

FWIW, rather than selling verticals, go with broken-wing butterflies, with short delta between |.20| and |.25|. By owning that front strike, you will vastly reduce your vol exposure, and eventually, even turn it positive.
More...

I am an options guy as well, most days that I watch the illiquid chop I can't imagine trading the outright's. Then again, as you probably notice, much of the way these futures trade has a great deal to do with which strikes are in play and the fact that there are three weekly expirations. A lot of "ramp and camp" and "bleed out" type of action most days.

I also use BWB's, mostly leg into my positions, vary the expirations and do other plays with different ratio spreads, but I have found the past two weeks tricky for even legging basic positions.
 
frostengine said:
By most measures, it appears we are about to enter one of the most "uncertain" times in recent memory. Yet VIX/Option Premiums are near multi year lows...

Everyday we have a new tweet about a tariff (at some point the market needs to take this seriously). Plus we have major instability in Europe brewing...

One tweet could cause a massive world wide panic sending the markets plunging... seems the next 4-8 years I would expect volatility/option premium to be high, but the market hasn't caught up.. what am I overlooking?

Don't get me wrong, I am fine with the low prices, I think being a buyer of options right now might be a great play as you look 3 to 6 months out. Especially buying ratio straddles (3 long straddles 6 months out short 2 straddle/strangles 2 to 3 weeks out) to finance the long straddles.. Just trying to figure out what I am missing..
More...


Index markets and moves in vola are inverse corr. You can't have a 200 point SPX rally without a huge drop in vola. This is like markets 101.
 
destriero said:
Index markets and moves in vola are inverse corr. You can't have a 200 point SPX rally without a huge drop in vola. This is like markets 101.
More...

Or not. Today, like many other days when some smell "trouble" -- one reason they *smell* trouble, is that VIX and indices moved in the same direction. *This* is like Markets 401.
 
tommcginnis said:
Or not. Today, like many other days when some smell "trouble" -- one reason they *smell* trouble, is that VIX and indices moved in the same direction. *This* is like Markets 401.
More...


You're assigning a +corr to noise. So either you're conflating it to be correct for it's own sake, or you don't know WTF you're doing. Jeez, you think there is news on Friday? Perhaps?

Where has the worry been expressed in the last 60 days? In a 200 point rally?
 
destriero said:
You're assigning a +corr to noise. So either you're conflating it to be correct for it's own sake, or you don't know WTF you're doing.
More...

Wrong.
I am assigning an observation sufficient merit to be note-worthy.
*You* have inferred cause|effect.
Try again.
 
tommcginnis said:
Wrong.
I am assigning an observation sufficient merit to be note-worthy.
*You* have inferred cause|effect.
Try again.
More...


ok, you're stating that since you ate tonight there is no world hunger. You win! You ignore magnitude in order to prove a correlation. You also ignore the 200pt SPX rally which beget a 12-handle on VIX cash.
 
destriero said:
ok, you're stating that since you ate tonight there is no world hunger. You win! You ignore magnitude in order to prove a correlation. You also ignore the 200pt SPX rally which beget a 12-handle on VIX cash.
More...
Wrong.
I am assigning an observation sufficient merit to be note-worthy.
*You* have inferred cause|effect. Twice.
Try again.
 
i cannot quantify "trouble" any more than "note-worthy."

Assigning your observation sufficient merit... is quantifiable as valueless.

Trouble (cause) = VIX +; SPX + (effect)

Try again, asshat. Oh, and I tried the correct spelling, without the hyphen... no luck. I continue to get that null error.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top