The problem with short gamma

Quote from nitro:

Well, I am not saying it would prove something or nothing. You claim you would be "...profitable if realized volatility was less than IV, and a loser if realized volatility was higher than IV." Ok, let's see if that is all it requires. We will have a measure of IV and realized at each hedge. We can wave our hands in the air all day long, but nothing beats a real-world test, even if that test is humble.
No reason to do anything as complicated as a calendar spread. Just do a single option; if it holds for one option, it will hold true for any combination of options.

We'll just do something simple. SPY (closed 116.58). I'll use SamoaSky's OptionOracle for simple pricing.

Let's pretend Friday afternoon I sold 10 contract of the 117 Apr10 call, trading at 1.50/1.52. Premium: $1500.

Delta (according to OptionOracle) 46.82. I go long 468 contracts of SPY, and I'm delta hedged. Cost: -$54559.

Cash account: -$53059.44.

Theta (with current IV of 15.44%) is -4.15; if underlying doesn't move, I would be out ~$124.50 on the option position by Monday afternoon.
 
Quote from heech:

No reason to do anything as complicated as a calendar spread. Just do a single option; if it holds for one option, it will hold true for any combination of options.

We'll just do something simple. SPY (closed 116.58). I'll use SamoaSky's OptionOracle for simple pricing.

Let's pretend Friday afternoon I sold 10 contract of the 117 Apr10 call, trading at 1.50/1.52. Premium: $1500.

Delta (according to OptionOracle) 46.82. I go long 468 contracts of SPY, and I'm delta hedged. Cost: -$54559.

Cash account: -$53059.44.

Theta (with current IV of 15.44%) is -4.15; if underlying doesn't move, I would be out ~$124.50 on the option position by Monday afternoon.
No!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You don't understand. It has to be a complex option position. Dude, we have been talking about a Variance swap that essentially simulates an infinite number of strikes, and now you say it doesn't have to be a complex position?

Forget it. I don't have time for this.
 
Quote from nitro:

No!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You don't understand. It has to be a complex option position. Dude, we have been talking about a Variance swap that essentially simulates an infinite number of strikes, and now you say it doesn't have to be a complex position?

Forget it. I don't have time for this.
LOL, okay, I didn't realize you were so busy.

Feel free to break down your calendar spread by calculating delta of each leg, and take corresponding position in the underlying. Newsflash: it adds up. The numbers work out in exactly the same way.

The purpose of the *VARIANCE SWAP* is to build a static portfolio that doesn't require daily hedging. It doesn't mean that daily re-hedging is impossible or incorrect.
 
Quote from nitro:

Right, I was aware of the VS on the SP500 being exchange traded. I may be able to make use of them in some future project, unless they have the problem you state below, i.e., that they have enormous B/A spreads.

Yes, the spreads are enormous.

Well, it is my problem, but your point is that the solution that I claim as my savior would not help because it would introduce another problem, they would be essentially not trade-able do to enormous spreads.

Correct.

Ya well, that would not surprise me that there is no interest in making markets on them, for a variety of reasons which I don't want to get in to (I don't want to get into a political war with the powers that be). But I don't know if I agree with your premise anyway. People made the same arguments when options first came out at the CBOE ("who would sell insurance on equities? You have to be crazy!"), and now look, we have penny wide spreads in a large portion of the equity-option universe and the penny-pilot program is growing every couple of months.

No, there is huge interest in market "making", just not in market "taking". Yes, you are correct about equity options. In 1973 no one ever thought people would trade them and the spreads were insanely wide. And look at them now. It only took 37 years to get spreads down to a penny. So yes, Nitro, if these were offered tomorrow, you only have to wait till your 75 years old before you can trade them with tight spreads. Fair enough.
 
Quote from nitro:

I don't understand what you don't get. So the price of delta hedging is already included in the price of a VS. Great, I don't have to worry about staying delta neutral then, right? (other than that I paid for it.) And if I sell another month VS against one I am long, these two months delta hedging costs embedded in the VSs prices should more or less even out, and therefore I am trading just vola.

Perfect!

Just so that we are clear, I don't want to replicate a VS with vanilla options. I just want a variance swap.

My bad,

I thought you wrote "I am pretty sure that I have a decent options system if I didn't have to worry about delta neutrality, but that is not my reality since I don't have access to variance or vola swaps."

So where is your problem ? Delta neutrality ?

Masteratwork
 
spreads in var swaps on indexes are fairly tight. You can trade in the interbank pretty much anything from 25k vega units upwards.

Quote from Maverick74:

I know, I was making the comment in reference to you saying they are only an institutional product. Also, making single equity vola swaps available is not your problem. They could all be listed tomorrow on the CBOE and that would not help you. The spreads would be 100 yards wide.

Look, these are order flow products, not market taking products. If Goldman wasn't earning the spread on these over the counter, I doubt they would make any money on them.
 
Quote from asiaprop:

spreads in var swaps on indexes are fairly tight. You can trade in the interbank pretty much anything from 25k vega units upwards.

Yeah, call GS or Nomura in London. No problem :=)
 
I dealt with them every day before I opened up shop myself, albeit in Asia, not London. Congratulations for knowing the name GS and Nomura.


Quote from ASusilovic:

Yeah, call GS or Nomura in London. No problem :=)
 
Back
Top