TK All-star > Blogs

User Avatar
TradeKing All Stars

Member since: Feb 08

Favorite Links

Covered calls and stampeding bulls

Sometimes your option trade can be 100% on, and yet you still feel a twinge from a missed opportunity. I was reminded of this paradox when reading a forum post from TK client Spencorama, who writes:

“Selling covered calls and/or [buying bull] call spreads are two of my major strategies. CC's can be a little painful if the stock is rising quickly so one has to be pretty nimble about when to roll up, buy back, or simply let them ride all the way to expiry, especially when they are close to the strike.”


Spence,

One of the truths about trading options is that there is no “best” way to look at positions, and different investors have different goals. At the same time, your stance on covered calls here is a little puzzling. Let me see if I get you thinking differently about this.

When you write a covered call, you’re making a trade off: in return for accepting a limited upside profit, you are paid a cash premium. Specifically, your max potential profit is limited by your obligation to sell shares at the strike price, but you also get to keep the premium received for selling the call. That cash increases the probability of turning this position profitable (counting from the day you write the call), plus it offers some protection against a decline in the price of the shares. Those are both good attributes for a position.  

What’s your max potential risk with a covered call? It’s the downside risk of owning any stock, which can decline to zero. However, your comment points out another risk: the “opportunity risk” that the stock could skyrocket. If that happens, the calls will probably be exercised by its owner, and you will not participate in any stock price increase above the strike.

In my opinion, when you write a covered call, the best thing that can happen is to see the stock run through the strike price, and to be assigned an exercise notice at expiration. That scenario yields your maximum profit. How can you beat that?

That you find the prospect of earning the maximum profit on the position to be “painful” suggests you’re thinking more about what might-have-been with your stock position than about the actual, good news on your covered call. If it’s truly painful to see the stock rise too far, then writing covered calls is not for you. In addition to making trades that suit your market outlook and risk profile, you should try to make trades that are psychologically satisfying. But when the maximum possible profit was earned on this covered call, you were far from satisfied.  

Why own a bull call spread instead of a naked call? You probably know the reasons: a naked long call is an unhedged position in which you could lose 100% of the cost of buying the call. A bull call spread, on the other hand, is a hedged position where your risk is limited to the debit paid to establish the position. In exchange for limiting risk, with this play you accept a ceiling on your max profit: to be specific, the difference between Strike A and Strike B minus the net debit paid.  That’s essentially the same idea as writing covered calls: less risk, less potential profit.

(Keep in mind that spreads are multiple-leg options strategies involving additional risks and multiple commissions and may result in complex tax treatments. Keep the risk of early assignment in mind when constructing your own trades. Consult with your tax advisor as to how taxes may affect the outcome of these strategies.)

There are advantages that come with turning a naked long into a hedged position. Isn’t that a good enough deal?

I’m not telling you to never make an adjustment, but I think it’s a mistake to make avoiding assignment your top priority when writing a covered call.

Here’s a suggestion: if you’re truly bullish on the underlying, make the equivalent trade, instead of writing a covered call. Consider selling cash-secured puts instead. The put has the same strike and expiry as the call you would be writing.  As to size, sell just as many puts as you would have sold calls. (Brian Overby, TK’s “Options Guy”, just wrote a post on this, The skinny on cash-secured puts).  

The reason cash-secured put selling should work for you is than when the stock rises, the price of the put shrinks.  You will be making money when that happens, and you never have to be concerned with not earning enough profit. If the stock tumbles, you are no worse off than if you had written the covered call.(Again, the max potential risk in a covered call is actually the downside risk associated with owning stock, which can decline to zero.)

Taking this approach to the trade will probably feel different to you – but it rests on a similarly neutral-to-bullish outlook.

Regards,
Mark Wolfinger
Founder, MDW Options
TradeKing All-Star Commentator

Options involve risk and are not suitable for all investors. Please read Characteristics and Risks of Standardized Options.

Any strategies discussed and examples using actual securities and price data are for educational and illustrative purposes only and do not imply a recommendation or solicitation to buy or sell a particular security or to engage in any particular investment strategy. In reading content in the Trader Network, you may gain ideas about when, where, and how to invest your money. Although you may discover new ideas or rationale that may be compelling, you must ultimately decide whether or not to put your own money at risk. Consider the following when making an investment decision: your financial and tax situation, your risk profile, and transaction costs.

