SteadyOptions is an options trading forum where you can find solutions from top options traders. Join Us!

We’ve all been there… researching options strategies and unable to find the answers we’re looking for. SteadyOptions has your solution.

Kim

(DISCUSSION) AAPL August 2013 trade

142 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

I have a general question regarding with our edge in SO strategy. Would it be possible that "smart money" can outsmart us (by taking the opposite side) if our community is larger and it seems many people implement the same strategy? It may not happen with big stocks like AAPL, but would this be possible for smaller ones?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a general question regarding with our edge in SO strategy. Would it be possible that "smart money" can outsmart us (by taking the opposite side) if our community is larger and it seems many people implement the same strategy? It may not happen with big stocks like AAPL, but would this be possible for smaller ones?

If you are referring to the earnings trades, the prices of the straddles are set by market makers based on the expectations of the post-earnings move. Those expectations are set by historical moves, market conditions, company specific news etc.

 

In some cases, for less liquid stocks, there might be a temporary dis-balance, but it will be gone very quickly. 

 

That said, I'm limiting the number of SO members so we don't become too big, and closing the service from time to time to ensure that members can get the best possible fills. I don't know many services (if any) that are doing this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This seems like a spot to just add some puts to the trade and go for the 400/450 strangle.

If we never get our spike it seems set up for a RIC held through earnings,

but this is for the aggressive player only. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, we have till Tuesday for this trade to recover, right? Do you have any backup plan for this? Even with the current price, I think the loss is substantial. If somehow stock goes down on Mon/Tue, then we're doomed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, if the stock goes down, not much we can do. But if IV goes up even 5 points (which still be much less than any previous cycle), the trade will be around BE even at the current stock price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kim, you kept mentioning that it's nearly impossible that the IV stays this low. Is it true that you just compared this with previous cycles or short-term history?

 

My point is - how can one be so sure about the "cheap" IV since at the end of the day, it's just a number. It can theoretically be lower for sure, right?

 

Sorry that I don't have a more specific question to ask, but just try to open up a discussion about this. By analogy, if one trades a technical pattern, he would have a stop loss and exit without questioning. This is because technical pattern is just a statistical edge, and it's NOT 100% every time. On the other hand, it seems we stick with this IV so strongly that we refused to close the trade around breakeven a few days ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kim, you kept mentioning that it's nearly impossible that the IV stays this low. Is it true that you just compared this with previous cycles or short-term history?

 

My point is - how can one be so sure about the "cheap" IV since at the end of the day, it's just a number. It can theoretically be lower for sure, right?

 

Sorry that I don't have a more specific question to ask, but just try to open up a discussion about this. By analogy, if one trades a technical pattern, he would have a stop loss and exit without questioning. This is because technical pattern is just a statistical edge, and it's NOT 100% every time. On the other hand, it seems we stick with this IV so strongly that we refused to close the trade around breakeven a few days ago.

In hindsight, you are absolutely correct - we should have closed it for breakeven few days ago. 

 

We trade probabilities. There is a big difference between probability and certainty. There was a high probability that IV will not stay that low, based on historical patterns. However, high probability is still not certainty, and IV did not rise as I expected. Obviously this was a bad call and we are paying the price now.

 

Many mistakes have been made with this trade, I will do a full analysis after we close the trade. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest jozsika

In hindsight, you are absolutely correct - we should have closed it for breakeven few days ago. 

 

We trade probabilities. There is a big difference between probability and certainty. There was a high probability that IV will not stay that low, based on historical patterns. However, high probability is still not certainty, and IV did not rise as I expected. Obviously this was a bad call and we are paying the price now.

 

Many mistakes have been made with this trade, I will do a full analysis after we close the trade. 

I think the OP raises an important question. As long as we discuss underlying assumptions, for the sake of accuracy, I want to point out that (with due respect) your reply is not 100% accurate either.

 

We are _not_ trading probabilities. We are trading _statistics_. The same way as you (correctly) point out that there is a difference between certainty and probability, there is a difference between probability and statistics.

 

Long term statistics on a sample may (or may not) approach probability. There are statistical methods to determine this. I don't expect that you run full statistical analysis on your samples, but the OP's questions, i.e. that how big is your sample, how many earnings did you examine, how long did you go back in your analysis are quite reasonable. Or to put it differently: when you say that "There was a high probability that IV will not stay that low, based on historical patterns." what exactly do you mean? What is the "high probability" in the statistical sense? 4 out of 4 is 1.0, sounds pretty high, but in reality it is lower (in the statistical sense) then 99 out of 100.

 

This is by no means splitting hair or an academic question. Last year I followed one of the countless "AAPL gurus" who claimed that he could predict AAPL price action. He brought up a few technical indicators, ran a historical test on them and announced that AAPL would go up. And it did. So he was right? Not exactly. I looked out of my window. I saw my neighbor walking his dog. So AAPL would go up. And it did. This is the amazing 'dog indicator.' Unfortunately we know what happened to AAPL. (My neighbor still walks his dog. Now I apply it to GOOG. Works like a charm. :-) This is just an anecdote. I know that we are trading non-directionally! Just an illustration how misleading indicators can be.

 

Cheers,

 

--joseph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the OP raises an important question. As long as we discuss underlying assumptions, for the sake of accuracy, I want to point out that (with due respect) your reply is not 100% accurate either.

 

We are _not_ trading probabilities. We are trading _statistics_. The same way as you (correctly) point out that there is a difference between certainty and probability, there is a difference between probability and statistics.

 

Long term statistics on a sample may (or may not) approach probability. There are statistical methods to determine this. I don't expect that you run full statistical analysis on your samples, but the OP's questions, i.e. that how big is your sample, how many earnings did you examine, how long did you go back in your analysis are quite reasonable. Or to put it differently: when you say that "There was a high probability that IV will not stay that low, based on historical patterns." what exactly do you mean? What is the "high probability" in the statistical sense? 4 out of 4 is 1.0, sounds pretty high, but in reality it is lower (in the statistical sense) then 99 out of 100.

 

This is by no means splitting hair or an academic question. Last year I followed one of the countless "AAPL gurus" who claimed that he could predict AAPL price action. He brought up a few technical indicators, ran a historical test on them and announced that AAPL would go up. And it did. So he was right? Not exactly. I looked out of my window. I saw my neighbor walking his dog. So AAPL would go up. And it did. This is the amazing 'dog indicator.' Unfortunately we know what happened to AAPL. (My neighbor still walks his dog. Now I apply it to GOOG. Works like a charm. :-) This is just an anecdote. I know that we are trading non-directionally! Just an illustration how misleading indicators can be.

 

Cheers,

 

--joseph

 

To elaborate this point further, can you first confirm that you said high probability based on just 4-5 quarters? And Why? Does that mean you just feel that this timeframe is appropriate? (I'm not saying I agree or not, just want to be clear).

 

What's more interesting, however, is how you handle "bad" candidates. I'm not here long enough to see how you drop out candidates, but I would be interested to see how? Two losses in the last two quarters and you drop it out? Did you get burned a lot by this? 

 

As a side note, I mean I assume I know how you would include a candidate you never traded before - just by backtesting and getting good results, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many quarters back would you expect to go? 4-5 quarters represent the most relevant data. It is not feasible to go 8-10 quarters back.

 

For AAPL trade, the biggest mistake was not relying on "expected" IV spike which did not come. The biggest mistake was not adjusting when the stock moved outside the "tent".

 

As for good and bad candidates - yes, I'm looking 4 quarters back. Two losses are not enough to drop bad candidates, but two 15-20% losses probably are. 

 

The difference between statistics and probability is only the sample size. To say that I have 70% success ratio in ICs based on 10 trades - is it meaningful? Probably not. You need at least 50-70 trades to do that, but that would take 5-7 years. Is it practical? We do what we can based on historical data and practical limitations. Loss like AAPL was not necessary - even with wrong assumption about IV spike that did not happen and big swings, it could still be closed for 15-20% gain with proper adjustments.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is - how can one be so sure about the "cheap" IV since at the end of the day, it's just a number. It can theoretically be lower for sure, right?

To elaborate on this point - I cannot be sure. It always can go lower (or not to spike as expected). However, this is once again the difference between probability and certainty. I traded VIX 8 times this year (except for the last one which is still open). I entered each time when VIX was around 13 or lower. Could it go any lower? Yes, but probability of it going higher was higher than probability of going lower. It resulted 8 out of 8 winners, with average gain of ~30%. Will it always be a winner? No, but I like the odds. 

 

Dan Sheridan likes to enter calendars when IV is at the low third of the recent 6 months range. Why 6 months? Because this is the most relevant period. Does it mean it cannot go lower? Sure it can, but the odds are it will go higher not lower. Again, probability vs. certainty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we need to put things in perspective.

 

First, the model portfolio does not include commissions, which I mention on every opportunity, so you should not really even try to replicate it. Second, yes, we had few bad trades, and I did a full analysis of the AAPL trade (show me another service doing that). But we need to look at the long term. Yes, we do have an edge - as long as we stay focused and manage the trades correctly. The buy-and-hold crowd do look like geniuses right now, but look at periods like August 2011, May 2012, July 2012 or April 2013 and compare SO performance with S&P 500.

 

​The AAPL, VIX and RUT losses are definitely higher than I would like, but look at the full track record and tell me how many 30%+ losses do you see. I counted less than 10 out of 460 trades. Regarding VIX loss - again, I don't remember people complained when we had 8 out of 8 VIX winners with average gain of 30%.

 

I know that people remember the pain from the losses much longer than the satisfaction from the gains, it's just a human nature. I just hope that some historic perspective might help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally don't know how long I can stay because I live the other side of the world. I have to stay to 2-3 am to make sure you no longer have alerts! This of course affects my everyday life a lot.

 

2) You said you have done a full analysis of this trade - where is that?

 

Here is Kim's analysis: http://steadyoptions.com/forum/topic/1379-aapl-calendar-trade-post-mortem/

 

Wow, you stay up until 3am doing this?  In that case, I can see where this system might not be a good fit for you.  Just for the record, even though it's been a rough 4 months, I plan to stay for awhile longer and see if I can make this work.  I haven't always been down.  I was up 15% at my highest point about two months in.  Part of my bad luck was that I doubled down on my portfolio at that point and then took a string of losses which quickly erased the gains, which were relatively smaller in absolute dollars.

Edited by indiana*josh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest jozsika

I think we need to put things in perspective.

 

First, the model portfolio does not include commissions, which I mention on every opportunity, so you should not really even try to replicate it. Second, yes, we had few bad trades, and I did a full analysis of the AAPL trade (show me another service doing that). But we need to look at the long term. Yes, we do have an edge - as long as we stay focused and manage the trades correctly. The buy-and-hold crowd do look like geniuses right now, but look at periods like August 2011, May 2012, July 2012 or April 2013 and compare SO performance with S&P 500.

 

​The AAPL, VIX and RUT losses are definitely higher than I would like, but look at the full track record and tell me how many 30%+ losses do you see. I counted less than 10 out of 460 trades. Regarding VIX loss - again, I don't remember people complained when we had 8 out of 8 VIX winners with average gain of 30%.

 

I know that people remember the pain from the losses much longer than the satisfaction from the gains, it's just a human nature. I just hope that some historic perspective might help.

First of all, thank you very much for reading all of your customers comments and taking the time for detailed replies. Much appreciated!

 

Your service is indeed of the few ones that publishes detailed track records (and I would never subscribe to a service that doesn't do that.)

 

But (sorry, there is always a 'but' :-) transparency doesn't mean realistic.

 

I am in the same boat as some of the others here (net loss since I joined) and I analyzed the data you published to figure out how to improve my results.

 

Some observations, questions and suggestions.

 

(1) You indeed emphasize that the model portfolio doesn't include commission. This is perfectly fine for a service that trades straight options or stocks or trades longer term. E.g. for the AP (that I also subscribe to) commission is only noise (as you --correctly-- point it out somewhere.) But for SO this is not true. E.g. the IBM double calendar that you mention consisted of 12 trades and generated $0.88 profit (in the model.) Commission here is significant. I think to subtract 1 cent / leg from the results would be realistic.

 

(2) The results you list are in %. Again, given that SO trades low price option combinations this is extremely sensitive to the smallest slippage. If a service (e.g.) recommends to buy AAPL (or even only MSFT) shares, sending out the trade signals (as you do, thank you for that!) over twitter , then the slippage would be insignificant. But for a complex (at least 2- but often time 4-legged), low priced and occasionally not too liquid option combination it can be significant. Do you have (and if you do, are you willing to share?) a version of your track record (or a subset, like this years trades only) where you have the actual entry/exit prices (and maybe all the 'legs', including adjustments) of the trades, instead of only the percentages?

 

(3) Related to this: I noticed (and some users also mentioned) that the trades you post, 'run away' from us. For some of these trades I noticed that the e-mail you send out follows the actual trade that you make (based on the published screenshots, again: thanks for that!) by several minutes, occasionally by half an hour. I understand that you have a _lot_ to do during the day and I also understand that your 'usual' response to this that 'in some cases you get a better fill, in some cases worse, it will zero out.' It is hard to verify this (and my experience so far that I am _behind_ you, it did not zero out -- so far.) Would you consider 'drinking your Kool aid' and check this theory yourself? I.e. send out the trade suggestions _first_ (maybe with the mid-price or limit order suggestion) and set up the trades yourself _later_. I would say, 'deterministically' later, so that we don't 'pollute' the results, e.g. always 10 minutes later, market price. This would _greatly_ improve the transparency of your model and gives us a more realistic feel about performance than just our own, individual experience and 'gut feeling.'

 

Thanks again,

 

--joseph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, thank you very much for reading all of your customers comments and taking the time for detailed replies. Much appreciated!

 

Your service is indeed of the few ones that publishes detailed track records (and I would never subscribe to a service that doesn't do that.)

 

But (sorry, there is always a 'but' :-) transparency doesn't mean realistic.

 

I am in the same boat as some of the others here (net loss since I joined) and I analyzed the data you published to figure out how to improve my results.

 

Some observations, questions and suggestions.

 

(1) You indeed emphasize that the model portfolio doesn't include commission. This is perfectly fine for a service that trades straight options or stocks or trades longer term. E.g. for the AP (that I also subscribe to) commission is only noise (as you --correctly-- point it out somewhere.) But for SO this is not true. E.g. the IBM double calendar that you mention consisted of 12 trades and generated $0.88 profit (in the model.) Commission here is significant. I think to subtract 1 cent / leg from the results would be realistic.

 

(2) The results you list are in %. Again, given that SO trades low price option combinations this is extremely sensitive to the smallest slippage. If a service (e.g.) recommends to buy AAPL (or even only MSFT) shares, sending out the trade signals (as you do, thank you for that!) over twitter , then the slippage would be insignificant. But for a complex (at least 2- but often time 4-legged), low priced and occasionally not too liquid option combination it can be significant. Do you have (and if you do, are you willing to share?) a version of your track record (or a subset, like this years trades only) where you have the actual entry/exit prices (and maybe all the 'legs', including adjustments) of the trades, instead of only the percentages?

 

(3) Related to this: I noticed (and some users also mentioned) that the trades you post, 'run away' from us. For some of these trades I noticed that the e-mail you send out follows the actual trade that you make (based on the published screenshots, again: thanks for that!) by several minutes, occasionally by half an hour. I understand that you have a _lot_ to do during the day and I also understand that your 'usual' response to this that 'in some cases you get a better fill, in some cases worse, it will zero out.' It is hard to verify this (and my experience so far that I am _behind_ you, it did not zero out -- so far.) Would you consider 'drinking your Kool aid' and check this theory yourself? I.e. send out the trade suggestions _first_ (maybe with the mid-price or limit order suggestion) and set up the trades yourself _later_. I would say, 'deterministically' later, so that we don't 'pollute' the results, e.g. always 10 minutes later, market price. This would _greatly_ improve the transparency of your model and gives us a more realistic feel about performance than just our own, individual experience and 'gut feeling.'

 

Thanks again,

 

--joseph

You are raising valid points and I will try to address them. 

 

1) We discussed the impact of commissions many times. On average, commissions reduce return per trade by 1.2-1.4% if you trade with IB. You can do the math how this will impact the overall performance. I even mention this on the Subscribe page:

  • "Impact of commissions: About 2-3% per month, depending on the broker"
  • I really don't know how can I be more transparent than that.

 

2) You really cannot compare options trading with stocks, especially stocks like AAPL or MSFT. This is not a fair comparison. As for my trades - all of them come with screenshots where you can see the fills for all legs. The percentage P/L is calculated in the alert post based on those fills. Since those are real results, there is no slippage here. Again, I'm not aware of ANY service doing that.

 

3) "For some of these trades I noticed that the e-mail you send out follows the actual trade that you make" - not some but ALL trades are based on my real trades. ALL posts are posted 1-2 minutes after the actual fill, there is NEVER a half an hour delay. In addition, I always post a discussion topic first where I make the analysis and suggest an approximate price. Members always have an option to act after doing some due-diligence based on the discussion topic. Again, NO service does that. 

I'm aware that in some cases the prices will be slightly different few minutes after the alert. But it can work both ways. Today was a perfect example. I closed RUT calendar at 9.50, half an hour later the price was over 10 (it is 10.50 as I type this). V was closed at 5.50 and could be closed at 6.50 just an hour later. Members will always remember when they get worse fills than me, but will rarely mention the cases where they could do much better.

 

 

  •  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest jozsika

 

You are raising valid points and I will try to address them. 

 

1) We discussed the impact of commissions many times. On average, commissions reduce return per trade by 1.2-1.4% if you trade with IB. You can do the math how this will impact the overall performance. I even mention this on the Subscribe page:

  • "Impact of commissions: About 2-3% per month, depending on the broker"
  • I really don't know how can I be more transparent than that.

 

2) You really cannot compare options trading with stocks, especially stocks like AAPL or MSFT. This is not a fair comparison. As for my trades - all of them come with screenshots where you can see the fills for all legs. The percentage P/L is calculated in the alert post based on those fills. Since those are real results, there is no slippage here. Again, I'm not aware of ANY service doing that.

 

3) "For some of these trades I noticed that the e-mail you send out follows the actual trade that you make" - not some but ALL trades are based on my real trades. ALL posts are posted 1-2 minutes after the actual fill, there is NEVER a half an hour delay. In addition, I always post a discussion topic first where I make the analysis and suggest an approximate price. Members always have an option to act after doing some due-diligence based on the discussion topic. Again, NO service does that. 

I'm aware that in some cases the prices will be slightly different few minutes after the alert. But it can work both ways. Today was a perfect example. I closed RUT calendar at 9.50, half an hour later the price was over 10 (it is 10.50 as I type this). V was closed at 5.50 and could be closed at 6.50 just an hour later. Members will always remember when they get worse fills than me, but will rarely mention the cases where they could do much better.

 

 

  •  

 

Hi Kim,
 

(1) I did _not_ say that you disclosure about commissions is not 'transparent' What I _did_ say that b/c of excluding commissions from the results, the published results are not _realistic_. And with due respect I stick to this. The estimate that you mention is way off! 1.5% on a $0.80 profit trade is less than 1.5 cents! And the trade has at least 4 legs, in the case of the quoted IBM trade 12 legs! Nobody on this board can trade 4 (or 12) legs for 1.5 cents!

(2) My comparison to stock trading was an _illustration_ why slippage can be significant in your service. Again: I stick to this statement and asked you to give us access to $ results in addition to %. It would be easier for me to use as I could simulate 'what-if' scenarios, like 'what if I subtract 1 cent/leg for commission' or 'what-if I assume 5 cents slippage per leg', etc. I really think it would be useful.

 
(3) Members actually do mention a lot their fill price. I don't _know_ whether them mentioning worse price more than better price is caused by they ignoring the latter _or_ by simply having the latter less frequently. With my suggestion (you trade _after_ you post the signal) we wouldn't have to guess this. When this issue comes up (and it comes up quite frequently) you quote some anecdotal evidence that not _all_ of your fills are impossible to get. If you traded _after_ you post the recommendations, no such argument is needed. So I ask it again: do you _really_ believe that on the average, on the long run your results can be replicated with a 1-2-5 minute delay? If you do, then why not implement it? If you don't then how do we make $$?

Your claim that ALL (emphasis is yours) of your trades are posted in 1-2 minutes is not entirely accurate.

This alert was sent out with 13 minutes delay:

http://steadyoptions.com/forum/topic/1332-trades-jpm-july-2013-straddle/?p=22056

Another one with 13 minutes delay:

http://steadyoptions.com/forum/topic/1365-trades-amzn-august-2013-double-calendar/?p=22837

 
I am sure there are good explanation for this and I can indeed testify that _most_ (but not "ALL") of your trades are sent out with much less delay.
 
On this note here is a 4-leg trade that you set up 50 minutes apart (and sent out the alert after the _second_ part was set up):

http://steadyoptions.com/forum/topic/1245-trades-rut-june-2013-double-calendar/?p=20357

What is disturbing about this that obviously you got this fill price by legging in (and notifying us after the second entry.) Nobody questions here that _you_ are an excellent trader! But we are not here to witness your excellent trades after the fact. We are here to make $$.

 
Thanks again for listening,
 
--joseph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Pilgrim

 

 
(3) Members actually do mention a lot their fill price. I don't _know_ whether them mentioning worse price more than better price is caused by they ignoring the latter _or_ by simply having the latter less frequently. With my suggestion (you trade _after_ you post the signal) we wouldn't have to guess this. When this issue comes up (and it comes up quite frequently) you quote some anecdotal evidence that not _all_ of your fills are impossible to get. If you traded _after_ you post the recommendations, no such argument is needed. So I ask it again: do you _really_ believe that on the average, on the long run your results can be replicated with a 1-2-5 minute delay? If you do, then why not implement it? If you don't then how do we make $$?
 

 

 

Kim...You are a sharp man with a good idea in Steady Options. That said, I humbly suggest that perhaps you aren't listening to your clients.

 

As you know, I discontinued service after 2 months because of an inability to get filled which resulted in my account being well below the posted results of SO. You responded to this by saying that _every time_ someone discontinues with SO you've found that the fault was with the subscriber and not with the SO service. I initially thought, "He's right...it must be me." After following many posts from other subscribers with similar experiences, however, this just isn't realistic Kim, and perhaps demonstrates a blind spot in my limited opinion.

 

I have found that when most people see things that I don't it's usually in my best interest to take a closer, second look. There are a lot of subscribers saying the same things here Kim. For your benefit and for the benefit of your subscribers I humbly suggest you take a closer, second look.

 

This is just the opinion of a novice trader with many blind spots of his own. 

 

Cheers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hi Kim,
 

(1) I did _not_ say that you disclosure about commissions is not 'transparent' What I _did_ say that b/c of excluding commissions from the results, the published results are not _realistic_. And with due respect I stick to this. The estimate that you mention is way off! 1.5% on a $0.80 profit trade is less than 1.5 cents! And the trade has at least 4 legs, in the case of the quoted IBM trade 12 legs! Nobody on this board can trade 4 (or 12) legs for 1.5 cents!

(2) My comparison to stock trading was an _illustration_ why slippage can be significant in your service. Again: I stick to this statement and asked you to give us access to $ results in addition to %. It would be easier for me to use as I could simulate 'what-if' scenarios, like 'what if I subtract 1 cent/leg for commission' or 'what-if I assume 5 cents slippage per leg', etc. I really think it would be useful.

 
(3) Members actually do mention a lot their fill price. I don't _know_ whether them mentioning worse price more than better price is caused by they ignoring the latter _or_ by simply having the latter less frequently. With my suggestion (you trade _after_ you post the signal) we wouldn't have to guess this. When this issue comes up (and it comes up quite frequently) you quote some anecdotal evidence that not _all_ of your fills are impossible to get. If you traded _after_ you post the recommendations, no such argument is needed. So I ask it again: do you _really_ believe that on the average, on the long run your results can be replicated with a 1-2-5 minute delay? If you do, then why not implement it? If you don't then how do we make $$?

Your claim that ALL (emphasis is yours) of your trades are posted in 1-2 minutes is not entirely accurate.

This alert was sent out with 13 minutes delay:

http://steadyoptions.com/forum/topic/1332-trades-jpm-july-2013-straddle/?p=22056

Another one with 13 minutes delay:

http://steadyoptions.com/forum/topic/1365-trades-amzn-august-2013-double-calendar/?p=22837

 
I am sure there are good explanation for this and I can indeed testify that _most_ (but not "ALL") of your trades are sent out with much less delay.
 
On this note here is a 4-leg trade that you set up 50 minutes apart (and sent out the alert after the _second_ part was set up):

http://steadyoptions.com/forum/topic/1245-trades-rut-june-2013-double-calendar/?p=20357

What is disturbing about this that obviously you got this fill price by legging in (and notifying us after the second entry.) Nobody questions here that _you_ are an excellent trader! But we are not here to witness your excellent trades after the fact. We are here to make $$.

 
Thanks again for listening,
 
--joseph

 

(1) Publish the results ex-commissions is the industry standard. It is not fair to expect from me to put myself in disadvantage when comparing performance between different services. Do you have experience with any service which reports say 5% per month in their performance page and you were able to make 5% on your real portfolio (unless it is a stock service)?  

 

My estimate of 1.2-1.4% is actually pretty conservative. Please look at report from pro-trading-profits:

 

post-1-0-30150700-1375376359_thumb.png

 

Based on 100k portfolio and 15% allocation, they report average trade of $14,862 and average commissions of $186.82 - that's 1.25%. Based on the same commissions structure, they also report (based on 100k portfolio):

 

 

Total Net Profit/Loss      $310,421 Average Annual Profit/Loss      $143,271 Average Monthly Profit/Loss      $11,939.25

 

(2) "asked you to give us access to $ results in addition to %" - I'm not sure what you are asking here. Since all trade alerts include entry and exit prices, you can easily calculate the $ results, slippage, commissions etc. based on your portfolio size and allocation.

 

I did not say that "are _no_ other services that publish their real trade results". What I do is 1) open a discussion before doing the trade and give members heads up; 2) send the alert within 2-4 minutes of my fill 3) attach screenshots to all trades. The combination of those 3 things is what sets SO apart. Opening a discussion before the trade is equal to giving members the chance to enter the trade before I do, and many members do just that.

 

(3) I can give you dozens of examples where members mention better prices, or report gains on trades that I did not take. Out of 400+ trades you managed to find 2 which were delayed by 13 minutes, and one which was delayed by 50 minutes (please note that I specifically mentioned on the discussion topic that I'm going to enter the RUT double calendar). The reason for the delay is simple. I usually prepare the trade alert email and set a limit order. It might be hard to believe, but from time to time I need to eat and go to washroom. If my order was filled during my lunch or washroom time, the alert will be delayed by few minutes. In some cases, the price can be actually better when the alert is sent - again, I can find a LOT of examples when this happened. 

 

If you think that you are here 'to witness your excellent trades after the fact", then you are missing the whole point of SO. I want members to be full participants in what we are doing, this is why I open a discussion on EVERY trade I plan to enter so members can do a full due-diligence based on the info we provided and make their own decisions. 

 

Taking AAPL trade as an example, look at this discussion topic and see how many members did MUCH better than me on this trade.

 

I don't expect everyone to agree with me and I know that no matter how honest and transparent you are, you just cannot satisfy everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kim...You are a sharp man with a good idea in Steady Options. That said, I humbly suggest that perhaps you aren't listening to your clients.

 

As you know, I discontinued service after 2 months because of an inability to get filled which resulted in my account being well below the posted results of SO. You responded to this by saying that _every time_ someone discontinues with SO you've found that the fault was with the subscriber and not with the SO service. I initially thought, "He's right...it must be me." After following many posts from other subscribers with similar experiences, however, this just isn't realistic Kim, and perhaps demonstrates a blind spot in my limited opinion.

 

I have found that when most people see things that I don't it's usually in my best interest to take a closer, second look. There are a lot of subscribers saying the same things here Kim. For your benefit and for the benefit of your subscribers I humbly suggest you take a closer, second look.

 

This is just the opinion of a novice trader with many blind spots of his own. 

 

Cheers!

Here are just few examples from the recent alerts:

 

CVX: members got same fill.

 

RIG: members paid 1-3 cents higher than my fill.

 

WFM: did not enter, members reported 12% gains.

 

GRMN: one member got the same fill, another got 3% gain compared to my 5% loss.

 

ESRX: members paid 1-3 cents higher than me.

 

LNKD: I paid 2.35, the price was 2.15-2.20 half an hour later.

 

MA: I paid 2.40, many members missed it but some got filled slightly higher than my fill.

 

AMZN: most members got filled slightly higher than my fills, but also had the chance to sell higher than me.

 

V: most members got better fills than me in both the entry and the exit. Some members reported 8-10% gains, compared to my 8% loss.

 

GOOG: did not enter, members reported 32% gains.

 

NFLX: most members missed it but some got filled at prices similar to mine.

 

RUT calendar: traded lower couple hours after I entered.

 

Do we need more examples?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest jozsika

Well, I deserved this. I sent out a long e-mail and you replied in a long e-mail. Problem is that in these long e-mails somehow the essence is lost.

 

So here is a short one:

 

Are you willing to experiment with _reversing_ the order how trade alerts are sent out? I.e. _first_ you send out the alert and _next_ you trade it yourself?

 

Advantage: _real life_ proof that your recommendations _can_ be traded. The proof is YOU. Sometimes (as you said) it will be better, sometimes it will be worse. No need for anecdotes, no need to track 400 forums, etc. 

 

Disadvantage? I don't see any. Do you?

 

Cheers,

 

--joseph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest jozsika

Here are just few examples from the recent alerts:

 

[...]

 

Do we need more examples?

No, we don't.

 

As a matter of fact we don't need ANY examples.

 

We need a STRATEGY. Sending out the alerts BEFORE you trade is easy and simple and nobody can argue with timestamped alerts and trade-confirmations! One less recurring set of complaints you have to deal with! A perfect win-win!

 

What do you think?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Hal

I've been following this discussion with great interest. Like many other "newbies", I too have struggled to replicate Kim's results. But I think the criticism I'm hearing of Kim's service is misplaced. Please let me explain.

 

The purpose of SO isn't just to follow Kim's trades. Steady Options teaches a technique that requires EACH of us to:

  • Identify suitable candidates for pre-earnings straddles, strangles, and calendar trades
  • Back-test trades to identify suitable risk/reward
  • Monitor the trades we're stalking for optimum entry points
  • Use options Greeks to track performance
  • Balance risk at a portfolio-wide level

When I look at the people who have been successful here, it is clear to me that each of them has been able to take these techniques and make them their own. In fact, a number of members enter trades earlier than Kim, or take on additional trades that are NOT part of Kim's official portfolio, but are based on the same underlying concepts. For me, this has been one of the strengths of this service.
 

Now let me be honest: I've had trouble being successful with this strategy. My portfolio is down a fair bit, largely because I took an over-large position on the AAPL calendar trade, and simultaneously got in the VIX and RUT trades that were pretty bad losers. I also failed to participate in the earlier VIX calendars, and some of the more successful straddles, which would have recouped some of my losses.

 

But this is not Kim's fault.

 

As it turns out, I'm pretty lazy when it comes to back-testing. I prefer to take Kim's word for it. And unfortunately, that makes it difficult for me to make this technique my own.

 

Marty Schwartz, the famous "Pit Bull", said that his goal in his first year as a trader was to find a trading style that suited him psychologically. Each of us has to judge for ourselves whether we're up to the task of back-testing, tracking Greeks, and so on. It may be that we're not – and BTW, there's nothing wrong with that! But if all we're doing is following Kim's trades and hoping to make 100% return every year, I'm afraid we're bound to be disappointed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, we don't.

 

As a matter of fact we don't need ANY examples.

 

We need a STRATEGY. Sending out the alerts BEFORE you trade is easy and simple and nobody can argue with timestamped alerts and trade-confirmations! One less recurring set of complaints you have to deal with! A perfect win-win!

 

What do you think?

Every member can handle the discussion topic as an alert and act on it. This is exactly the purpose of the discussion topic where I give guidelines on the trades and the suggested prices. What you suggest is a duplication of the discussion topic. In the discussion topic, I always suggest potential strategy, strikes and prices and then adjust them as we go.The whole purpose of the discussion topic is to give members a heads up what I'm about to do. As mentioned in the examples, many members take some trades that I don't. Please show me another service doing that. 

 

You need a STRATEGY?? We are talking about our strategies and how to balance the portfolio every day (unlike most other services that just send a bunch of unrelated trades).

 

What really matters is not how much SO makes, is how much you make. This is what important. I'm giving members the tools and the strategies and hopefully help them to become better traders. The rest is up to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, 

 

In my humble opinion, trade alerts are the least valuable thing in any newsletter. Price move, liquidity in options are not so great, you are stuck in a meeting and by the time you get back to your desk, the price has moved on. 

 

For a slightly off-the-topic but relevant topic about edge and learning about trading, 

 

When I started trading, I thought the holy grail is to find an edge through some kind of statistical anomaly in complicated products or identifying the next Google. In another words, I cared a lot about trade entry. I had a huge ego and I worked with similarly full-of-themselves co-workers who had graduated from MIT to build machine-learning tools and backtesters to find the perfect conditions to enter a trade. We reasoned, "if we only if we could build the perfect correlation model between Southwest stock and Crude oil, or if the option skew is off by 0.50% in a OTM option strike in a really long-dated month, we could arbitrage this and make millions," 

 

Now the older I get, the dumber I realize that I am and I only hope to accelerate this learning of realizing how dumb I'm. I realize that I don't have the speed as the nimble high frequency trading companies who co-located their trading servers right to the exchange, my account is an speck of sand compared to the hedge fund/prop desks on Wall Street who can move mountains and my brain is a pea in comparison to the combination of econometrics/statistical analysis performed by those with Astrophysics PhD quants. 

 

I know nothing about the market and when I make a feeble attempt to guess where it's going, it's as good as a monkey's. So to protect myself from myself, I consider risk management and what-to-do after you enter a trade to be the most important. I follow about half of Kim's trades and honestly, he has had some bad trades (sorry Kim, but no one is immune to statistics).

 

But honestly his good trades/performance doesn't interest me, a monkey can guess correctly some of the time how a stock is range-bound and put on a iron condor and it'll get profitable most of the time. But the one time when it fails, it can wipe you out of the market for good. So honestly, I perk up when I see how Kim reacts to his bad trades, like the AAPL August calendar or the August RUT iron condor. There's no fun in watching someone pick up pennies in front of a slow moving steam-roller but it's more fun to see how they react when they are about to get run over - they get squashed completely or they manage a daring escape; either way, it'll be a poignant lesson for me as a bystander. 

 

More concretely, what I learned from SO is: trade adjustment, what to do when the stock moves against you; how to adjust your trade to still keep a favorable risk-reward ratio; overall portfolio management, how to balance your vega, delta positive trades against your negative one's to keep the whole porfolio as neutral as possible; thinking about risk, not to get hung up or married to a single position and learn to when to fold them and keep a steady routine of trade identification, trade management, trade exit and calm regardless of wild portfolio swings

 

Best,

PC

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If ideally you'd want an auto trade service where someone just books profitable trades into your portfolio and you don't care to much why these trade are put on and why they make or lose money - then maybe SO is not the ideal service for you.

I think a very big part of it is to learn about options, numerous strategies and in the end be able to find your own trades and strategies that work for you and look at the number of suggestions (each discussion topic is basically a trade idea to start with) and make your own decision if and when you want to enter the trade.

Kim makes a lot of effort to educate people. I trade options since over a decade and many years I was a professional option trader and yet I still find a different angle to look at a trade or a new way to adjust here once in a while. If you are new to options and are willing to learn I think you wont find too many places where you can learn (more than) the basics and get someone to answer your questions for the price that you pay here.

In terms of performance reporting -  while I'd agree that despite the disclosures its easy to underestimate the impact of commisions on the overall SO performance I also see Kims point that literally no service is taking commisions into account. In fact there are many services who use various dodgy pratices to inflate performance. So I would say dispite the commision issue this is the most honest performance reporting I've come across! And while you might not achive the model portfolio performance I think higher double digit returns are not out of reach.

 

- find a broker with low commisions. If you have 10k in my opinion IB has the best combo of low comm and good execution but if you go elsewhere if you pay much more than 1$ a lot you'll have quite a headwind to your performance.

 

- paper trade Kims trades for a while or better do everything in 1 lot  (if you are with broker who doesn't charge a minimum trade fee) that will give you a feeling for how these trades move.

 

- in the mid term try to understand options and the strategies that Kim plays here. Then you'll be able to find your own trades or at least your own entry and exit points - Kim usually gives the price that he is targeting in each discussion topic. This way you are not chasing the entry after the alert.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the posts from Hal, PC and Marco show how members can make the best use of SO.

 

Speaking of auto-trading - does anyone really believe that you can place your trading on auto-pilot and just make 5-7% every month with no effort? Does anyone believe that auto-trading services don't have slippage? That all auto-trading members get the same fills? And how auto-trading services report performance if some members get better fills than others, or some members don't get a fill at all?

 

Lets assume I go on the path that joseph suggests. Lets say I issue an alert with limit price. Some members get the trade at that price, but I don't. How should I report it? Should I include it in the performance or not? If I don't and the trade ends up a loser, wouldn't members complain that their performance is worse than the official one?

 

Members who think that my performance is not transparent/honest/realistic etc. should read this post and compare what we do at SO with how other services report performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Pilgrim
On 8/1/2013 at 5:05 PM, Marco said:

If ideally you'd want an auto trade service where someone just books profitable trades into your portfolio and you don't care to much why these trade are put on and why they make or lose money - then maybe SO is not the ideal service for you.

 

I'm trying to put your thoughts in context Marco, but am having difficulty finding their relevance. For instance, you use the second person pronoun "you," (3x above) as if you're addressing someone specific, but you've quoted no one. I've followed this thread closely and don't see any post wherein a preference for an auto trade service is even hinted at. In the same way, what post in this thread suggests that the author doesn't care why these trades are initiated? Likewise, which comment states that an SO subscriber doesn't care about why they may make and/or lose money?

 

I think a very big part of it is to learn about options, numerous strategies and in the end be able to find your own trades and strategies that work for you and look at the number of suggestions (each discussion topic is basically a trade idea to start with) and make your own decision if and when you want to enter the trade.

 

I agree, but that's not what is being discussed here. I (and I'm probably not alone) joined this service to make money. This, in no way, diminishes the many subordinate reasons for joining. Part of the lure for joining is a very high advertised return (verified return). 

 

I don't care to learn about options or their various strategies. In fact, I just want someone to book profitable trades into my account, because I also don't care why a trade is initiated or why they may/may not make money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, 

 

In my humble opinion, trade alerts are the least valuable thing in any newsletter. Price move, liquidity in options are not so great, you are stuck in a meeting and by the time you get back to your desk, the price has moved on. 

 

For a slightly off-the-topic but relevant topic about edge and learning about trading, 

 

When I started trading, I thought the holy grail is to find an edge through some kind of statistical anomaly in complicated products or identifying the next Google. In another words, I cared a lot about trade entry. I had a huge ego and I worked with similarly full-of-themselves co-workers who had graduated from MIT to build machine-learning tools and backtesters to find the perfect conditions to enter a trade. We reasoned, "if we only if we could build the perfect correlation model between Southwest stock and Crude oil, or if the option skew is off by 0.50% in a OTM option strike in a really long-dated month, we could arbitrage this and make millions," 

 

Now the older I get, the dumber I realize that I am and I only hope to accelerate this learning of realizing how dumb I'm. I realize that I don't have the speed as the nimble high frequency trading companies who co-located their trading servers right to the exchange, my account is an speck of sand compared to the hedge fund/prop desks on Wall Street who can move mountains and my brain is a pea in comparison to the combination of econometrics/statistical analysis performed by those with Astrophysics PhD quants. 

 

I know nothing about the market and when I make a feeble attempt to guess where it's going, it's as good as a monkey's. So to protect myself from myself, I consider risk management and what-to-do after you enter a trade to be the most important. I follow about half of Kim's trades and honestly, he has had some bad trades (sorry Kim, but no one is immune to statistics).

 

But honestly his good trades/performance doesn't interest me, a monkey can guess correctly some of the time how a stock is range-bound and put on a iron condor and it'll get profitable most of the time. But the one time when it fails, it can wipe you out of the market for good. So honestly, I perk up when I see how Kim reacts to his bad trades, like the AAPL August calendar or the August RUT iron condor. There's no fun in watching someone pick up pennies in front of a slow moving steam-roller but it's more fun to see how they react when they are about to get run over - they get squashed completely or they manage a daring escape; either way, it'll be a poignant lesson for me as a bystander. 

 

More concretely, what I learned from SO is: trade adjustment, what to do when the stock moves against you; how to adjust your trade to still keep a favorable risk-reward ratio; overall portfolio management, how to balance your vega, delta positive trades against your negative one's to keep the whole porfolio as neutral as possible; thinking about risk, not to get hung up or married to a single position and learn to when to fold them and keep a steady routine of trade identification, trade management, trade exit and calm regardless of wild portfolio swings

 

Best,

PC

 

PC - I have read a few articles with a similar sentiment - essentially efficient market theory.  HOWEVER, perhaps someone can clarify something for me.  I also read folks like Jeff Augen and a few other authors who say that small time traders can have an edge in options because lit is difficult for large institutions to trade large volumes of option shares on anything but the handful of very big underlyings (SPX, SPY, VIX, AAPL).  The latter, Augen theory, is one that I had personally put some faith in.

 

 

BTW, what I am saying isn't entirely pertinent to this conversation, but I personally have been a member from the beginning.  Kim probably doesn't remember, but I won the contest to choose the site name :) 

In the last 10 months or so I haven't taken a single earnings trade and only entered one IC and one calendar.  The reason I continue to pay for this site is because Kim and many of the members are responsive, kind, and honest, and I learn alot from it.  Yes this is irrelevant to the portfolio and trade alert issue, but I'd give the site 5 stars just for the knowledge and community aspects.

 

Good luck to all of you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Pilgrim

Every member can handle the discussion topic as an alert and act on it. This is exactly the purpose of the discussion topic where I give guidelines on the trades and the suggested prices. What you suggest is a duplication of the discussion topic. 

 

If the discussion topics were actually as you describe them here all of this would be a moot point and a "duplication of the process." The discussion topics, however, are not consistently as you suggest...unless I'm just not reading them rightly. Take AAPL for example. In the initial post you said:

 

"I'm looking to enter the August/July 450 call calendar, currently trading around 5.50...I'm looking to enter in the next few days."

 

I (call me crazy) don't see that as a suggested entry price Kim. You are merely stating where the play is currently. "In the next few days" it could be anywhere (even though you did get in at 5.50).

 

Stating where the current price is and stating a suggested entry (or even a range for entry) are two different things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the discussion topics were actually as you describe them here all of this would be a moot point and a "duplication of the process." The discussion topics, however, are not consistently as you suggest...unless I'm just not reading them rightly. Take AAPL for example. In the initial post you said:

 

"I'm looking to enter the August/July 450 call calendar, currently trading around 5.50...I'm looking to enter in the next few days."

 

I (call me crazy) don't see that as a suggested entry price Kim. You are merely stating where the play is currently. "In the next few days" it could be anywhere (even though you did get in at 5.50).

 

Stating where the current price is and stating a suggested entry (or even a range for entry) are two different things.

Matter of interpretation. When I consider the trade too expensive, I specifically say so. For example:

 

This topic is to discuss the DIS trade.

The August 65 straddle trading around $2.73 implying 4.2% move, with IV around 24%. This is slightly cheaper than previous cycles. Backtesting shows good results. I would like to see the stock slightly closer to the strike and ideally the straddle trading around 4.0% IM which is $2.60

 

OR:

 

This topic is to discuss the PCLN trade.

The straddle usually did not make money, but the monthly straddle has lost less than the weekly which makes it a good candidate for a double calendar. Historically, entering when the spread was 0.4% or less produced good results. 0.4% means 3.50-3.60 price for the double calendar (890*0.4%). Currently the prices fluctuate between 1.80-1.90 so slightly higher than I would like to see, and 8 days is too early for a stock like PCLN which can move a lot. I will probably be waiting till Thursday-Friday and watch the prices. If I can get any of the spreads around 1.50, I will be entering before. I'm referring to long August (monthly) short August week2.

 

This guidance includes: 1) Historical analysis; 2) Preferred entry price; 3) Expected time to enter.

How much more guidance could I possibly give???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to throw my 2 cents in here.

 

I look at this site as an opportunity to watch a successful trader do his thing in as close to real-time as possible, with a willingness to provide insight and rationale for each trade.

 

I often see a trade discussion open up with an analysis of a trade that has not been made yet, often with a target price and strategy. Follow-on discussions may reveal further information about what makes this a good or poor possibility. This is about as close as someone can reasonably get to posting the trade before it happens.

 

I figure that I'm paying for the ability to watch over Kim's shoulder, and I hope to gain insight into what appears to be a successful trading strategy.

I've missed a lot of good trades because I was too cautious in chasing the trade. I have also missed some losers. If I can ride Kim's coattails while I learn and experiment, then I will not complain if I can't do *quite* as well as Kim. Perhaps someday I will. And that is an in-the-trenches sort of education that I am happy to have.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to throw my 2 cents in here.

 

I look at this site as an opportunity to watch a successful trader do his thing in as close to real-time as possible, with a willingness to provide insight and rationale for each trade.

 

I often see a trade discussion open up with an analysis of a trade that has not been made yet, often with a target price and strategy. Follow-on discussions may reveal further information about what makes this a good or poor possibility. This is about as close as someone can reasonably get to posting the trade before it happens.

 

I figure that I'm paying for the ability to watch over Kim's shoulder, and I hope to gain insight into what appears to be a successful trading strategy.

I've missed a lot of good trades because I was too cautious in chasing the trade. I have also missed some losers. If I can ride Kim's coattails while I learn and experiment, then I will not complain if I can't do *quite* as well as Kim. Perhaps someday I will. And that is an in-the-trenches sort of education that I am happy to have.

Thanks CJ that's basically what I wanted to say but I think you bring it much better to the point than me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One point worth making is that Kim can't always know what price he's going to get to enter or exit a trade, part of his approach seems to be to try limit orders at different levels until it finally gets executed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No more examples needed. Point taken: if there is any need for improvement it is on the part of the subscriber.

I never said that. In fact, I made a LOT of changes over the last year. The daily update for example is one of them.

 

btw, I suggest looking at the CF discussion to see how members booked 26% and 42% in few hours based on the discussions we had. I'm not even in that trade. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest jozsika

I've been following this discussion with great interest. Like many other "newbies", I too have struggled to replicate Kim's results. But I think the criticism I'm hearing of Kim's service is misplaced. Please let me explain.

 

The purpose of SO isn't just to follow Kim's trades. Steady Options teaches a technique that requires EACH of us to:

  • Identify suitable candidates for pre-earnings straddles, strangles, and calendar trades
  • Back-test trades to identify suitable risk/reward
  • Monitor the trades we're stalking for optimum entry points
  • Use options Greeks to track performance
  • Balance risk at a portfolio-wide level

When I look at the people who have been successful here, it is clear to me that each of them has been able to take these techniques and make them their own. In fact, a number of members enter trades earlier than Kim, or take on additional trades that are NOT part of Kim's official portfolio, but are based on the same underlying concepts. For me, this has been one of the strengths of this service.

 

Now let me be honest: I've had trouble being successful with this strategy. My portfolio is down a fair bit, largely because I took an over-large position on the AAPL calendar trade, and simultaneously got in the VIX and RUT trades that were pretty bad losers. I also failed to participate in the earlier VIX calendars, and some of the more successful straddles, which would have recouped some of my losses.

 

But this is not Kim's fault.

 

As it turns out, I'm pretty lazy when it comes to back-testing. I prefer to take Kim's word for it. And unfortunately, that makes it difficult for me to make this technique my own.

 

Marty Schwartz, the famous "Pit Bull", said that his goal in his first year as a trader was to find a trading style that suited him psychologically. Each of us has to judge for ourselves whether we're up to the task of back-testing, tracking Greeks, and so on. It may be that we're not – and BTW, there's nothing wrong with that! But if all we're doing is following Kim's trades and hoping to make 100% return every year, I'm afraid we're bound to be disappointed. 

 

 

Excellent post!

 

Thank you, Hal!

 

This is definitely a perspective I didn't have when joining and when trying to follow this service (I stopped it for now.)

 

I will think about this over the weekend and will decide what to do.

 

Here are some things I will consider (YMMV):

 

I was attracted to this service based on its published and marketed performance record.

 

What you are saying now (and you may be right) that it is up to ME to replicate that performance record. [And to some extent this is what Kim says too] So (1) I will have to find and allocate the time to learn the methodology; and (2) I will need to decide --based on the Forum discussions, torrents of daily e-mails we receive, the timing of these, etc, etc-- whether this trading style fits my life style or not.

 

I don't know the answer yet to either of these questions, I will think about it.

