SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Value Investing

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: 249443 who wrote (14354)4/20/2002 11:17:48 AM
From: MCsweet  Read Replies (1) of 78525
 
I've started taking a similar strategy. Don't recommend it for most people. It is selling naked out-of-the-money puts on stocks I wouldn't mind owning.

If you check the vol quotes, you'll notice that out-of-the-money puts have higher implied vols than out-of-the-money calls. This means the premiums on puts are richer than on calls.

This doesn't make sense to me from a statistical perspective as on-average stocks go up at more than risk free rate (used in Black-Scholes valuation), hence a naked call option should be undervalued versus a naked put option. It does make sense to me from an insurance perspective: Buying puts is like buying insurance for your portfolio, so you have to pay the insurance premium.

With all that in mind, I prefer to sell out-of-the-money puts. I sell them for a stock I wouldn't mind owning at the strike price.

Another nice thing about selling out-of-the-money puts is I can use a limit order and don't have track the order from second to second, as the value of the out-of-the-money puts is less sensitive to moves in the stock price then say an at-the-money option. Of course, it is best to diversify and take smaller positions on these things, as being short any naked option could cause a lot of pain.

MC
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext