The #1 Skill In Selling Options

[destriero]

What was its gamma, NOT it's gamma? The word "its" is a possessive pronoun in the third-person singular tense referring to inanimate objects or abstract concepts as in "@destriero, its head needs to be checked" and the word "it's" is the contraction of the third-person singular pronoun "it" and the auxiliary verb "is" meaning "it is" as in "That is why it is futile to carry on a conversation with @destriero as it only has an IQ of 1"! And before you get all excited and pick on this one, just like question marks, if the exclamation marks apply to the whole sentence, it is to be placed outside of the quotation marks. I will let you go do the research and verify that. LOL



First of all, define the word: asploded. Since I am so shitty in my grammar, I have never seen this word. I'd like to venture to think you want to use the word to mean your ass exploded but I'd like to give you the benefit of the doubt to think that you were trying to mean "it exploded and went inf." with "it" meaning the gamma? LOL In that case, do you have any proof to show that gamma didn't explode and went into an extremely large value on that day? Do you have the gamma value from that day?

I'll entertain your stupidity one more time. Sure, gamma exploded. We'll use your scientific term. The problem is less that gamma exploded and more than the positions went to 100D. At 100D there is no gamma. Gamma implies leverage yet you can have exploding gamma and lose very little. Too much gamma: bad! I don't know where you got this infinite gamma nonsense, but as stated, it trades inversely-proportional to moneyness and vol.

There are higher moments too, but they are also finite.

 

[destriero]

What happens to gamma when vols rise? Where is peak gamma?

I know you think it exploded but it didn't. Perhaps you're conflating with one of your recent date-nights. Vols exploded. >100 point move on VIX cash.

Gammas drop with moneyness meaning that as the position generates delta (ITM) it loses gamma. Same with vols; as vols-rise gamma falls (singles). The problem is that they shorted figures that destroyed them on both. Gamma position as a leverage figure (same with vega).

You also have the modality. OTM is generating gammas until it trades ATM, but it's of no comfort as it trades ITM and gamma falls bc you're still generating deltas (and vols) against you position.

It's mostly the sign and magnitude of the exposure. Gamma peaks ATM so you can imagine when complex spreads and combo go deep ITM. Now it's neither gamma nor vega that killed the account but the delta position.

Microstructure/panic ruled all. Attempted flow in flies was met with a "5x95" price market.

Someone mentioned bear risk-reversals. Some people were spared in long RRs bc the vol on the calls also ballooned. Big losses nonetheless. Vol-smile was flat to call-leaning pre-'87 crash.

The vega and gamma pos of a 100D option is zero.

 

[TheDawn]

What happens to gamma when vols rise? Where is peak gamma?

I know you think it exploded but it didn't. Perhaps you're conflating with one of your recent date-nights. Vols exploded. >100 point move on VIX cash.

Gammas drop with moneyness meaning that as the position generates delta (ITM) it loses gamma. Same with vols; as vols-rise gamma falls (singles). The problem is that they shorted figures that destroyed them on both. Gamma position as a leverage figure (same with vega).

You also have the modality. OTM is generating gammas until it trades ATM, but it's of no comfort as it trades ITM and gamma falls bc you're still generating deltas (and vols) against you position.

It's mostly the sign and magnitude of the exposure. Gamma peaks ATM so you can imagine when complex spreads and combo go deep ITM. Now it's neither gamma nor vega that killed the account but the delta position.

Microstructure/panic ruled all. Attempted flow in flies was met with a "5x95" price market.

Someone mentioned bear risk-reversals. Some people were spared in long RRs bc the vol on the calls also ballooned. Big losses nonetheless. Vol-smile was flat to call-leaning pre-'87 crash.

The vega and gamma pos of a 100D option is zero.

Told you in theory yes, but not in practical trading. In practice, the price never reaches 1D (it's 1D standing for delta of 1 not 100D) so DITM that the gamma reaches zero no matter how much of a smile there is because IV always adapts and adjusts so gamma never reaches zero especially for longer-term expirations. If you look at options prices statically yes, you see gamma at two extremes are zero but in real trading, everything changes and changes dynamically in real-time to adjust to new situations. This is another point that I was making and that's why I said I don't give a fuck about delta because in real-life trading, nothing ever stands still; everything changes, whatever pricing models Black & Scholes, binomial whatever, they all go out of the door because they all assume constant IV. On Oct. 19, 1987 that Black Monday, maybe when the market dropped 20% at one point when the vol just couldn't catch up, gamma became very very low, close to zero but I highly doubt if it ever reached zero unless you have an options pricing screen with all the calls/puts from that day during the midst of the 20% price drop to prove to me.