 

But. Something for our consideration. There is no question in my mind --and there shouldn't be any in yours-- that Kim is the master of these techniques both in theory and in practice (his lifestyle.)

 

So all what any of us can hope that we approximate his results and it will take months or years!

 

In this sense the marketing material is somehow misleading (no offense!) as it somehow implies that this is the performance I can expect! Also (again: no offense) the claim that 'you lose some, you win some, but based on examples on average you make as much money as I do' is a little bit of BS (sorry!) Sure, I can match your performance, after I build up your experience and match your lifestyle! When (according to your post) all what you need an occasional pit-break and an occasional lunch-break? Well, I need a pretty constant stream of work-breaks too :-)

 

And on the practical (materialistic) side: let's assume that I take a 2 week vacation, and read everything on these forums and all Kim's articles on SA. And I learn all the things (greeks, history, etc) that you so well summarized in your post. At that point what is the value I get for $125/month? The way you paint this subscription now is something like a continuing education class and not a service at all.

 

Somehow a balancing act for Kim (and he takes both sides, at his convenience.) He can either say that "I can teach you my methodology in practice and you will be able to match my performance" -- but then why is this a service? Publish a book, charge $100 for it, I buy it, end of story. Or he can say that you need me for $125/month because without my guidance there is no way you can do this. But then I need reproducible trade recommendation and not this fishing analogies.  You can't have both ways. I think. 

 

--joseph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joseph,

 

I think it really comes to expectations. I believe I'm very honest and transparent when it comes to expectations, you can read my post about expectations here.

 

So yes, SO does require time and effort commitment, and I realize it's not for everyone. Many services advertise "make 10% per month with no effort". I never did that, and if this was your expectation, then maybe SO is not for you. 

 

90% of retail traders lose money in the stock market. You know why? Because they give up too quickly. Success in trading requires long term commitment, determination and discipline. Unfortunately, many people concentrate on short term performance instead of investing in their education and build long term goals. New traders expect to make money with a new strategy after few months which is usually not realistic.

 

Getting good fills is part of the learning process. Over time when members gain more experience, they learn how to get better fills, when to chase a little bit and when to let it go. Many SO members started as complete novices and now they take the trades even before I do and get better results in some cases. But those things take time.

 

If you really believe that you can learn all we teach here from a book, then by all means, buy a book - you don't need SO. If you don't believe that SO helps you to become a better traders, then you don't need SO.

 

SO is a combination of continuing education class and a trading alerts service. It's up you what to take from it. Personally I think for all you get here $99 is a bargain (similar services charge 3-4 times that, PM me for some examples), but that's really up to you. You might also refer to this post for some thoughts about price of education.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/3/2013 at 1:30 AM, jozsika said:

I was attracted to this service based on its published and marketed performance record.

 

In this sense the marketing material is somehow misleading (no offense!) as it somehow implies that this is the performance I can expect! Also (again: no offense) the claim that 'you lose some, you win some, but based on examples on average you make as much money as I do' is a little bit of BS (sorry!) Sure, I can match your performance, after I build up your experience and match your lifestyle! When (according to your post) all what you need an occasional pit-break and an occasional lunch-break? Well, I need a pretty constant stream of work-breaks too :-)

I guess everyone sees what he wants to see.

 

FYI, I don't have any marketing material because I don't do any marketing. If I did, I would probably have double number of members and the subscription fee would be double as well. But if you do find it misleading, then maybe SO is not for you after all.

 

Here is what I present on the subscription page:

 

What do you get when you subscribe?

  •  10-15 trading ideas per month, mostly earnings trades and other non-directional strategies. 
  •  Full followup, including real time entry and exit alerts, rationale behind the trade etc. 
  •  24/7 access to members only forum and chatroom with dozens experienced traders. 
  •  High quality education, including basic concepts, risk management, the Greeks, etc. 
  •  Continuous learning and sharing resources, exploring different strategies. 
  •  A full access to us. You will be able to ask questions about all aspects of options trading. 
  •  Special brokerage commissions rates at ThinkOrSwim. 
  •  A complete portfolio approach and not just few Iron Condors each month. 
  •  Complete transparency. The performance data includes real fills, not hypothetical performance.

 

Please show me which part is misleading here.

 

On the performance page, commissions are mentioned not once but twice. They are mentioned in performance report.

 

P.S. I also believe you will have a hard time to find a similar discussion on any other service/forum (or whatever you prefer to call it). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest jozsika

Here is what I present on the subscription page:

 

What do you get when you subscribe?


t_unread.png Full followup, including real time entry and exit alerts, rationale behind the trade etc. 
t_unread.png Complete transparency. The performance data includes real fills, not hypothetical performance.

 

Please show me which part is misleading here.

 

 

These two.

 

 

These two combined imply for the (non-lawyer) reader that the performance data (mentioned in the second bullet) is based on the real time entry and exit alerts (mentioned in the first bullet.) And this is not the case.

 

Yes, legally this is not so. But this is the implication.

 

You are not sending out 'real time entry and exit alerts.' You are sending out 'instant notifications and confirmation about your trades.' I am not a copywriter, but you see what I mean. And sure, the rest is accurate about rationale, education, forums, access, etc. And those (as I always said and I repeat now) much appreciated!

 

Cheers,

 

--joseph 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if you had a chance to read this post - I think you should. As a reminder, some other services report performance as "The highest price the option achieves is recorded as the result since this was historically what the option price reached.", among other tricks.

 

Compared to those tricks, if the only misleading part in SO is the difference between 'real time entry and exit alerts.' and 'instant notifications and confirmation about your trades.' and you think it should be defined as 'continuing education class' and not a service, I think I can live with that.

 

At this point, we will have to agree to disagree. I really prefer to concentrate on finding us the best trading setups and responding to real questions from members and not analyzing semantic mumbo jumbo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest jozsika

 

Ok, I read it. What is your point? Looks like those [alleged] services disclose, transparently how they report performance. (How else would you know?) You just happen to disagree with their methods. As I do with yours.

 

Compared to those tricks, if the only misleading part in SO is the difference between 'real time entry and exit alerts.' and 'instant notifications and confirmation about your trades.' and you think it should be defined as 'continuing education class' and not a service, I think I can live with that.

 

Actually, I did not say that (i.e. the "only" part). You asked me a question and I answered it. If you accept my answer (if this is what you mean by "I can live with it"), there is no disagreement.

 

At this point, we will have to agree to disagree. I really prefer to concentrate on finding us the best trading setups and responding to real questions from members and not analyzing semantic mumbo jumbo. 

 

There is no reason to insult me. Again: you asked me a question, I answered it. I don't think that reporting something _before_ it happens vs. _after_, is a "semantic mumbo jumbo." You do. Fine.

 

And yes, as Pilgrim mentioned:
 

"I don't care to learn about options or their various strategies. In fact, I just want someone to book profitable trades into my account, because I also don't care why a trade is initiated or why they may/may not make money."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"disclose, transparently how they report performance?"

Well, not necessarily and not always. Sometimes you have to dig really dip to find that fine print saying "The highest price the option achieves is recorded as the result since this was historically what the option price reached." And when they report return on naked put or other margin trades as return on cash (showing 1,000%+ returns when the real return is ~10%), you need to understand "return on margin" vs. "return on cash" to see how deceiving this is. Are you comparing those methods with my method of "reporting something _before_ it happens vs. _after_"? Are you really putting them in the same category?

 

It was not my intention to insult anyone. I just don't see a difference between 'real time entry and exit alerts.' and 'instant notifications and confirmation about your trades.' 

 

You also need to understand that I have to be careful how I issue my alerts/notifications. I'm not a financial adviser, so I cannot say "buy xxx at $yyy". I know that some services do that, they are breaking the law. I'm not going to do that.

 

To emphasize again how I see things:

  • The discussion topic is to discuss trades, to provide as much information and guidelines as possible about the trade, to answer questions and to provide the necessary updates. In some cases there will be more information, in some cases less - the markets are dynamic and things change. Again, I'm trying my best to provide as much guidelines as possible, but sometimes there are limitations.
  • The trades topic is to share my trades and to show what was possible based on the information provided in the discussions topic. Members can select to act after the discussion topic has been posted, or after the trade topic has been posted, or start with half position first and then try to get into the second one. There are a lot of options how to manage the portfolio. I cannot tell members what to do.

 

Taking the last PCLN trade as an example, I provided the following guidelines:
 

Quote

Historically, entering when the spread was 0.4% or less produced good results. 0.4% means 3.50-3.60 price for the double calendar (890*0.4%). Currently the prices fluctuate between 1.80-1.90 so slightly higher than I would like to see, and 8 days is too early for a stock like PCLN which can move a lot. I will probably be waiting till Thursday-Friday and watch the prices. If I can get any of the spreads around 1.50, I will be entering before. I'm referring to long August (monthly) short August week2.

 

This guidance included: 1) Historical analysis; 2) Preferred entry price; 3) Expected time to enter.

So Thursday arrived, the price came down to 1.70-1.80 per spread and I entered the trade.

 

Now a simple question: what additional information/guidance would you expect in the discussion topic? If the information provided was enough, and you agreed with the thesis, what prevented you to place orders at 1.70-1.80 per spread? If the information/guidance was not enough, why didn't you request more details?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's easy and free!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By Ophir Gottlieb
      That's great, because it means there is discord, and discord, especially for Apple ahead of earnings has meant a repeating pattern for the clever trader to take advantage of. 
       
      One week before Apple's earnings would be January 25th, 2018. 

      Apple's Disagreement 
      Sometimes a bullish momentum bet works great -- and in fact, for Apple that has been a strong pattern ahead of earnings. But with a toppy market, sometimes a different approach can work as well. 

      It turns out, over the long-run, for stocks with certain tendencies like Apple Inc, there is a clever way to trade market anxiety or market optimism before earnings announcements with options. 

      This approach has returned 189% with 10 wins and 2 losses over the last 3-years. 

      The Trade Before Earnings 
      What a trader wants to do is to see the results of buying a slightly out of the money strangle one-week before earnings, and then sell that strangle just before earnings. 

      Here is the setup: 
       


      We are testing opening the position 7 calendar days before earnings and then closing the position 1 day before earnings. This is not making any earnings bet. This is not making any stock direction bet. 

      Once we apply that simple rule to our back-test, we run it on a 40-delta strangle, which is a fancy of saying, buying both the 40-delta call and 40-delta put, for a non-directional bet on volatility. 

      Returns 
      If we did this long strangle in Apple Inc (NASDAQ:AAPL) over the last three-years, but only held it before earnings, using the options closest to 14 days from expiration, we get these results: 
       
      AAPL
      Long 40 Delta Strangle   % Wins: 83.3%   Wins: 10   Losses: 2   % Return:  189% 
      Tap Here to See the Back-test
      The mechanics of the TradeMachine™ are that it uses end of day prices for every back-test entry and exit (every trigger). 

      We see a 189% return, testing this over the last 12 earnings dates in Apple Inc. 

      We can also see that this strategy hasn't been a winner all the time, rather it has won 10 times and lost 2 times, for a 83.3% win-rate on an one-week trade. 

      Setting Expectations 
      While this strategy has an overall return of 189%, the trade details keep us in bounds with expectations: 
            ➡ The average percent return per trade was 16.9% over 7-days. 
            ➡ The average percent return per winning trade was 21.8% over 7-days. 
            ➡ The average percent return per losing trade was -7.6% over 7-days. 

      We like the comfort of a trade that, when it loses, it isn't a disaster -- at least not historically. 

      Option Trading in the Last Year 
      We can also look at the last year of earnings releases and examine the results: 
       
      AAPL
      Long 40 Delta Strangle   % Wins: 100%   Wins: 4   Losses: 0   % Return:  98.2% 
      Tap Here to See the Back-test
      In the latest year this pre-earnings option trade has 4 wins and lost 0 times and returned 98.2%. 
            ➡ Over just the last year, the average percent return per trade was 22.3% over 7-days. 

      WHAT HAPPENED 
      We don't always have to look at bullish back-tests in a bull market -- sometimes a straight down the middle volatility pattern pops up. This is it -- this is how people profit from the option market -- finding trading opportunities that avoid earnings risk and work equally well during a bull or bear market. 

      To see how to do this for any stock we welcome you to watch this quick demonstration video: 

      Tap Here to See the Tools at Work 

      Risk Disclosure 
      You should read the Characteristics and Risks of Standardized Options. 

      Past performance is not an indication of future results. 
       
       
    • By Ophir Gottlieb
      These are all trade-able events, at anytime, without concern for earnings. Today we look at exactly what has worked for Apple (AAPL). 
       
      Take well bounded risk, small, and direction-less, and let a tweet, a news headline, an Apple headline, a day of pessimism or a day of optimism, whatever -- move the market, as it has so often in this new volatility regime.
      The Short-term Option Volatility Trade in Apple Inc 
      We will examine the outcome of going long a short-term at-the-money (50 delta) straddle, in options that are the closest to seven-days from expiration. But we have a rule -- it's a stop and a limit of 10%, and, we back-test re-opening the position immediately, as opposed to waiting for 5-days later. 

      Here is the stock chart for Apple since October 1st -- focus on the volatility, not the direction -- these are daily candles. 
       

      Chart from CMLviz.com

      We can volatility and a general downtrend, in fact, a 14% drop in less than 6 weeks. But let's not worry about direction, let's try to find a back-test that benefits from that volatility that is in fact up 92% in just six-weeks and takes no stock direction risk at all. Here it is, first, we enter the long straddle. 
       


      Second, we set a very specific type of stop and limit: 
       


      At the end of each day, the back-tester checks to see if the long straddle is up or down 10%. If it is, it closes the position, and re-opens at the same time, another long straddle, but this one now re-adjusted for what is the newest at-the-money strike price. 

      We have a full blown tutorial write up on this type of stop/limit behavior in the Discover Tab: Stops & Limits Roll Timing What does "open again at normal time" vs "immediately" mean? 

      The Results 
      We back-tested this only over the last six-weeks. We are hyper focusing not on a long drawn out pattern, but rather this time, right now, this period of volatility. 
       

       
      AAPL: Long 50 Delta Straddle   % Wins: 58.8%   Wins: 10   Losses: 7   % Return:  92% 
      Tap Here to See the Back-test
      The mechanics of the TradeMachine® are that it uses end of day prices for every back-test entry and exit (every trigger). 

      Notice that this has triggered a trade 17 times in the last six-weeks and while the stock has dropped 14%, the option strategy, which takes no directional positioning, is up more than 92% in six-weeks time. This is a fast moving, re-adjusting straddle. The idea is simple: 

      Take well bounded risk, small, and direction-less, and let a tweet, a news headline, an Apple headline, a day of pessimism or a day of optimism, whatever -- move the market, as it has so often in this new volatility regime. 
       

       
      Setting Expectations
      Since we use end of day open and closes, while this strategy has an overall return of 92%, the trade details keep us in bounds with expectations: 

            ➡ The average percent return per trade was 11%. 
            ➡ The average percent return per winning trade was 29.9%. 
            ➡ The percent return per losing trade was -16%. 

      Not only are we seeing a high winning percentage, but also that the average win is twice as large as the average loss. Further, this trade takes no stock direction risk at all. 
       
      WHAT HAPPENED
      When the market shifts, we need a minimum amount of data to adjust, and succeed. This is how people profit from the option market -- it's not luck, it's preparation. 
      Tap Here to See the Tools at Work 

      Risk Disclosure 
      You should read the Characteristics and Risks of Standardized Options. 

      Past performance is not an indication of future results. 

      Trading futures and options involves the risk of loss. Please consider carefully whether futures or options are appropriate to your financial situation. Only risk capital should be used when trading futures or options. Investors could lose more than their initial investment. 

      Past results are not necessarily indicative of future results. The risk of loss in trading can be substantial, carefully consider the inherent risks of such an investment in light of your financial condition. 

      Please note that the executions and other statistics in this article are hypothetical, and do not reflect the impact, if any, of certain market factors such as liquidity and slippage.
       
      Ophir Gottlieb is the CEO & Co-founder of Capital Market Laboratories. Mr Gottlieb’s learning background stems from his graduate work in mathematics and measure theory at Stanford University and his time as an option market maker. He has been cited by Yahoo! Finance, CNNMoney, MarketWatch, Business Insider, Reuters, Bloomberg, Wall St. Journal, Dow Jones Newswire, Barron’s, Forbes, SF Chronicle, Chicago Tribune and Miami Herald. He created and authored what was believed to be the most heavily followed option trading blog in the world for three-years.

      Related articles:
      The Incredible Option Trade In VXX Earnings Momentum Trade In Oracle Post Earnings Option Trade In Facebook Option Trade After Earnings In AutoZone Pre-Earnings Momentum Trade In Netflix Microsoft Pre-Earnings Momentum Trade Post Earnings Trade In FedEx Pre Earnings Pattern In Apple Earnings Momentum Trading In Google PANW Broke The Golden Rule How To Profit From PayPal Volatility
    • By Kim
      This options investment strategy involves buying "Deep In The Money" (DITM) options to limit downside risk while retaining the full benefits of the stock. The options are purchased at a lower cost than the actual stock but still receive close to a $1 increase for every favorable $1 move in the underlying security which increases the percentage return for the same dollar move.
       
      Advantages of stock replacement strategy:
      Keeps all benefits associated with trading the stock. Reduces costs associated with owning the stock. Offers more leverage by increasing the potential percentage return. Offers lower downside risk. Disadvantages of a stock replacement strategy:
      Needs good trading experience and skills to master the strategy. The strategy may fail, when the stock stays on (almost) the same price or moves sidewise. Leverage works both way - If the stock falls, the percentage loss is larger as well. Let's check how you could use this options investment strategy to reduce your cost of owning Apple. The stock closed at $174 yesterday.
       
      Experienced options traders are usually well aware of this strategy and make good use of it.
       
      Strategy No. 1: Buy 100 shares of the stock
      Buying 100 shares will cost you $17,400. Not cheap. If the stock rallies to $185, you have made $1,100 or 6%. Let's see how it compares with the stock replacement strategy.

      Strategy No. 2: Buy DITM call
      As an alternative to buying the stock, we can buy the AAPL July 20 2018 130 call at $45.47. The cost will be $4,547 which is about 26% of the cost of the 100 shares. The P/L graph looks like this:
       

      If the stock rallies to $185, you have made $1,030. This is slightly less than buying the stock, but percentage wise, it is a 23% gain, compared to the 6% gain when owning the stock. Of course the opposite is true as well - if the stock goes down, your percentage loss is much higher. 

      This is called leverage. It works both ways - you increase the reward if the stock rises and increase the risk if the stock falls.
       
      However, if the stock falls, the volatility should increase which actually helps our option price because increased volatility can cause option prices to increase or not fall as fast. So basically even though we will gain $1 for every $1 the stock increases we will lose slightly less than $1 for every $1 the stock drops.
       
      You might noticed that we gained only 93 cents for every $1 movement in the stock. This is due to the fact that the delta of the 130 call is 0.93. We could choose a call which is deeper in the money - it would have a higher delta and have a better replication of the stock movement. However, it would also be more expensive and provide less leverage. 0.90-0.95 delta provides a good compromise between 1:1 movement and a reasonable price.
       
      Now let's see if we can do better.
       
      Strategy No. 3: Buy DITM call and sell OTM call against it every month
      Here is how it works:
      Buy AAPL July 20 2018 130 call at $45.47 Sell AAPL Feb 16 2018 185 call at $1.55 We reduce the cost of our trade by $155 to $4,392, but we also limited our gains. The P/L graph looks like this:
       


      As we can see, we increased the maximum gain to $1,147. This gain is not only larger than the dollar gain from owning the 100 shares of the stock, but also translates to a cool 26% in one month. If the stock is below $185 by February expiration, we can repeat the process with the March options. If it is higher, you just close the trade for a gain and can roll to higher strikes.

      Of course if you believe that AAPL will be higher than $185 by Feb expiration, you will be better by just buying the DITM calls.
       
      Strategy No. 4: Buy DITM call, sell OTM call and buy OTM put
      Here is how it works:
      Buy AAPL July 20 2018 130 call at $45.47 Sell AAPL Feb 16 2018 185 call at $1.55 Buy AAPL Feb 16 2018 165 put at $2.07 Our cost now is $4,599, still significantly lower than owning the stock. The P/L graph looks like this:



      Our gain is now limited to "only" $900 (20%), BUT we also limited our loss to ~13% in case AAPL goes down after earnings. And if the stock really crashes, the position can actually produce some gains because at some point the long put will more than offset the losses from the long call.

      This is a variation of collar, where we replace the long shares with DITM call. 

      And this is the beauty of options. You have almost endless possibilities to structure your trade, based on your outlook and risk tolerance.
       
      Before investing any money, please make sure you understand what you are doing. Good luck.
    • By TrustyJules
      What drew me to this site was Kim professing to apply strategies or trading philosophies as set out in Jeff Augen's books. Besides many things posted on here he also devoted some chapters to stock pinning, i.e. on expiration some stocks tend to gravitate towards a particular strike price. AAPL was and is an example of a stock that often pins to a strike. Jeff did his research on 3rd Friday expiries but I thought to test his theory today for a bit of fun. The actual pinning effect is something I verified by charting minute by minute quotes for AAPL over two years. You get charts like these:
       

       
      Here you see the stock quote from March last year with the Y axis showing how far ($) away from the closest option strike the stock was and the X axis the number of minutes since trading started that day. This plunging chart is very frequent with AAPL as - from the stocks I was able to acquire minute by minute data from - it is the stock that most consistently shows this behaviour - it only failed twice in two years roughly (based on 3rd Friday expiries).
      Anyway I could never make use of this with my European broker because profits are small and trading is frequent - with minimum 36$ to open and close a position this wasnt feasible. Now I switched to a US broker this became a possibility. So for fun I tried this today on a non 3rd Friday expiry and I can say AAPL duly obliged:

       
      I picked up the trading at 11.40 AM EST - you can start earlier but this is usually a midday lull that creates a stable time to open your position. The strategy is to use ratio trades to make profits on low capital investment. The stock was around 208.40$ and in line with the strategy we guessed that 207.50$ mark would be the close hence OB 1 C 205 @ 3.34$ and OS 4 C 202.50 @ 0.93$ for a net credit.
      The stock duly obliged and tumbled; in fact below 207.50$ to 206.80$ or so by which time I closed the trade. Now we retained the theory that at close it would be 207.50 so this time we did a different ratio and sold the 2 C 202.50 @ 4.55$ and bought 4 C 205 @ 2.03 again for a net credit. AAPL proved particularly tractable and by 4.20 PM EST it was trading around 207.85$ so we closed. The 0.40$ credit on the 207.50$ calls beckoned again. Therefore we repeated the setup of the morning except this time of course the trade was a net debit.
      I watched smugly as AAPL duly converged back down to the strike price - with 9 minutes till session close I was reckoning to close at the last minute. Except... my internet went down at that moment with 4 ITM shorts! Slight panic - router reboot and thank goodness Internet worked again (ouf!) I closed out immediately just in case another gremlin would be thrown up. In doing so I gave up a little profit as AAPL closed at 207.53 $ like a champ of pinning.
       
      Profit from all this excitement: $ 362 after commissions - the capital outlay was never more than 2K (but this is a slight cheat because I have an AAPL long position in my portfolio) - anyway 18% in the day and a good bit of fun with a slightly unpleasant bit of excitement toward the end!
    • By Ophir Gottlieb
      There is a bullish momentum pattern in Apple Inc (NASDAQ:AAPL) stock 2 calendar days after earnings, if and only if the stock showed a large gap up after the actual earnings announcement. 

      This is a conditional entry -- the company reports earnings and if the stock move off of that report is a 3% gain or larger, then a bullish position is back-tested looking for continuing momentum. The event is rare, but when it has occurred, the back-test results are noteworthy. 

      Apple Inc (NASDAQ:AAPL) Earnings 
      In Apple Inc, if the stock move immediately following an earnings result was large (3% or more to the upside), if we test waiting two-days after that earnings announcement and then bought a three-week at the money (50 delta) call, the results were quite strong. This back-test opens two-days after earnings were announced to try to find a stock that continues an upward trajectory after an earnings rally. 

      Simply owning options after earnings, blindly, is likely not a good trade, but hand-picking the times and the stocks to do it in can be useful. We can test this approach without bias with a custom option back-test. Here is the timing set-up around earnings: 
       
          Rules  Condition: Wait for the one-day stock move off of earnings, and if it shows a 3% gain or more in the underlying, then, follow these rules:  Open the long at-the-money call two-calendar days after earnings.  Close the long call 14 calendar days after earnings.  Use the options closest to 21 days from expiration (but more than 14 days). 
      This is a straight down the middle direction trade -- this trade wins if the stock is continues on an upward trajectory after a large earnings move the two-weeks following earnings and it will stand to lose if the stock does not rise. This is not a silver bullet -- it's a trade that needs to be carefully examined. 

      But, this is a conditional back-test, which is to say, it only triggers if an event before it occurs. 

      RISK CONTROL 
      Since blindly owning calls can be a quick way to lose in the option market, we will apply a tight risk control to this analysis as well. We will add a 40% stop loss and a 40% limit gain. 
       

      In English, at the close of every trading day, if the call is up 40% from the price at the start of the trade, it gets sold for a profit. If it is down 40%, it gets sold for a loss. This also has the benefit of taking profits if there is a stock rally early in the two-week period rather than waiting to close 14-days later. 

      Another risk reducing move we made was to use 21-day options and only hold them for 14-days so the trade doesn't suffer from total premium decay. 

      RESULTS 
      If we bought the at-the-money call in Apple Inc (NASDAQ:AAPL) over the last three-years but only held it after earnings and after an earnings pop higher, we get these results: 
       
      AAPL
      Long 50 Delta Call   % Wins: 80%   Wins: 4   Losses: 1   % Return:  151.9% 
      Tap Here to See the Back-test
      The mechanics of the TradeMachine® are that it uses end of day prices for every back-test entry and exit (every trigger). 

      Looking at Averages 
      The overall return was 151.9%; but the trade statistics tell us more with average trade results: 
            ➡ The average return per trade was 46.54% over each 12-day period. 
            ➡ The average return per winning trade was 76.92% over each 12-day period. 
            ➡ The average return per losing trade was -75% over each 12-day period. 
       
      WHAT HAPPENED 
      Bullish momentum and sentiment after of earnings can be quite powerful with the tailwind of an earnings beat. This is just one example of what has become a tradable phenomenon in Apple. To identify patterns that have repeated over and over again, empirically, we welcome you to watch this quick demonstration video: 

      Tap Here to See the Tools at Work 

      Risk Disclosure 
      You should read the Characteristics and Risks of Standardized Options. 

      Ophir Gottlieb is the CEO & Co-founder of Capital Market Laboratories. Mr Gottlieb’s learning background stems from his graduate work in mathematics and measure theory at Stanford University and his time as an option market maker on the NYSE and CBOE exchange floors. He has been cited by Yahoo! Finance, CNNMoney, MarketWatch, Business Insider, Reuters, Bloomberg, Wall St. Journal, Dow Jones Newswire, Barron’s, Forbes, SF Chronicle, Chicago Tribune and Miami Herald and is often seen on financial television. He created and authored what was believed to be the most heavily followed option trading blog in the world for three-years.This article is used here with permission and originally appeared here.
    • By Kim
      Given the power of stock options to leverage your investment dollars, you might be tempted to bet on the AAPL earnings report coming out today by buying Apple calls (if you think the stock is going up) or Apple puts (if you want to bet that it will go down).
       
      That bet paid off handsomely in July 2016 when Apple reported earnings. The stock rose 6.5% the next day and the value of Apple’s weekly calls increased dramatically.
       
      But that’s the exception, not the rule.
       
      As I showed in one of my Seeking Alpha articles, buying either puts or calls just before Apple’s earnings report is, on average, a losing proposition.
       
      When you look at longer timeframe, AAPL tends to move less than expected. Take a look at the screenshot from optionslam.com, showing the post earnings movement of the stock in the last 10 cycles:
       

       
       
      The explanation for those numbers is simple. Over time, the options tend to overprice the potential post-earnings move. Those options experience huge volatility drop the day after the earnings are announced. In most cases, this drop erases most of the gains, even if the stock had a substantial move.
       
      The last column shows the one day post earnings performance of the weekly straddle. As we can see, it has lost money 8 out of 10 times. Which means that 8 out of 10 times the stock moved less than expected. If I had to choose, I would take the other side of the trade (selling those options).
       
      Jeff Augen, a successful options trader and author of six books, agrees:
       
      "Trying to predict the future is like driving down a country road at night with no headlights on and looking out the back window." - Peter Drucker
       
      Related articles:
      Is Your Risk Worth The Reward? Why We Sell Our Straddles Before Earnings Risk Reward Or Probability Of Success? Whatever You Do, Don't Do This Before Apple's Earnings How NOT To Gamble On AAPL Earnings  
      Want to learn how to trade options in a less risky way?
       
      Start Your Free Trial
       
    • By Ophir Gottlieb
      Here it is -- a portfolio of FAANG stocks using pre-earnings trading. A 3:30 video that is staggering and includes some robustness testing.
       
      Reminder that you can sign up for Trade Machine as a Steady Options member here:
      https://cmlviz.com/register/cml-trademachine-49-mo-promotion-so/
       
       
       
       
    • By Ophir Gottlieb
      Trading options pre-earnings -- 1 minute 25 second video. (example: $AAPL)
      As a Steady Options member, you can get a promotional price, here:
      Try the Back-tester
       
       
       
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.