Mark Wolfinger maintains a cross-marketing relationship with TradeKing.
Share This! Report

Posted by TK All-star on 11/04/09 at 03:26 PM

Tag It | 1 user tagged it: TradeKing, broker, trading, options, puts

Comments

User Avatar
User Avatar Brokerage Account

PoopyHead

Member since: Mar 09

5 Day 10.81%
15 Day 9.85%
1 Month -3.35%
3 Month 26.69%
6 Month 34.51%
1 Year N/A
As of: 11/20/09
How is this calculated?
Trades 67
Trade Notes 1
Blog Posts 1
PoopyHead
Hi Mark,
I love your posts and have a question for you. I am a relatively new stock trader and understand exactly what your saying. However, I am only allowed to trade naked option positions unless I exercise a covered call which costs a lot of money. I know this question has been asked before but I never got a clear answer. Why can't I make bull call spreads when they are less risky than executing a naked call. I would rather play a spread but am not approved to do so. From what I understand I need at least $25,000 to be upgraded and years of experience. Spreads are easy to understand and i learned them very easily with the help of your education center. So please give me an honest answer to why this is the case. 

Thanks.
User Avatar
User Avatar TradeKing Staff Member

StefanMcVeigh

Member since: Jun 07

Trades Not Shared
Trade Notes 0
Blog Posts 4
Electronic Customer Support at TradeKing
Age: 20's
Charlotte, NC
StefanMcVeigh
PoopyHead,

Please contact us through live chat or over the phone at 877-495-5464. We would be able to speak with you regarding your ability to place a bull call spread. Here at TradeKing we do require level 3 options for a bull call spread. There is no minimum equity requirement but there is a 1 year option trading experience requirement. The options agreement can be found by logging into your account and going to Services > Apps + Forms > Options. This form can be scanned and emailed or faxed to us. The fax number is 866-699-0563 and our email address is Service@TradeKing.com .

You are correct that with higher option levels there does begin to be a minimum equity requirement. Level 4 allows naked puts in a margin account which does have a $25,000 equity requirement. Level 5 would allow naked calls and would have a $100,000 minimum equity requirement. However, the bull call spread does not have a minimum equity requirement and would only require level 3 options.

Best regards,

Stefan McVeigh
TradeKing Customer Support
User Avatar
User Avatar Brokerage Account

Spencorama

Member since: Sep 09

Trades Not Shared
Trade Notes 0
Blog Posts 0
Spencorama
? well I don't see my previous post anymore so I'll hope it's just a problem with my computer and not lifted
but either way your blog is so well intentioned, well reasoned and so far off the mark I feel compelled to spill a lot of ink.

Different strokes-
Early in your article you state "different investors have different goals." and then you never again entertain the notion that I could be referring to something valid, but different than the one you fabricate. What I see is an article built on a misread, that then goes further and further out to make a  pre-determined point based on an opinion with zero facts. Basically an elaborate writing exercise for imparting a "lesson" you've chosen to share. A nice lesson, it just has nothing to do with me. You begin with the premise of my desiring and then not liking an exercised strike. Interesting, but I never said that. You then put your words in my mouth by saying that I find "the prospect of earning the maximum profit on the position to be “painful”'. Since I said no such thing I'm wondering is that my paradigm, or yours?

I understand what you are trying to do but the problem is you hitched your wagon to my horse and kicked me off the ride in the process. Putting that reason aside I would still disagree with your premise because once you grab the reins apparently one horse is the same as any other. Clydesdale, pinto, quarter horse- no matter, they should all perform the same and when they cross a magical line ya gotta sell em. Specifics of call, like the legs, costs, strikes and timing are apparently immaterial and beyond the need to mention. Rule 1-100 is yield to all potential exercises. Those traders that don't, well they really have a problem which leads to the next issue. Somehow the man capable of intuiting the attributes of intricate mental spinning, can't find or mention any single case or circumstance which differs from his opinion. They just don't exist, least of all from my clueless, profitless, pain impaired vantage.

poetic license-

I like fiction as much as anyone but as for your conjecture into the inner workings of my mind - I'm not sure if I should be amused, offended or simply resigned to the entropic inertia of the whole thing and let it merrily smash along. You begin by assigning my term "a little painful" to a specific action which I never do, then ascribe what goal would be best for me, which leads you to decipher that beyond making bad assessments, I am "MORE" engaged in wishful thinking about "what might-have-been" than "actual good news".  I guess intuition trumps the need for supporting data. But no bother as the pejorative insertion of "more" makes a large leap but to pick up an extra boost of momentum for the tidy grand conclusion: "when the maximum possible profit was earned on this covered call, you were far from satisfied". Stated as fact, not could or might have the feeling. A "little" is edited to outright pain surrounded by a sea of wishful thinking which then morphs into a lack of satisfaction, which in turn is not generic dissonance but actually the embodiment of someone "FAR from satisfied". Wow. I've been clueless to the depths of my own despair so thanks for pointing it out. I do hope I'm still breathing by the end of your story.  

