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 : Options 201: Beyond Obi-Wan-Kenobe

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: tyc:> who wrote (689)9/23/2002 11:07:13 AM
From: Dan Duchardt  Read Replies (1) of 1064
 
Do you agree that positions that have the same (future) profit profile, have the same (de-facto) present value ?

I think not, but that might depend on how you define your positions. For example, move on to the next question

do you agree that the value of a short put is the same as a covered call, both having the same strike ?

Based on theoretical pricing models, the profit/loss curve for a short put is identical to that of the covered call at the same strike, neglecting differences of risk free interest rates. So if you are looking at the absolute amount of money made or lost on a trade, the positions are equivalent. However, the carrying costs are not the same. A covered call with a fully paid underlying stock is equivalent to a short put backed by sufficient cash to purchase the underlying if assigned. If you are receiving interest on this cash at the rate used in the pricing models, these two positions are truly equivalent.

If you purchase the underlying on margin you typically can carry the long underlying of the CC for 25% to 30% maintenance margin, but can carry a naked short put for premium received plus 20% of the underlying, so the carrying cost of the short put is somewhat less than for the CC.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext