[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: The bugaboo of ITM option illiquidity



PureBytes Links

Trading Reference Links

Michael, many thanks for such an instructive post!  It really helps a 
clueless newb like me when you walk me through an example like this.

So with your example, the NQ trader buys 5 NQ's, posting roughly $17k 
in daytrade margin, or $35k for full margin.  (I know that margin is 
a fiction, and no one in his right mind trades anywhere near the 
minimum margin, but I want to see how much account is required for 
both trades.)  He rides a small 20pt move, and sells for $2000 profit 
less about $100 slippage, for $1900 net.

The option trader buys 80 calls.  We can't know how much this costs 
him unless we know what strike he uses.  If we use the examples you 
posted yesterday, the 4-strike-ITM call went for $4.40.  So he buys 
the 80 calls for 80*100*$4.40, right?  So he commits $35k to the 
trade, almost identical to full-margin rates for the NQ -- 
interesting coincidence.

Now, presumably the call goes up in value about $2000, since you 
constructed the options example to be equivalent to the futures.  And 
you said slippage is $800, right?  So you have a 40% slippage cost 
instead of the 5% slippage cost of the NQ.  That's a nasty cost, and 
it illustrates why you wouldn't want to use options for scalping.

But, assuming I have my figures right, your total risk (in this case) 
is equivalent to the margin value of the NQ.  This is certainly a 
huge benefit.  For the NQ trader to lose $35k, the market would have 
to go down 350 points without him able to get out.  While unlikely, 
that's certainly possible.  It could do that in a day, since the 
current 20% limit is 360 points.  And if it didn't stop there...

I definitely understand the risk-limiting benefit of trading options 
instead of trading naked futures.  I'm just trying to understand the 
cost of that insurance.  I think the high amount of slippage on small 
trades (like your example daytrade) would kill most people.  But if 
your average trade is large enough, maybe the slippage would become 
small enough that it becomes a bearable expense for the insurance.  
And it sounds as though you recommend simple option positions instead 
of synthetics (e.g. a long put protecting a long futures position) 
because of higher costs for the synthetic position.

So you'd say that options are probably not a good match for 
daytrades, right?  (Unless you do as Bob Fulks suggested, put on an 
option to protect positions, then trade in & out with futures.)  What 
about short overnight trades that last 2 or 3 days?  Or do you have 
to shoot for large, multi-day moves before the options become a 
really viable mechanism?

So, let's say I'm convinced I should options instead of futures for 
all my overnight positions.  How does an options newbie get answers 
to things like:

* What slippage can I expect on overnight positions?

* What strike/expiration should I buy?  Should I buy the expensive 
ITM ones, requiring more capital & risk, or the cheaper ATM/OTM ones, 
which presumably move less for equivalent moves in the underlying?

* How can I project what will happen if the underlying moves X, 
taking Y days to do it, and the volatility changes from V1 to V2?  
How can I even find historic data to try to experiment with and 
understand these positions?

* Is it possible to juggle all these figures (strikes, expirations, 
greeks, etc etc) and understand what's going on without pricey 
specialized options software?  (Obviously some people can do it in 
their heads, but **I** can't, at least not yet....)

Thanks,
Gary