Then scattered within your profile, just to make sure your points weren't lost, you also recommend trying to make "trades that are more psychologically satisfying" and perhaps covered calls are "not for you" (meaning me).

 t-t-t-iming is everyth.....
Um, okay... I appreciate your concern. But before you probe any deeper into my mismanaged, stressful and apparently masochistic inability to handle the intricacies of complex trades like covers and other really weird stuff I'd just like to say

YOU"RE A TAD LATE. I've been trading options for 22 years.  

As regards to the stock of my original post I guess I'll just have to live with the indignity of my badly done, unexercised position and its miserly 300-900% profit.

re: black, blue, Periaqueductal gray & the red zone
I'm not quite sure why you and one other poster picked up on this idea of a "little painful" implying anything more than meaning that things don't always go our way and sometimes a person has to cut losses early, sweat out a hold or target, and absorb a change if a situation reverses. Go back and read the quote- I said owning a CC can be a little painful. Here's a flash: owning anything in a market you don't control contains dynamics of doubt and negative emotions especially around moments of rapid transition or changes in positions. The equating of what I said with dissatisfaction, let alone for a stock rising in value is your invention, not mine. Barring the bliss of impeccable timing and some kind of zen or possibly dead constitution, occasional discomfort is unavoidable. When you play football, you expect to get hurt. It comes with the territory. Potential pain is in the process, even when you hit your objectives. Denial is ridiculous. Lots of winning players soak in the whirlpool. The object is not to avoid all pain, it's to prepare and incorporate it into your strategy while keeping it within acceptable limits. If every person who ever felt a "little pain" was disqualified from owning options I wonder how many folks would be left in the market. As for me, no investment has ever made me run to the medicine chest, kick a dog, lose sleep or seek solace from a bottle so perhaps my use of terms isn't the same as the one in your head. In which case maybe you're the one with the problematic fear of pain.

To be unequivocally clear- My comment was in reference to the decision making process of rolling up, holding and/or buying back covers. If one wishes to exit at the strike, there is no anxiety.  

Sinatraesque, my way
You mention two reasons for using covers and I concur, but they are not the ONLY reasons. My covers are intra-term trades to generate cash. Strikes are just the means to an ends, a necessary condition of doing business. My use of calls in this instance is an accretive process over the long term, akin to being paid for treading water till the stock hits my target. That ultimate price is often over and above the current cover range. I don't know if my way is less normal, easier or harder than the standard "ride it to expry and be taken out", but it works for me. Bottom line is I profit on 3-5 of my short leg sells for every 1 that I have to buy back at a "loss". Used selectively the result is that I can cut my cost/increase profit anywhere from 20-50% for a stock that I would otherwise be holding anyway. Call them synthetic dividends. Buyback "losses" can be more than offset by the underlying gain. Yes I could attempt ongoing trading in and out of the stock but in the real world I find it more lucrative and easier to project a reasonable target and then sell someone else an "unreasonable" contract a few (or many) points higher, knowing that even if the stock continues to climb, rapid depreciation in the time value can still work in my favor.

During my best streak I traded options on one stock 54 times, I got "hurt" (aka pained) twice buying back my options before expiration, broke even twice and traded the other 50 times for profit. Better yet, I managed to sell off 95% of my holdings 1/4 of a point from a top that the stock wouldn't see again for 3-4 years. Had I followed your advice I would have left a very very very large profit on the table. That doesn't mean I'm right or you're wrong- but it does speak to the importance of following your own way vs. somebody else's "should and should-nots".

the nitty gritty re: broken drums, LVS, details and real numbers  
You said "In my opinion, when you write a covered call, the best thing that can happen is to see the stock run through the strike price, and to be assigned an exercise notice at expiration. That scenario yields your maximum profit. How can you beat that?"

First off since neither you or the reader is shown any actual numbers, no one really knows what we are talking about, so yeah I guess they must be whatever you say they are.

Generally speaking, your point is good advice but to refresh, opinion does not equal fact. I'm equally certain your maxim is not right 100% of the time. For example I wouldn't necessarily sell off an underlying position in a surging stock that was a few cents over the strike. Belief in pending news, market action etc. could equally effect a decision. There is a big difference between a single buy/sell as an isolated analytical event and trading in moving market within a larger scheme. Meantime let's talk the specifics of LVS since that was the subject of my original post. Having bot all the way down at 1.49 up to an average cost in the 4s I traded a few covers along the way. Following you advice I might have stopped out at 5, 7.5, 10, 12.5 etc. and then I'd have to time a re-entry. I know myself well enough to think that once sold I'd want a price lower than my old exit, conversely since it's a resuscitation rather than something fresh, I'd probably put it on the back burner till I felt the pressure to repurchase i.e. it started to rise with conviction. Meaning if I followed your plan I would have incurred more trading fees, a possible higher cost basis and most certainly more stress. In exchange for that mess, I'd rather buy back the small price of an option gone slightly wrong and be instantly ready to keep rolling cc's higher or further, leaving my underlying position as is until I'm done with it.

LVS shot to 10± in a relatively short period of time and then to the high teens. Somewhere in there I sold covers and subsequently bot them back for .30 or .40 loss. I call that short term pain. That is a carefully considered loss I am willing to take because 1)it negligibly raises my costs as compared to overall value. 2)I saw the stock as having greater headroom than downside 3)I can turn around and sell another cover for a greater amount than my loss at an overall higher or further out strike (/exit).  4)I can turn around and do that again & again for as long as I own the stock.  In fact a week or so later I sold even higher strikes for more which expired worthless. That's better than your sell into expry. If instead of expiring, the stock had been "taken out" then I would have made the extra money + 4 points-.40, which also adds up to a better "maximum profit". By holding and waiting, a higher strike closer to my real target became available. In the earlier round I didn't even have that option. I can't say I anticipated the stock increasing 10 fold over the course of a few weeks but once it had I was pretty certain it wasn't going up another 50% in two weeks. So me- I'd rather hold and sell into the froth, extracting cash and keeping all my shares.

Here's a little further specific backfill, which is of course irrelevant: Over the last six months it has not been my intention or desire to exit LVS at the levels I sold. My plan which I am still sticking to is to see where that particular stock is in early 2010 and then re-evaluate. By then I will probably have sold covers at least 2 or 3 more times, hopefully at the same or progressively higher strikes. Philosophically, I don't think a US banking crisis signals the permanent end of global gambling. In 2010 LVS is slated to open the first and only western style non-state owned casino in Singapore. I don't think its priced in. More recently, contrary to initial reactions, Chinese restrictions for Macau will help this company. Structurally, after a single digit stock doubles, most premiums will equal a significant percentage of the original cost basis. Details like these and stock movement factor into my choices. Percentage-wise, serially selling .50-1.00 opts for a $50 - 200 stock has very little overall impact, but a .50+ opt on a $4.00 stock done four or five times makes a big diff.

For you, my willingness to absorb a minor loss atop an enormous gain represents such mind numbing vapidity, that maybe the best thing I can do is throw away my calls and give up.I beg to differ. But let's go along and suppose things didn't go that rosy... Even if I continued to buy back at a loss and incrementally increase my cost basis, up unto a point I don't have a problem with it. I would see that as no more than the cost of an insurance policy, like some folks buy puts. Only selling calls gives me $. My aim is to sell much higher with a lower or even zero cost basis. So what's better than getting exercised out at 7.5 or 10 and being paid .60 to do it? How about getting out at 20-30 with a cost basis of 2.5. Or taking the hit of my hypothetical "insurance" I'd still prefer to hold and exit at 25 with an increased basis of 5 than exit at 10 with a cost in the low 4's. Yeah the stock could go to 0 or 100. Point is I have my strategy, I have limits, ranges and targets in mind and they're not yours.

The devil is in the ...
If I understand your post correctly you are also assuming that the long and short legs expire at the same time. Did I say that? According to your blog even if I'm holding 2011 leaps @ 5 and selling August 09 calls at 15, if the stock hits 15.20 I should just ride it into expiration because that represents the maximum gain. Really?  I'll leave it to you to explain to someone else why that might not be the best plan.

I could go on as to my hows and whys ... I don't usually start with a covered position, rather I own shares or purchase ITM or even deep ITM then wait and sell ST covs at nosebleed levels. I work in very particular ranges and depending on the action I often find that trying to eek out the last pennies of a dying cover isn't worth the wait. Minor pain for long term gain is not a new concept.  Buying to close a position that's really worth 0 (something that could be considered "a little pain") can be expedient. Likewise I feel tiny premiums with lousy reward to limit ratios aren't worth the forced ride to expry. The amount of options can also change strategy but then again this is all stuff that in your analysis apparently doesn't matter.

the Big View-
I guess this is equally unimportant, but what about the broader market/cycle? Here's what I see- hundreds of America's largest companies have been selling at going-out-of-business prices. Only they didn't. Suffice to say that along with LVS, I also bot lots of single digit stocks: GE, BAC, F, AA, KEY, HW, TCK, CX, ETFC, AKS, TRN...and more. With variations I'll hold most of 'em for a year or two selling more covers with similar objectives. I expect pain and gain. But then again, according to you, if any of these should equal the strike price of a call at any time, I should close out the position. No exceptions.

re: other methods- There is a season turn, turn,

As you know the great thing about the way I use options is that they work for 3 market conditions: flat, down or slightly up. The rub comes if the stock goes way up, but even there, they can work if the time erosion outruns the gain. That was the context of my original post. Playing it differently is fine, its just not what I usually do.

spreads and calls into expry- Did that, do and done that- as recently as last month, never said I didn't. As for shorting- makes me nervous, not my comfort zone. Not interested in tying up my money with puts or buying more shares at a lower price. I have the shares I want, all I'm aiming for is to get paid along the way and profit from the herd's zigzag undulations.

finally, I'm almost ready to shut up-

I don't pretend to hold any aces and I surely know less about financials than most people here but lack of self awareness is not one of my more glaring faults. This is the internet = no rules = cast all the tea leaves and assumptions you wish, but it seems to me that the next time you chose to make a post centered on a particular individual, you might have the courtesy to make contact first or at least work from facts.  If you find that too compromising then you can just as easily make the entire essay a generalized commentary without addressing a specific person throughout. In this case that person being me.

But since you did I am now here with all kinds of new data to shred, burn or modify to prove your points. Not all the details, but at least more basis than supposition. I apologize for the excess, but your commentary uses a broad brush and a lot of liberties attached to an untethered opinion more akin to Joycian stream of consciousness than true analysis. I operate with real positions, born and bound to exact values and conditions so if you are going to offer critiques in my name you should at least know something of what I am actually doing vs. the abstraction you assume or invent.  Now you can tell me all I am doing wrong other than the obvious- aka writing a really really long post.
User Avatar
User Avatar TradeKing All Stars

TK All-star

Member since: Feb 08

Trades Not Shared
Trade Notes 0
Blog Posts 313

Age: 30's
TK All-star

Spencorama: as an educator I’d much rather blog about real-world option trades than talk endlessly in theory, so I check out the TradeKing forums from time to time to see what folks are trading, what questions they have, or what trading decisions they face. It’s been a good way of engaging in conversations with Trader Network participants, and most traders I’ve interacted with in this way seem to like the approach. I saw your post and thought it’d make an interesting springboard for a more general discussion. That’s it.

I don’t mean these posts as a corrective on anybody’s trading logic, and I try to stay constructive in any critique. I find it useful myself if others suggest different ways of viewing a trading decision, and my only intention was to be helpful. I’m sorry you didn’t see my response this way. I truly thought that you were incurring pangs of regret at selling the calls and thought that naked put sales would work better. If you've been doing this since the 80s, then obviously you can handle the covered calls. 

Best,
Mark Wolfinger
Founder, MDW Options
TradeKing All-Star commentator

User Avatar
User Avatar Brokerage Account

Spencorama

Member since: Sep 09

Trades Not Shared
Trade Notes 0
Blog Posts 0
Spencorama
Mark

Reading that someone wants to change my mind right off the top without really delving intto understanding it by at least posing a couple of preliminary questions, or considering altering points of view first was very disturbing initially, especially when I thought my words were mischaracterized, but I understood your intention. I also agree with you about using real-world trades which is why I took the time to add so much detail to my trades and thought process, on the chance that you might wish to critique my real (for better or worse) actions and theory as opposed to the one you thought I implied.

Meantime I am sorry if you were overwhelmed or even taken aback by my response. For that I wish to offer my sincere apologies. I stand by my points and analysis but I really regret the length, breadth and just overall cumbersomeness of my post. It is just the wrong thing to do. At the time I couldn't get it down to more manageable bites. Because my read of your post felt to turn my original post completely upside down I think I was trying to throw in all the context I could, like painting a portrait, with foreground, background, all the details and historical notes simultaneously for fear of leaving something out. It's as wrong as it is stupid and unforgivably inelegant.

Overall I'm quite sure you're an excellent commentator and educator. All my comments are in reference to this specific blog, not you and your overall contributions. I don't gain any thrills seeing my words in print and I don't need the applause of strangers so the only reason I post at all is to be challenged and grow more efficient, or occasionally offer some support to others. For that reason rather than hold back I try to offer my best and strongest arguments. Anything less is a disservice to all involved. If I am corrected by a more cogent or effective point of view, so much the better. I'm all ears. I plan to peruse more of your blogs and hopefully we can cross paths again in clearer circumstances with smoother conversation.

S