And to blame it on leverage is ridiculous. Options itself is a leveraged product and to say that has any bearings on the price movement is just absolutely ludicrous. And to say something like gamma which is the second derivative of price, how fast the price is changing is leverage is something that is just beyond stupidity. What are traders borrowing with gamma? LOL

I dunno why I bother responding to this thread.

 

[newwurldmn]

My infinite gamma helps me sleep at night.

on those 100 delta calls and 100 delta puts!

 

[newwurldmn]

Told you in theory yes, but not in practical trading. In practice, the price never reaches 1D (it's 1D standing for delta of 1 not 100D) so DITM that the gamma reaches zero no matter how much of a smile there is because IV always adapts and adjusts so gamma never reaches zero especially for longer-term expirations. If you look at options prices statically yes, you see gamma at two extremes are zero but in real trading, everything changes and changes dynamically in real-time to adjust to new situations. This is another point that I was making and that's why I said I don't give a fuck about delta because in real-life trading, nothing ever stands still; everything changes, whatever pricing models Black & Scholes, binomial whatever, they all go out of the door because they all assume constant IV. On Oct. 19, 1987 that Black Monday, maybe when the market dropped 20% at one point when the vol just couldn't catch up, gamma became very very low, close to zero but I highly doubt if it ever reached zero unless you have an options pricing screen with all the calls/puts from that day during the midst of the 20% price drop to prove to me.

And to blame it on leverage is ridiculous. Options itself is a leveraged product and to say that has any bearings on the price movement is just absolutely ludicrous. But of course I didn't expect anything more from somebody who can't accept something as simple as quotation marks can go inside of a question mark.

the greeks are just a partial differential equation explaining a very small move in the underlying. If you want to understand a larger move, you need to expand the full Taylor series, but in reality that's not necessary as you get a close enough answer with the first, second and sometimes third order or you just reprice everything.

 

[destriero]

Told you in theory yes, but not in practical trading. In practice, the price never reaches 1D (it's 1D standing for delta of 1 not 100D) so DITM that the gamma reaches zero no matter how much of a smile there is because IV always adapts and adjusts so gamma never reaches zero especially for longer-term expirations. If you look at options prices statically yes, you see gamma at two extremes are zero but in real trading, everything changes and changes dynamically in real-time to adjust to new situations. This is another point that I was making and that's why I said I don't give a fuck about delta because in real-life trading, nothing ever stands still; everything changes, whatever pricing models Black & Scholes, binomial whatever, they all go out of the door because they all assume constant IV. On Oct. 19, 1987 that Black Monday, maybe when the market dropped 20% at one point when the vol just couldn't catch up, gamma became very very low, close to zero but I highly doubt if it ever reached zero unless you have an options pricing screen with all the calls/puts from that day during the midst of the 20% price drop to prove to me.

And to blame it on leverage is ridiculous. Options itself is a leveraged product and to say that has any bearings on the price movement is just absolutely ludicrous. And to say something like gamma which is the second derivative of price, how fast the price is changing is leverage is something that is just beyond stupidity. What are traders borrowing with gamma? LOL

I dunno why I bother responding to this thread.

You stated that gamma was not inf in practice but in theory. You're fcking delusional. Nothing that you wrote, above, makes any sense.

You don't GAF about delta?

Where do you buy your bearings?

 

[destriero]

EXACTLY!! It was the short puts, pushed by the ballooning infinite gamma that never really reached 0 when delta reached 100 (or 1) like what @destriero tried to illustrate. And guess who pushed gamma to infinite on that day? The put shorters' tremendous losses on that Black Monday was the prime example of how gamma could be manipulated by the dealers who took the other side of the transaction who refused to sell their puts no matter how much the put shorters bidded to buy back their puts.

Thank you for proving my point with this empirical evidence and that theory doesn't really matter. It's the reality that counts.

EXACTLY!! It was the short puts, pushed by the ballooning infinite gamma that never really reached 0.

You don't really understand the meaning of infinite. Asymptotic, perhaps? We'll give you some time to look it up.

 

[TheDawn]

You stated that gamma was not inf in practice but in theory. You're fcking delusional. Nothing that you wrote, above, makes any sense.

You don't GAF about delta?

Where do you buy your bearings?

I said gamma shows as zero in theory but not in practice. In practice, it never reaches zero and could reach infinity. Ok now I am just talking to loony bins here. I am running out of nouns/adjectives to describe stupidity and shittiness. LOL

 

[destriero]

I said gamma shows as zero in theory but not in practice. In practice, it never reaches zero. Ok now I am just talking to loony bins here. I am running out of nouns/adjectives to describe stupidity and shittiness. LOL

You fcking said gamma was infinite. Infinite gamma. It's right fcking there for you to see.


























Yes, gamma is asymptotic. You fcking fool.

 

[destriero]

So you're arguing that gamma is infinite (again, ballooning, infinite gamma) and never really gets to zero. So like 0.00000000000000000000001 to infinity?