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.

FrankTheTank

Option Alpha's Post/Backtest on Earnings Trades

Recommended Posts

For sure.  I just wish he was able to break down his study into sub-sets of stocks such as lower IV vs. higher IV or by option volume.   Clearly the stocks SO uses are better than this raw average but the question is why?    Just trying to figure things out from a fundamental level.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Flameirinhas said:

It would be good to see the broker paper to check the real prices filled and the commissions and fees included.

The screenshot of real prices are included in every trade alert. Commissions differ between brokers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, FrankTheTank said:

For sure.  I just wish he was able to break down his study into sub-sets of stocks such as lower IV vs. higher IV or by option volume.   Clearly the stocks SO uses are better than this raw average but the question is why?    Just trying to figure things out from a fundamental level.  

 

 

Well, the big difference is that all those "studies" use the whole universe of stocks, enter at certain dates, use EOD prices and exit a day before earnings.

We on the other hand enter only certain stocks that show good results in backtesting, enter only when the price is good compared to previous cycles, and manage the trades actively by taking profits when our profit targets are hit. Makes a world of difference.

I tried to post a comment on the article, but after showing "pending" for few minutes, it disappeared.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve actually done an analysis on all of Steady Options “calendar” trades dating back to the beginning, in 2011.

Came up with a 77% win rate and an average gain (including the losses) of 12.25%.

That is ridiculously good and almost too hard to believe..but it certainly is true.

I actually only trade calendars, straddles and strangles.   Nothing at all wrong with the other types of non-directional type trades..just my preference.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Options18 said:

I’ve actually done an analysis on all of Steady Options “calendar” trades dating back to the beginning, in 2011.

Came up with a 77% win rate and an average gain (including the losses) of 12.25%.

That is ridiculously good and almost too hard to believe..but it certainly is true.

I actually only trade calendars, straddles and strangles.   Nothing at all wrong with the other types of non-directional type trades..just my preference.

Some people just don't realize how unique is what we do in terms of returns and consistency. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a classic example how real trading is different from "studies".

On March 2 2:30pm we entered CPB straddle:

image.png

The price was 3.05 or 6.5% RV. We based our entry on the RV chart:

image.png

We exited the trade on March 3 10:05am for $3.45 credit, 13.1% gain

image.png

EOD price on March 2 was 3.40 and EOD price on March 3 was 2.95. The study using EOD prices would show 13.2% LOSS while our real trade was closed for 13.1% GAIN.

Two points that contributed to the difference:

  1. Based on historical RV charts, we would not even be entering this trade at 3.40.
  2. On the last day, we did not wait till the EOD and closed the trade in the morning.

This is just one example how a "study" can show dramatically different results from real trading.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a related note, posting dollar P/L is meaningless - this alone disqualifies the whole study. The only thing that matter is percentage amount. Why? Because in order to get objective results, you need to apply the same dollar allocation to all trades.

Now, lets take an example of stocks like AMZN and GM. AMZN straddle can cost around $200 and GM straddle around $2. If AMZN straddle average return was -10% or -$20 and GM average return was +50% or $1, the average return should be reported as +20%. In the study, it would be reported as -$9.5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/25/2020 at 9:25 AM, Kim said:

On a related note, posting dollar P/L is meaningless - this alone disqualifies the whole study. The only thing that matter is percentage amount. Why? Because in order to get objective results, you need to apply the same dollar allocation to all trades.

Now, lets take an example of stocks like AMZN and GM. AMZN straddle can cost around $200 and GM straddle around $2. If AMZN straddle average return was -10% or -$20 and GM average return was +50% or $1, the average return should be reported as +20%. In the study, it would be reported as -$9.5.

Yes.  Tasty trade does this too and it drives me crazy when they include AMZN in their limited studies.   You would think their team of "data scientists" would catch this and they probably do but I suspect Tom tells them how he wants the results to look and then they scramble around trying to make it fit his narrative.  

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, FrankTheTank said:

Yes.  Tasty trade does this too and it drives me crazy when they include AMZN in their limited studies.   You would think their team of "data scientists" would catch this and they probably do but I suspect Tom tells them how he wants the results to look and then they scramble around trying to make it fit his narrative.  

 

Well, I didn't want to mention tastytrade as some people say I'm biased. But since you did.. 

I have no idea why they do what they do. Presenting results in dollar terms is completely meaningless. Even if you backtest the same stock over 5 years period, and the stock price doubled, which probably caused the typical straddle price to change significantly as well. So if 5 years ago the straddle price was $10 and today it's $20, how does it help to compare the dollar P/L? it's comparing apples to oranges. Even on the same stock.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My basic thought on that article is that it didn't test SO's strategies or really anything all that close to them. Systematically and indiscriminately buying straddles on a predetermined universe of stocks X days before earnings and selling them Y day before earnings (or after earnings) is not what we do here. 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.