The first half of 2024 was very good for the 112 strategy. Here’s an analysis of real trades, plus some choices if the market had crashed.
So far…
Occasionally, it’s good to look back and see how a strategy is performing. A lot of traders reach out with questions about the 112 strategy, so it seems like a good time to share some good news. When things are going well, it can be good to review details and see what insights can be gained. It’s also a time to consider what could go wrong in the future. For six months this trade has made money every single time I’ve traded it. That doesn’t happen often with any strategy, so it’s worth taking time to discuss.
I’ve been trading the 112 strategy for quite awhile. I’ve written about it here. That page goes through all the mechanics of the trade, so I won’t repeat that in this post. Instead, we’ll dig into some real world examples and talk about how I chose to manage the trade in a few different scenarios, and answer some questions that I’ve been asked in other forums about worst case scenarios.
A Brief Review of the 112 Strategy
While I won’t repeat the page on the 112 strategy, let’s do a brief overview of what this option strategy involves. Typically, I trade this using /ES futures options on the S&P 500, but I know lots of traders who trade it with other underlyings. I open the trade between 55 and 120 days before option expiration. The three digits of 1, 1, and 2 represent three different put option positions being traded in a ratio of 1:1:2. The 1-1 parts of the trade are buying a 50 point wide put debit spread that costs about $10 to open, and then selling 2 puts that are selling for about $10 each. The net result is that the opening of the trade is around $10 credit. How do I find the right strikes? Just do a little trial and error in the option table to find strikes 50 points apart that are $10 difference in premium. You’ll notice in my results that I actually try to collect slightly more than a net of $10, by picking a put debit spread that is slightly under $10 and selling puts with a premium of slightly more than $10. I usually end up somewhere between $11 and $13 net credit to start. Since I am trading /ES, there is a 50x multiplier, so the actual dollar credit to the account is $550 to $650 with that level of premium.
Most of the time, this is a slow boring trade that slowly decays. If the market goes up, I can usually close the trade for about 20% of what I paid and keep 70-80% of the premium I collected. Often, I only buy back the 2 far out of the money puts, and keep the 1:1 put debit spread in place as cheap insurance. I almost always close the 2 far out short puts early before expiration, usually between half and 2/3 of the way to expiration from when I entered.
Occasionally, the market drops and as long as the drop is not super quick, I can often close the trade for a credit. This happens when the 1:1 put debit spread goes into the money, but the 2 short far out puts have not increased that much. This can get a little nerve-wracking, but this is where big money comes in and why it makes sense to trade the 112 vs just selling one put for $10 out of the money.
On rare occasions, which hasn’t happened this year so far, the market will drop quickly, and 112 positions that are new and haven’t had time to decay will lose money. The 2 short puts will jump in value faster and more than the 1:1 put debit spread increases. If the 2 short puts were ever to get in the money, the losses really explode to catastrophic levels. A trader never wants that to happen. This is what people constantly ask about, and rightfully so- what can I do to prevent my account from blowing up in this situation?
The Results
Here’s a table of trades opened in 2024 that were closed by early July. It seemed like a good time to show this concept. There’s nothing special about the sheet- I just made columns for things I thought were important so I could look back later and see what I could learn. Others may track in different ways.
Most of the trades I chose were the 112 strategy, but you can see I sprinkled in a few 111s. The 111 trades were typically entered when the market was a little down and IV was up, giving me a little cushion on entry. You can also see that I varied the DTE entry, with many trades in the 50-65 DTE range to open, and others well over 100 DTE. Longer duration trades use less SPAN margin on futures and allow the far out puts with much lower strikes, but also a bit slower decay.
You can see that most trades were closed between 50 and 75% of the initial duration. In most cases, well over half the premium was kept. I’ve shown the initial premium collected and then the debit that was paid to close, or in several cases, there are negative numbers that mean I actually collected a credit to close, double-dipping with a credit to open and a credit to close.
From the data, you can see three different types of outcomes as mentioned earlier. When the market was on a sustained up move from opening, the trades were usually closed with about 70-80% of the initial credit kept. The trades could have been held to expiration, but closing them or just closing the far out put freed up capital to start new trades. Often, the put debit spread, the 1-1 of the 112 strategy was kept as insurance as there was usually very little value left in those two strikes.
When the market dipped in April, the opportunity came to close several 112 strategy positions for a credit. As price dropped to approach or even go below the upper strikes of the put debit spread, and the far out puts that had decayed already stayed at a low value, the net result was put debit spreads that were worth more than the 2 far out of the money puts combined. I generally watched the Delta values along with Theta to decide when to exit. I didn’t want to let the market get too close to my 2 far-out puts, and I also didn’t want the market to go up past my put debit spread before I closed the trade. You can see several trades that closed in that time frame with a credit, some close to the credit that was collected to start. One trade actually had a bigger credit to close than was received to open. I didn’t try to hold any of these trades to expiration and pin a maximum credit of $2500 per contract- the value of a $50 spread with the multiplier of 50 from /ES, it just never seemed like a position was going to settle there. In hindsight, I don’t think any of them would have- the market came back up not long after I closed the winning credit 112 positions.
There were two trades that are highlighted that were closed for less than 50% of the credit received. These were trades where the market dropped almost right away after the trade was entered. In these cases, when the put debit spread was breached, the 2 far-out puts were also gaining considerable premium. I decided to get out while the trade had a profit and not chance a further decline that could quickly explode to the downside. On one of these positions, I closed the put debit spread, and rolled out the 2 far-out puts to 151 days at a much lower strike, collecting $20 premium and buying a $10 put debit spread for an unconventional trade that closed three months later for a nice profit. So even the “bad” 112 strategy trades turned out okay.
What if…?
Clearly, it could have been worse, and the market could have fallen much faster, leading to big losses. I’m often asked, how can someone manage those kinds of really bad situations with this trade. I have three ways that are very different and each appeal to a different type of trading style.
Set a stop loss, either mentally or with your broker. Many traders I know will set a stop loss at 1x the maximum gain, which for 1 /ES contract of the 112 strategy is typically around $3000. Given that the average gain per contract was around $400, a trader needs at least 7-8 wins for every stop loss just to break even. But considering that it is possible to go a year or more without a loss, that isn’t bad odds. Just know that when the losses come, they are likely to come in numbers, so seller beware.
Define the risk by buying a protective put way below at the opening. This is the whole point of the 1122 and 1111 trades. Losses could be much larger than the stop loss tactic above, but losses are limited to the width between the double credit spread created way out of the money. Some traders add an additional put to make the strategy 1-1-2-3, with the idea that a very, very bad market drop could make the three cheap puts end up worth more than the two short puts- a reality if the market drops 30% within a few months. Besides still having a big maximum loss, adding long puts reduces Theta, so overall decay is slower. But for the once a decade event that crashes the market, this could save a disaster.
Get creative and roll the short put that is being tested way out and down for a credit. Bet that the market will turn around and give back all the losses that were taken. If possible, buy a new 50 wide put spread above the new strikes for $10, creating a new 112 strategy. This is the tactic I used on April 22. It worked out, but I wouldn’t recommend it. Most traders take their losses and move on, and consider this type of loss rolling irresponsible.
So there you have it. A variety of 112 strategy trades from the first half of 2024. Plus a reminder of things that might be done when the market has its eventual down move that is much worse than the little spring dip of this year. Happy trading everyone!
Follow-up note: As with many things, timing is important in trading. Within a few weeks of publishing this post, the market had the fastest spike in Implied Volatility ever recorded, and anyone with significant holdings in naked options, and especially the 112, likely took significant, if not catastrophic losses. In August 5, 2024 pre-market trading, VIX spiked to 65, although the market was only down a moderate amount. Stock traders shrugged, but option traders, especially short in futures options saw premiums explode to extreme levels. Short traders saw margin requirements explode and marked positions move to 10, 20, 0r even 30 times the initial amount collected in losses they couldn’t escape in illiquid markets.
Many seasoned traders I know saw their accounts reduced by 30-50% overnight with their brokers liquidating positions to satisfy margin requirements. In short, the debit side of this trade didn’t provide the promised protection during this event. Many traders, including me, saw big losses even though the debit spread didn’t even go in the money and the short puts were still well out of the money. It was the implied volatility that did the positions in, not the actual underlying market indexes.
I’ve written a separate longer analysis of this situation and the take-aways that all option traders should take from this. While this event was unprecedented, due to the amount of trading now done in options, I suspect that there will be similar, if not worse, events on occasion in the future.
Most people have full time jobs. Can someone manage an options portfolio and work full-time without watching the market all day? I say yes.
Most people have full time jobs that don’t involve the financial markets. Can someone manage an options portfolio and work full-time without watching the market all day? I say yes, and they may do even better than a full time trader. The reasons may surprise you.
For several years I was a full time options trader, watching positions in a bunch of accounts, adjusting every day as the markets moved. Many of my positions were short duration, which meant that I needed to stay on top of them. Much of my strategy involved rolling to avoid getting to expiration or to keep my strikes out of the money. There were lots of good reasons to spend the day reviewing every position in every account to determine if any adjustments were needed. And I enjoyed it. It was fun managing accounts that were growing and generating the income I needed.
But in 2022, I had a series of events that drained my accounts that provided my spending money. (Separately, I’ve written about my lessons learned in 2022.) I’m not yet to the age where I can take money out of my retirement accounts without penalty, and I didn’t want to get into Substantially Equal Payment Plans (SEPP) to commit to withdrawls- that’s a big topic for another day in itself. The bear market coincided with some unexpected expenses, so I liquidated most of the liquid accounts I had available at bad times. My accounts that had been providing nice streams of income lost a lot of value when I needed them most. So as the year came to a close, it was clear I needed to get a “real” job again.
Changing to a full time “real” job
In January of 2023 I started working full-time, a typical 9-to-5 job. But I still had a number of accounts to manage, a combination of retirement accounts and leftovers from my cash/margin accounts that I hadn’t completely used up. (I didn’t go broke, I just wasn’t flush enough to live off my accounts that I could draw from.) I had to have a different approach to account management- the days of full-time trading were over.
I still wanted much of my portfolio to be option-based. I’ve seen how options give me leverage and the ability to manage in any type of environment. But I knew that my approach to managing daily had to dramatically change. I couldn’t watch the market and do my job, so I needed to completely change my trading routine.
First, I decided to stop all 1 DTE and 0 DTE trades. Honestly, these had not been that profitable and were the most time-consuming positions I had been trading. It was almost like I had been trading them to keep my day completely filled with activity. If you read about my 1 DTE Straddle management approach, you’ll see that I try to take profit and adjust positions throughout the day, which is very time-consuming. 0 DTE trades are just as time-consuming for most strategies. I know some traders open a position and set up stop and profit limit orders and go about their day, but even that seemed like more than I wanted to do. So, no more expiring option trades.
Next, I moved all my shorter duration trades out in time. I was doing some 7 DTE put spreads, rolling almost every day. These were problematic in the 2022 bear market anyway, so it wasn’t a hard decision to get rid of them. I also decided to mostly stop doing 21-day broken butterfly trades. This was a harder decision, as I’ve had good success with defending these even in tough times, but I knew that I just didn’t want that responsibility to keep an eye on them.
So, I was left with positions mostly 4-7 weeks from expiration- put spreads, iron condors, covered calls, covered strangles, some 1-1-2 ratios, and some long duration futures strangles. All these trades are far enough out in time that a move during the day won’t be a huge loss or need an immediate adjustment.
Initially I thought I’d try to spend a half hour each morning when the market opened before I started my job. For a few weeks I did this, but I found that my work often required me to be available for an early call during that time, or there were urgent items that couldn’t be delayed, and that time wasn’t available. I’d miss a day, then it was two or three in a row, and I realized I needed to be able to have an approach that could go several days at a time without requiring action. But, I also noticed that missing several days wasn’t hurting my market results, especially in a choppy market.
Since almost all my trades are based on profiting from premium decay, time is my friend. I need time to pass and the market to remain somewhat stable. Getting away from the daily noise of the market up for some reason one day and down the next for another reason helped remind me that selling options is about being patient. It also reminded me that market movements are mostly noise that is statically insignificant. If I don’t react to every move, the market tends to chop up and down and not really move that much or that fast over time, which is exactly what a seller of options needs.
My new routine
With time, I’ve settled into a trading routine of doing a thorough review of all my positions about once a week. For positions in the 4-7 week to expiration window, I like to roll and adjust Delta about once a week, essentially kicking the can down the road, trying to pick up a percent or two of return on capital each time. Timing isn’t critical, but I want to keep my spreads in the sweet spot where they decay the most, with short strike’s Deltas in the high teens to low twenties. I’ve written about this in many posts that address best Deltas for put spreads.or for rolling put spreads. I’m leaving a bit of money on the table, missing the very best timing, but I’m making up for that by not over trading, which I clearly was in 2022.
Some of my longer duration trades, that are 2-4 months out, can go weeks or even a month or more without an adjustment roll. My weekly checks just make sure that they are not getting close to being tested or getting to a duration that I want to extend. My philosophy with those positions is an “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” approach. So, not much to do with these.
So, it takes me about an hour a week to make adjustments during market hours. I find a break in my day, or a day when I can get trades in early before my work day starts. I’ve been surprised at how manageable it all is. I’ve realized that when the day comes that I don’t need a job anymore, I will be able to manage my trades with a lot less time than I was using the last several years. I don’t plan to ever trade all day long again.
Results
The great news is that I’m very happy with my results. My most aggressive accounts have been pulling in about 10% returns each month so far in 2023, and all my accounts are handily beating the market. So, I’m very happy with my new approach. I know that the market isn’t always this calm, but I also know from 2022’s bear market that longer duration trades in high volatility have much better outcomes than short duration trades, so I’m confident that this approach would have done well in that environment, better than I did trading every day with short duration trades.
In 2022 I had a rough year in many ways, but also had many successes, and need to take away some lessons from it.
Moving into a new year, it is always good to review trading in the past year to see what can be learned. 2022 is no exception. I had a rough year in many ways, but also had many successes, and need to take away some lessons from it.
Overview
2022 was a bear market year. Coming into the year, I was trading some very aggressive, short-duration bullish options positions, despite lots of warnings of troubles on the horizon. This resulted in a big loss in January and February, until I adjusted to a more neutral approach. However, I got away from many core philosophies and still didn’t recover as well as I could have.
What didn’t work and why
My biggest losses came from three main strategic mistakes, one that was new to me, and two that I should have know better. The new one was selling short duration without an appropriate exit strategy. The old should have known better losers were trading options on individual stocks and selling calls too close to the money.
Short duration trades
In 2021 I rode the bull market with a trade that was perfect for an almost straight up market, the 7 DTE rolling put spread. I’ve written about it, and you can read about how great it worked. However, when the S&P 500 went down over 400 points in a month at the beginning of 2022, there was no defense with the strategy of rolling. Because I had so much success with selling 7 DTE put spreads, I was reluctant to admit that the strategy wouldn’t work. I wasn’t prepared for a move down that didn’t bounce back. We had plenty of warning that the Federal Reserve was going to stop pumping money into the economy and instead raise interest rates and reduce the money supply. But, I left myself exposed with lots of short duration put spreads as the year began.
I tried to fight the down moves with rolls and a variety of other tricks I’ve used over the years, but there really was no defense for short puts close to expiration in a plummeting market. As I’ve come to learn, in down markets puts can be underpriced for the risk, and short duration puts can actually be a good buy. The book “The Second Leg Down: Strategies for Profiting after a Market Sell-Off” by Hari Krishman details a number of studies to back this up.
I’ve heard from a number of people that they had success with short duration options even in 2022 by going a little further away from the current price and either holding or using stop losses to keep losses from getting too big. But, I didn’t do that. Later in the year I tried to get back into selling some short duration options and got burned again. My style of rolling is just not a good fit for short duration options.
So, as expiration approaches, there is a lot of time decay that is very tempting to take advantage of. The flip side is that to get that decay, options must be sold quite close to the current price making them susceptible to a sharp move. Short term move of several times the expected move are not uncommon, especially in a bear market. For me, the returns are not worth the risk. My temperament is just not set up for this kind of trade.
More time gives more forgiveness. Looking to reduce risk from short duration options, I’ve focused studying ways to get the most out of longer duration options. I’ve done additional research on optimal Delta for selling put spreads at different time durations to maximize Theta. I’ve also gotten back to waiting for down days to sell bullish put strategies.
The only short duration trade I’m currently doing is an opposite trade to most of my other strategies. I’m buying 1 DTE straddles, as I’ve written about in a previous post. So far, so good with that.
Selling Calls too Close to the Money
Even in a bear market, selling calls can be painful. In a bear market there are often large counter-trend rallies where calls with strike prices close to the money quickly end up in the money. Implied volatility on index options is almost always significant skewed to the downside, making calls cheaper than puts. Selling the lesser call premium tends to not be adequate for the risk of a big rally. When I combine selling calls close to the money and with fairly short duration, I set myself up to be whip-sawed back and forth, reacting to each move in ways that locks in losses each way.
Ideally, I want to have positions outside of the market moves, far enough away in time and price distance that day to day price changes have little impact on me and I can just wait for time decay to work my option prices down over time. Puts tend to have more strategies that can be profitable when selling than calls. If you don’t believe this, just try back testing short option strategies and see if you can find one where calls beat puts- I haven’t found one.
Selling Options on Individual Stocks
I’ve written a number of times about how indexes are much less likely to have extreme outsized moves than individual stocks. 2022 is a great reminder of that. Many formerly valuable stocks lost well over half their value during the year, and a number of them lost over 90% of their value. I was exposed to some of this mayhem when I sold puts well out of the money on a few that seemed like they couldn’t miss, but then did.
I completely botched a trade on a company that I really like. Generac makes back-up generators as well as systems that store and manage electricity generated from solar panels. With the electrical grid getting less reliable, people are in need of their products. So, to mix it up a bit, I sold at $20 wide put spread in the low 200s early in the year after the stock had fallen significantly and seemed to be on an upward trajectory. Despite all their success in the market, the stock slowly declined, and I found myself rolling my position down and out a few times. Then, I made the fateful decision to sell my long put of the spread and switch from a put spread with $20 risk, to a naked put with a strike price of $200, cash secured. I figured that the stock was surely at the bottom of its range, and I wouldn’t mind owning it if it dropped a little more. Then Generac announced that they were going to miss earnings substantially because of a lack of installers available to deliver and install their equipment at residences. Overnight the stock dropped 30% after previously losing over 20%. Before I knew it, I was stuck obligated to buy a $100 stock for $200. I tried to roll out, but there were no takers to make a trade. I was assigned the shares, losing $10,000 per contract on a trade that originally had a max loss of $2,000 per contract. Multiple bad ideas- individual stock risk, getting cute when tested, not accepting a loss and moving on.
I also sold puts on ARKK, the Ark Innovation ETF. It’s not an individual stock, but it is a volatile managed fund of a relatively small number of innovative companies. Again, I thought that we had seen the worst of the market drop, especially for this fund, and I sold cash secured puts in the middle of the year. Since then, the stock has fallen by half- I had about a 10% cushion to start, but that is long gone and now I have shares.
There are some others that weren’t that bad, but the conclusion is the same. Options on major indexes are much less likely to be hit by outsized moves, particularly if there is a decent amount of time until expiration and the strikes are well out of the money. That is one of my core mantras and I strayed at my own peril.
What went well
Fortunately, not everything went as badly as the trades described above. I re-discovered some strategies that I had stopped using that worked well, and started using some new strategies that I was either skeptical of or unaware of prior to putting them into practice.
Selling Long Duration Puts
I’ve sold puts well out of the money well out in time many times in the past, but the allure of big Theta from short duration started getting the best of me. Why sell at 6 weeks or 12 weeks when we can make bigger returns selling at one week? Well, lots of reasons. Short duration takes lots of effort and is much more stressful. It doesn’t take a big move to blow past strikes that have value less than a week until expiration, while positions outside of the expected move a month or more out in time are much less impacted.
With positions 4 to 6 weeks out or even more, we get more consistent results and can reduce volatility of the portfolio. When a big move happens, we can wait a few days to see if the move reverses before making any adjustments. Often it does and there is no reason to intervene.
I’ve found that I can still sell spreads with Delta values in the teens that are in their maximum percentage of decay weeks or even months before expiration. While the percentage return isn’t as high as short duration, it is more consistent and higher probability of being positive. It isn’t exciting, but that’s okay.
Put Ratio Trades
The most popular page on my site every month is my explanation of how I trade broken wing butterflies. For a while I got away from trading this, chasing some other “shiny object.” I re-started trading the strategy and got back to winning. I have been a little more opportunistic with this strategy, opening on down days to get my strikes lower with higher IV, but the trade is high probability with rapid decay. The way I trade it seems to be just far enough out in time to buffer it from the volatile weeks that have come along regularly in 2022.
I’ve also had good success with the other put ratio cousins of this trade, the broken wing condor (or 1-1-1-1), and the 1-1-2-2 trade. The common thread to each of these is that there are two competing spreads in each case. I start with a debit put spread, typically where I buy a 25 Delta put and sell a 20 Delta call which acts as protection for a higher priced and wider credit put spread at lower delta values. The wider and lower Delta valued credit spreads decay faster than the narrow debit spread, and often switch from a negative value overall position when sold to a positive value position that I can sell to close prior to expiration. This happens when the wide credit spread decays to the point that it has less value than the narrower debit spread. So, I often collect cash when I open and collect cash when I close these.
Finally, I’m seeing success in the naked versions of these trades as well. Instead of having two spreads, I sometimes skip using the low long leg of the credit spread and go with selling a naked put. This leaves me with a debit spread protecting a naked put or two below it. So I end up with 1-1-1 or 1-1-2 versions of the above trades- true ratio spreads. These have undefined risk to the downside unless cash secured, and I trade them on margin. That ties in nicely with some of my other take-aways.
Using Futures Options to Pump Up Returns
After avoiding futures for many years, I’ve really become fond of them. I avoided them because I didn’t see the strategic value of buying or selling futures contracts on an index or commodity. I was also scared by the risk of aggressive use of SPAN margin. But what I’ve found is that futures options in particular allow me to sell high probability positions for very low amounts of capital, and then allow me to buy or sell actual futures contracts to use as a hedge and neutralize overall Delta. It can get complex very quickly and a trader has to be avoid building a house of cards that could collapse in a outsized market event. But when used with care, futures options and futures themselves provide valuable tools to increase returns.
I haven’t written much about the use of futures strategies on this site because I’m still working to distil the approaches into content that can be readily applied. Risk vs reward becomes much more significant with futures options, so risk management becomes a primary consideration in every trade and isn’t something to jump into without a comprehensive understanding.
All that said, I’m finding futures options allow me ways to magnify returns and also hedge my risks. I’ll be writing more in subsequent strategy discussions, but if you look at pages on four different underlying types and four levels of risk, there’s some initial content to consider. One specific hedge trade I’ve started using, the 1 DTE Straddle, came from my futures experience.
Selling Naked Futures Options
One place where I’ve found success with futures options is selling naked options well out of the money well out in time. Because of SPAN margin, these trades don’t require much capital. They also don’t move that much because of the long duration. I’m finding trades with lots of decay and really seeing the appeal of naked options. Long duration and low deltas cushion the positions from big day to day moves and give me plenty of warning to adjust when needed. While spreads have windows where they can be rolled for credit and other Delta values where they can’t, naked options can always be rolled out in time for credit. The issue is that some rolls are more lucrative than others.
So I finally see the flexibility and adjustability that naked options provide in defending against big price movements. The key is to manage size to keep risk reasonable.
Naked to me involves a variety of strategies from selling a single option, to selling the naked put ratio trades mentioned above. As I better define consistent management and hedging approaches to these trades, I’ll explain my naked strategies in more detail.
Using Research to Test Strategies
Finally, I’ve re-discovered the importance of doing my own research to understand trades I’m doing. I’ve shared many of my insights on this website, but I always have new ways to look at trade set-ups, impact of management, and understanding risk. I’ve written about the sources I use to research the market, and I still use the same primary approaches. I use current option tables, I do backtests, I analyze historic trends, and I model potential outcomes.
Sometimes it is easy to get caught up in what I’m doing every day and not stop and ask if the approaches I’m using at the moment are really valid. I don’t look to see if there is a better way. Research keeps me fresh, and often validates findings I’ve observed in the past, but strayed away from in my current trading. So, constantly looking at data from different strategies in different ways actually keeps my trading focused on approaches that work.
I also find that the biggest beneficiary of the studies I share is me. Writing things down to share makes me double check my work and get clearer as to what I’m doing. Sometimes in the course of providing data for a trading approach I’m doing; I realize that I could do better, and revise based on what the data says.
I also get a lot of inspiration from other sources- groups I’m a part of and sites I follow. My favorite source of inspiration continues to be TastyLive, which I often have playing in the background while I trade. I interact with a lot of other traders which also helps. I’ve written about the value of community in the past.
So my final thought is that I need to challenge myself to always keep learning and base my trading strategies focused on proven approaches with high probability of success and manageable risk.
I’ve noticed some put spread rolls collect more credit than others. This study shows that there is an ideal Delta for rolling put spreads
After trading put spreads for several years, I’ve noticed that some rolls collect a lot of premium credit, and others are a struggle to collect any credit at all. I decided to study this to see if I could find if there is a “sweet spot” for rolling put spreads based on Delta values. I’m happy to report that there is.
It’s no secret that if a put spread gets fully in the money, it is impossible to roll to the same strikes in a later expiration for a credit. But when a spread is out of the money, I’ve seen a wide variation in credit when I roll, and I’ve often thought that there must be a best place to make a roll to get the most credit. If there is, I could devise a strategy to take advantage. So, I copied some option tables into Excel and pivoted the data a few different ways to figure out how premium from rolls vary.
Before jumping into the study, let’s discuss what rolling option spreads involves and why we might do it when a spread is out of the money. Rolling is one three ways to manage an exisitng trade- I covered the three ways in the page on managing by holding, folding, or rolling. One of my common management techniques is to continuously roll a position- I let the short spread decay in value, then roll it out in time to get more premium, and then let it decay all over again. Just repeat over and over. For those not familiar with the roll concept, rolling means executing a trade where an existing position is closed and a new position is opened all at once in one trade. The new options may be at the same strikes, which would be rolling “out,” or the strikes may be higher, which would be rolling “up and out,” or we could also roll “down and out.” Rolling a credit put spread that is out of the money out to the same strikes, will almost certainly generate a credit, which is the goal of this strategy. I’ve discussed this -approach in detail in other pages of this website, including roll for 6 percent a week, goals for rolling Iron Condors, the power of rolling Iron Condors, and rolling losing positions.
Rolling Spreads in the Study
I looked at a lot of different combinations of rolls, different durations, different times between durations, and I saw similar results. In the interest of keeping this write-up from getting lengthy, I’m choosing to just show a few examples.
7-10 DTE Roll
While I don’t trade a lot of options with durations of a week or less, I thought it would be good to look at this timeframe as the lower end of timeframes where we get outside of current week expirations. The following chart shows all the available combinations of 40 wide 7 days to expiration (DTE) SPX credit spreads rolling to the same strikes at 10 DTE.
Rolling out from 7 DTE to 10 DTE has the best credit when the 7 DTE short strike is between 10 and 20 Delta. Note that the Theta peaks at a slightly higher Delta.
I’ve shown the net credit for each roll combination, as well as the raw Theta difference for each existing 7 DTE 40 point wide spread. The x-axis is the Delta of each 7 DTE spread. The roll credit is shown on the left axis, and the net Theta is shown on the right axis. Looking at a peak value of approximately $1.20 per roll, we would collect 3% of the 40 wide spread. Meanwhile, the peak Theta of around $0.45 per day would equate to 1.1% of the width. So, holding might get a similar daily return, but with increasing risk as expiration approaches, but a roll would allow us to collect 3% and still collect additional Theta over again. Actually, that’s double counting. The Theta would just be the decay of the premium we are collecting. Just a few ways to think about the transaction. We can also look at actual strike prices and look at a few other values.
This graph shows roll credit plus Delta and Theta values for the positions
On this next chart, I’ve shown the x-axis as the strike price of the short put of the credit put spread. I’ve also added the Delta values of each of the puts for the 7 DTE spread as well as the Delta of spread position. In addition to the net Theta of the 7 DTE spread, I added the net Theta of the 10 DTE spread that we would roll to. So, each strike price on the x-axis is tied to six different pieces of data for a potential spread roll. While the roll premium and net Theta of the 7 DTE spread is the same information as the previous graph, the additional data can add more context.
Note that the Theta values of the longer duration spreads are generally lower than shorter. That should be expected. More time means slower decay. But the new spread will have a slightly higher Delta, which moves the peak of the Theta curve down in strike prices, because as we have seen in our study on maximizing Theta for a put spread, Theta tends to max out at short Deltas around 20, which will be further down after a roll. So, note from the chart that the maximum roll premium lines up for the most part with the maximum Theta of the spread we are rolling to.
The take-away from the Delta information on the chart is that as we get closer to the current price and have higher Deltas, the net Delta goes up, and the value of rolls goes down. Also, if Delta gets too low, there isn’t as much premium available in a roll to the same strike prices. I picked out the Delta values of the spread with the highest roll value, and it is approximately 14 Delta on the short strike and 8 Delta on the long strike.
So, the ideal scenario is to start with Deltas of around 20/13 and see the positions decay and Deltas to decline to 14/8, and then roll out to new strikes with Deltas of 20/13. If only the market would cooperate with our plan and let us do this all the time. Obviously, the market isn’t that consistent, so we have to manage in other ways.
Sometimes, we may want to roll down and out. Let’s look at the premium for 40 wide spreads and see what is possible if we want to collect a credit.
Looking at the premium differences, we can see opportunity to roll down at some strikes more than others.
On the above chart, I have plotted the premium value of 40 wide put spreads at 7 and 10 DTE, along with the premium collected to roll out to the same strikes. I’ve also highlighted possible rolls down and out. The highest strike where it is possible to roll down a strike and collect a credit is to go from 3920/3880 at 7 DTE to 3915/3875 for a 10 cent credit. When a spread is being tested, every bit helps, but clearly this roll doesn’t give the position much more breathing room. On the other hand, if we had the 3800/3760 spread, we could roll down 25 points to 3775/3735 for no cost. So, again it pays to stay away from being tested. But at this short of timeframe, it doesn’t take much of a move to get a spread in trouble, so let’s look at how a little longer duration would fare.
21-42 DTE
Let’s look at an example that generally matches up with the common strategy often associated with TastyLive.com. Interestingly, values peak out at about the same place based on Delta.
This example shows rolling from 21 DTE to 42 DTE, essentially doubling the time until expiration.
Again, the best premium for a roll is in the mid to low teen values of the Delta value of the short strike of the 21 DTE spread. Here we are collecting just over $6.00 to roll our 100-wide put spread out to 42 DTE. In that case, we would be collecting an additional 6% of the width of the spread. The 21 DTE spread would be decaying about $0.30 per day, so the roll allows us to collect around 21 days of decay in cash.
Notice that the observations we made on the 7-10 DTE roll hold almost exactly the same on the 21-42 DTE roll, even though we have much higher time to expiration, wider spreads, and proportionally longer rolls. One difference to note is that amount of premium and Theta are much less on a daily basis, but that should be expected as daily decay for similar Deltas gets higher as expiration approaches.
This graph shows the premium levels of 100 point wide spreads at 21 and 42 DTE, as well as the premium collected to roll out at the same strikes.
Another key difference is the distance that our strikes can be from the current price, giving the position more wiggle room for price changes. The above chart shows the premium of the various spreads available at 21 and 42 DTE. Notice that the lower strikes approach zero value while the spreads at higher strikes approach 100, which is the width of the spread and would be maximum loss for a credit spread at expiration. With spreads, the closer expiration gets the more of an S-shape we get when charting the premium. Since we are selling the spread, we’d like to see the value decay, either by staying out of the money as time goes by, or seeing the price go up, which would shift all the lines to the right on the chart.
What if we want to roll down to lower strikes when rolling out from 21 to 42 days? Let’s look at what would be available by zooming in a bit to the chart above to the area where there is credit available to roll out.
In this chart, we can see that the further we are out of the money, the more we can roll down for a credit. Once a spread is in the money, the opportunity to collect a credit is gone.
With plenty of time to expiration, we can roll out for nice credit or roll down quite a ways for some credit. For example, in the chart above, the 3700/3600 spread could be rolled down 150 points to 3550/3450 for 20 cents credit or rolled to the same strikes for $7.50 credit. The closer our strikes are to the money, the less credit we get to roll and the less we can roll down for a credit. And as we’ve seen, if our strikes are in the money, we would have to pay a debit to roll out. Having more time allows us to sell spreads that are much further away from the money and be able to roll out and away much easier than spreads that are closer to expiration.
42-49 DTE
One last example for contrast, we will roll out a relatively short amount of time from a 42 DTE put spread.
Again, we compare rolls at different Delta values, along with the net Theta of our current position.
So, this roll is from 6 weeks to 7 weeks until duration. However, our previous observations generally hold. The peak premium is at a bit higher Delta, in the high teens. This makes sense if we consider that we are only rolling out for about 16% more time, so our new spreads will have peak Theta much closer to our old spreads. This would point to the idea that the best roll is the roll that gets us to a new spread with a short strike Delta of around 20.
Again, our max roll amount equates roughly to the daily Theta multiplied by the number of days we are rolling out.
How to Use This Information
Readers may wonder, what good is this? A trader can’t really control where prices move to, so the Delta value is not really controllable by a trader. This is somewhat true, but prices do move up and down all the time, and so if I’m looking to roll out to get to a timeframe that has less volatility, I might be able to enter a limit order that seeks to collect close to the maximum roll credit possible. Often, I’m not in a big hurry to roll, so I can check out where the maximum should be and set up an order for 90% of that amount and go about my business. If it doesn’t execute after a day or maybe even a week depending on the timeframe of the position, I could change the order to something less lucrative.
Another way to look at this data is to realize that if my position has both strikes down in the single digits of Delta, I’ll likely want to roll up my strikes when I roll out to get to optimal Theta. On the other hand, if my position has strikes with Deltas in the twenties or thirties, I may want to try to roll down and out, and hopefully still collect a credit.
If my position has gotten even closer to the money or even into the money, I’m going to have trouble rolling for a credit, and I have some tough decisions to make. I need to consider all my choices: holding, folding, or rolling. If I’m deep in the money I might consider taking desperate measures. It all comes down to risk appetite and an overall plan of action. It’s best to have a plan for all possibilities ahead of time, and not try to figure it out when times get tough.
Final Take-aways on rolling put spreads
My thought process for looking into this was to find optimal credits for rolling spreads, so I could devise strategies to improve my results. After studying this, I was excited to find an answer that makes sense. Deltas in the teens for the short strike of the spread are ideal for rolling. The further out in time the roll is as a ratio of current DTE to future DTE, the lower the delta of the current spread for best credit from the roll.
A good starting point for estimating the best credit is to take current Theta of the spread and multiply by the number of days that are being rolled out. So, if Theta is 20 cents and the roll is going out 5 days beyond the existing spread, the best credit will be around $1.00.
Finally, realize that this study was for put spreads, not call spreads, iron condors, or naked options. Spreads have unique characteristics compared to naked positions, and their behavior does not translate over. So, I only apply this information to rolling put spreads.
I am studying how naked puts best roll as well and plan to do a write up in the future on the topic.
Selling put spreads is a fairly simple trade that can generate one of the highest returns on capital of all option trades. The trade is fairly flexible to adjust for higher returns with higher risk, or more consistent, but lower returns with lower risk based on choice of duration until expiration. While I’ve written about put spreads in detail before, I recently did some additional studies to see if my earlier conclusions on best Delta values for entry were still accurate.
I’ve noticed from Google Analytics that many traders are searching for the answer to “What are the best Delta values to use for selling put spreads?” or some variation. While I think my earlier webpage on put spreads covers that fairly well, there have been enough people question me, and enough questions pop up from my own trading to cause me to go back and dig into the data a little deeper. The quick answer that I usually give to anyone on Delta values for a put spread is to sell the put strike with a 20 Delta value and buy the strike with a 13 Delta value. This optimizes position Theta, and also provides a nice, relatively high probability of profit. But is that answer true if the expiration timeframe is short, like just a few days, or really long, like several months?
Readers likely have a hint at results from the featured chart image at the top of this post. I decided to look at all the possible Theta values of short put spreads at different strikes. For the first example, I looked at 7 days to expiration (DTE), and chose 40 point wide spreads on SPX, the S&P 500 index. SPX is generally my go to choice for options on the S&P 500, but as I wrote in another post, there are lots of different ways to trade options on the S&P 500. So, the graph shows the Theta value relative to the Delta value of the short put of the spread of all possible 40 wide put spreads, expiring 7 days from November 18, 2022. The chart shows a very smooth curve peaking around 22 Delta.
This chart shows all possible short put spread combinations around the peak Theta values as a percentage of the spread width.
Here’s a slightly different way to look at the different Theta possibilities of 7 DTE put spreads. The horizontal axis is the long strike value, and the vertical axis is the short strike. The various values are color-coded, where the greener the cell, the higher the Theta value is as a percentage of the spread width, while yellow means lower Theta. As I’ve written elsewhere, this is one of my favorite ways to evaluate decay of a spread. I also drew boxes around all the values where the spread is 40 points wide- the points that are plotted on the earlier chart at the top of this post. If you zoom in on this green-yellow table, you can see that each cell is a percentage value, while the left and top lines show the strike prices and Delta values of each strike price. This table goes out much further than what I’m showing, but this is the part of the table where values are highest, and you can see the values are lower at the edges of this chart.
Note that delta values of between 5 and zero for the long put tend to have lower Theta values. And when the short puts get into the mid-twenties to thirty, Theta drops off. There are a number of combinations in between that have good Theta, and one could make an argument for many different ones.
On this chart each line represents the Theta values of different spread widths at different strike prices.
One more way to look at this is to look at a graph with each line representing a different spread width. Notice that the most narrow width of 5 points has a lot of variation- this is because the Theta difference is so small, yet divided by a small width and a few nickels change in the difference in Thetas doesn’t scale smoothly. I’ve highlighted the 40 wide line that I’ve used earlier. One could argue that another line might be a better choice, but as we go wider, the peak gets closer to the current price which makes the probability of expiring in the money higher and higher.
Since the chart is made based on the short put strike, the curves move higher and higher as the spreads widen. Notice that as the spreads get wider, the peak Theta percentage gets smaller.
Longer Duration put spreads
Let’s go a little further out in time and see if the data is different. At 42 days to expiration, we get somewhat similar results.
For 42 DTE on SPX. I chose 100 wide spreads and Theta peaked right at the 20 Delta short strike.
I also did a similar thing with a table of percentage Theta values, highlighting the 100 wide spreads.
This table shows the Theta as a percentage of the spread width, and is color coded with more green meaning more Theta return. Lines on the chart mark key Delta values.
Even longer duration put spreads?
Let’s look at 90 DTE for an even longer duration.
At 90 DTE, Theta peaks out just under 20 Delta
We can also look at a table of Theta values as well for 90 days to expiration.
The boxed values are 200 point wide spreads.
Again, the highest values have short strikes in the teens and low twenties for Delta. However, it probably is worth noting that the values shown are not that different between the yellow and green cells. So, maybe we should look at different spread widths to see it graphically.
Virtually all spread widths have a lot of combinations of strikes with values over 0.06% Theta per day. Compared to shorter durations, these Theta values are fairly low.
When selling spreads this far out in time, the idea is to have a large buffer from the current price and get much of the premium to decay well before expiration is even close. Let’s look at an example of how this might work.
This chart shows how the premium of a 200 point wide spread is likely to decay over 90 days, assuming no change in underlying price or volatility. The small triangles represent the Delta values of each of the strikes in the spread as time passes.
Starting with low deltas below 20, we can see that much of the decay of this spread happens well before expiration is even close. In fact, the last 20 days have virtually no premium left, which would suggest closing early and moving on. I plan to do a lot more studies on the decay curves of different spread widths and strikes to help identify the pros and cons of different entry points.
Conclusion
I think it is safe to say that the original study on spread width still stands. However, the data shows that there is some wiggle room around our old ideal of 20 Delta short and 13 Delta long strikes. We just need to be in the neighborhood. We don’t have to be exact.
Where’d the data come from?
Readers may wonder the source of the data for all these charts and tables. Actually, it’s a source that anyone can access and replicate. I simply copied an option table from my broker’s site and pasted it into Excel. Then I used a pivot table to organize the data so that it was friendly for the analysis I wanted to do. The option table had Delta and Theta values for each option contract available, and I had to use some formulas to figure out percentages of spread widths, but it wasn’t any really difficult challenge.
I do worry that my broker is changing the format of the option tables it presents, and copying every contract may be a bigger challenge in the future, but for now, I can display all contracts and select all with Control-A, then paste as text in Excel. In the future, I may have to paste a smaller amount of data each time. Readers trying to replicate these studies may face the same problem.
Like all the front ratio type trades I have shared, this trade is a defined risk version of a very similar front ratio trade featuring naked short puts. My versions hedge the trade with long puts to limit the risk. However, in this trade, I will also discuss the unlimited risk version of the trade, the 1-1-2, because the additional risk isn’t that much from a practical standpoint.
I’m a big fan of front ratio type trades. I’ve written about my success with Broken Wing Butterflies and Broken Wing Put Condors. Another trade that fits in the group is the 1-1-2-2 Put Ratio. I don’t know of a named reference to a bird or insect for this trade, so I’m going with 1-1-2-2. Like all the front ratio type trades I have shared, this trade is a defined risk version of a very similar front ratio trade featuring naked short puts. My versions hedge the trade with long puts to limit the risk. However, in this trade, I will also discuss the unlimited risk version of the trade, the 1-1-2, because the additional risk isn’t that much from a practical standpoint.
I picked up the concept of this trade from one of my favorite traders, “Sweet Bobby” Gaines, who I have mentioned previously in at least one other page on this site. Bobby is a big proponent of the 1-1-2 trade, and has posted numerous videos on it on his YouTube channel, including his recent rising star appearance on Tasty Trade. But really, the trade is the next level of evolution moving from broken wing butterfly to broken wing condor to “one louder” as they say in the mythical group Spinal Tap.
What all these trades have in common is selling an out of the money debit put spread, and financing by selling further out of the money puts or wider credit put spreads. The combination delivers a net credit, but also sets up an interesting dynamic of extra rapid decay of the premium involved. The farther out puts or put spreads decay faster than the closer debit spread, and often lead to the debit spread having more value than the credit spread. These trades take in a credit to open, and often can take in a credit to close. At least that’s how I set them up and manage them.
All these trades are a variation of a front ratio spread, where more options are sold than bought with hedges added to define risk. I’ve also written about back ratio spreads where more options are bought than sold. Front ratios are designed for maximizing decay, while back ratios set up multiple long positions paid for by a costly short position.
The previously discussed broken wing condor could also be called a 1-1-1-1 trade. In that trade we buy a put spread and then sell another put spread further out for more money, collecting a net credit. Four different strikes, 1 contract each. So what is a 1-1-2-2?
1-1-2-2 Basic trade setup
The 1-1-2-2 takes this a step farther, because we use two credit spreads very far out of the money to pay for the debit spread. The 1-1 part is buying a put around 25 delta and selling a put around 20 delta. The 2-2 part is selling two puts at around 5 delta and buying two puts around 1 delta. The goal is for the 2-2 to sell for about twice what the 1-1 cost. I like to set these up with 45-55 days remaining to expiration, quite a bit longer than the other ratio trades I’ve discussed.
What is the advantage of this? Well, because each of the two short strikes are further out, we greatly improve the odds of being profitable, and increase the initial rate of decay of the total position. We end up with a big gap between the debit spread strikes and the two short put strikes. Lots of good things happen with this setup. The biggest upside is that there is no upside risk- if price goes up, the trade makes money. The downside of this trade is that it can consume a lot of capital and has significant tail risk, which we will get into before we are done. Let’s look at a typical example.
In this example, each of the two low delta puts collect about what the debit spread costs (~$10).
The first thing I want to point out in this example is that the 3100 short put is 900 points below the current price of $4000. For that strike to get in the money, it would take a 22.5% decline in the market in 55 days. That won’t happen very often. To be fair, this example uses values with VIX at 25, a historically higher than average value, but for the timeframe of 2020-2022, a fairly middle of the road level. The higher that implied volatility is, the farther away the short strikes can be and still collect meaningful premium.
The next thing to point out in the setup numbers is the Greeks. Delta is fairly flat at +3. For a credit trade, that isn’t much and means that the position can handle some movement in price. Theta is $69/day, and we collected $805. So, the position is expected to lose 1/12 of its value each day. But we have 55 days, so how does that work? Quite well, I’d say.
Finally, we can’t ignore the capital risk of $115,000. How can this be? If the price drops below $2500 at expiration, a 47.5% drop, the loss would be $115,000. While extremely unlikely (we didn’t lose that much in the Covid crash of 2020), it is possible in some disastrous scenarios. We’ll discuss this later as it impacts capital requirements and how one perceives risk. At the end of this post, I’ll explain how we can get into this trade for a fraction of this buying power.
Numbers are one thing. A picture or three might help make this all more clear.
The dotted lines represent expected moves. This trade is profitable at expiration if the market doesn’t go down more than two expected moves.
This chart shows how changes in the underlying price will impact the profit and loss of the trade. We evaluate at four points in time. The green diamond shows our initial position at 55 DTE, underlying price is $4000, and the P/L is zero. The curvy lavender line shows how price would likely impact the position with 35 DTE. The green curve shows the likely profit at 14 DTE, and the sharp purple lines are the expiration values. We know exactly what expiration values will be at any price, but the curves are estimates based on likely impact to implied volatility as time passes and prices change.
I’ve put in dotted lines to show the expected move and multiple expected moves down. If you need a refresher, check my earlier post on expected moves. It is likely that price will end up inside of one expected move, the dotted lines on either side of the current price of $4000. There is approximately a 2% chance that price will move two expected moves to the second dotted line below the current price, which would still be max profit for this trade at expiration. And there is approximately a 0.3% chance of moving three expected moves to the far left dotted line. We can go further, but the odds keep dropping as we go to lower levels. However, as history has shown, moves down tend to have somewhat higher probability than theoretic probabilities once we get beyond two expected moves. The bottom long puts are a final defense to limit losses for going even more extreme in a rapid crash. The point is that this trade is very likely to end up profitable, but there is risk that an extremely big move down could lead to an extremely big loss. We’ll talk about ways to reduce exposure later.
Now that we’ve talked a bit about the very unlikely outcomes, let’s zoom in and discuss the most likely scenarios. Here’s the profit chart showing prices down to 25% below the current price with profit and loss zones highlighted.
Zooming in allows us to see the profit levels in the timeframes referenced above. Notice that down moves initially can drive the position to a loss, but if the move doesn’t go below the two short puts at 3100, the position will be highly profitable at expiration. In fact, this trade does best in the very wide range of a price drop between 6 and 22 percent, bringing in up to $5000 additional credit.
If price goes up or drops less than 200 points, we can keep our initial premium at expiration. We may be able to collect more. The profit curve at 14 DTE is actually above the expiration profit if the price remains the same. How is this possible? Because the 1-1 debit put spread decays slower than the 2-2 credit spread, eventually the 1-1 part is worth more than the 2-2 part, even though the 2-2 part started out worth twice as much as the 1-1.
Let’s look at this another way. Prices don’t generally move immediately to a new level, but have probabilities of moves that get bigger over time. Again, going back to expected moves, let’s compare how we might expect price to move during the duration of the trade.
This chart shows expected moves day by day from initiating the trade until expiration, and compares to the put strike prices.
In this chart I’ve shown several outcomes. The zero move is if price doesn’t change at all, a baseline. I’ve shown a +1% move which is in line with the positive drift of the market. There’s also a line for the positive expected move and the negative expected move, where price is likely to be within at any point in time. And finally I’ve shown a curve for a price move of two times the expected move down. Notice where the strikes are relative to the price curves are. The negative curves take time to get below the upper 1-1 put strikes, and never reach even the short put of the 2-2 credit spread.
Now let’s look at what happens to the value of our premium if price were to follow each of these curves. This is a view that you don’t see much because it is based on lots of assumptions for the pricing models. Since implied volatility is not predictable in the future, the chart makes assumptions for how price and time will most likely impact volatility and premium value.
This chart shows how different underlying price trends would likely impact option premium over time.
Initially, this position collected $8.05 in premium, so we start with a negative or short value of -8.05. From there the price moves shown in the previous chart drive the premium up or down along with time decay. If price is flat or going up, premium decays and moves quickly toward zero premium. If the price goes down, the positive Delta pushes premium to more negative values. The price move of negative two expected moves really does a number on our premium initially, driving it down to below -30.
But, remember our profit chart at expiration? The flat and positive moves end up with a profit of our initial premium (all the puts have zero value at expiration, and the negative expected move and negative double expected move end up at maximum profit. Since our debit spread is 50 points wide, the negative moves would leave it fully in the money for a premium value of +50 points. And that’s in addition to the initial premium collected to open the trade. The challenge is that to get that max profit, we likely will have points in time where our position loses money.
The probability of getting to max profit is low because it would require a price drop between 6 and 22%. Based on our put strike Deltas we can estimate that we have about a 20% chance of that. Most of the other 80% is expiring with all strikes out of the money. So, it might be wise to zoom in and understand what happens with the vast majority of trades.
In most situations, the premium of the 1-1-2-2 front ration decays quickly, maxes out, and then levels off before losing value.
I used this chart as the featured image of this post because I thought it best illustrates how this trade plays out most of the time. If you remember when we discussed the Greeks, I pointed out that Theta is very high compared to the premium. From this chart we see that if price stays the same or is slightly up, premium will decay to zero by 35 DTE, or just 20 days into the trade. This is an example that Theta isn’t 100% accurate by itself as it looked like 12 days of Theta should move us to zero value. It could be that IV modeling is slightly off or the Theta was off, but still we have very rapid decay that I don’t think anyone can complain about.
Like all ratio style trades we have discussed, this trade has the possibility of switching from negative to positive premium. The difference with this trade is that it is actually quite likely, and as such we need to plan for it and manage our profit accordingly.
I’ve colored in the area under our three flat-to-positive curves with three zones each. There is a green zone where positive premium is growing, a yellow zone where premium is topping out, and a red zone where positive premium is being lost. Notice that the curve of the 1% up move and no price move are fairly close together, and that’s because the price movement is relatively close to the same compared to the other moves we are analyzing.
Let’s review how this happens. This trade essentially has two spreads, a slow decaying debit spread (1-1), and a fast decaying credit spread (2-2). The credit spread decays faster because it is farther out from the money, is much wider, and has twice the value to start with. All these factors help decay happen more quickly. As long as the price stays fairly stable, this relationship will hold. Theta will be the primary driver of the premium value, and the wide credit spread will get to be worth less than the narrow debit spread.
The most likely scenario is that we stay inside the expected move and travel somewhere close to the no price move or 1% up move. Let’s realize that the market doesn’t move in equal amounts every day like this chart, so think of it as a smoothed out version of what premium would do. In the real world, premium would bounce up and down with price. However, if our price is close to where we started with 20 days until expiration, we would expect that the premium switch to positive has about maxed out, and it is probably a good time to close out the trade. Hopefully,your trading platform has a analysis feature that lets you look at your position and see how profits are changing day by day to help determine when the position is as high as it can go.
Without a chart, another way to determine how close the trade is to switching direction is to watch the position Theta. At the beginning of this trade, Theta was 0.688, or $68.80 for the full contract per day. As the trade progresses, Theta will decrease and at some point when the premium goes positive, Theta will turn from positive to negative. As it gets close to zero, that is the peak premium value. I generally try to exit the trade a few days before Theta is projected to turn negative. A big up day for the market could quickly change my very positive premium to not as positive premium, so it isn’t a time to get greedy.
So that brings us to the curve for the positive expected move. This is the curve that assumes that the price follows the one standard deviation move up. The good news when this happens is that premium decays very quickly because Delta and Theta team up. The not so good news is because the price move gets so far away from the strikes, the total position won’t get to a very high positive value. This is because all the options will drop in value quickly, approaching zero, and the upper debit spread won’t have much value. A big move up means that the probability of any of the strikes going into the money will be very low, so there is very little premium. As a result, it is likely we won’t be able to get out for much positive premium if any at all, but we will be able to keep most, if not all the premium from the opening trade. This is the least stressful outcome of the trade. If the price moves up faster than the expected move, premium will likely drop to very close to zero and may not ever go positive. So, if price is up a lot and the trade can be closed for a credit, I take the money and run. I’m happy to have a quick, winning trade.
The risky outcomes
Looking at the position vs time value chart, there are two lines that represent what happens if price goes down. One is the move down one expected move and the other is down two expected moves. Interestingly, in this example, both end up at max profit by the end of the trade. So, it would appear that the trade can’t lose, which is far from true. Notice that these premium values may go very negative if prices drop quickly after opening the trade. This is because the narrow debit spread doesn’t pick up as much value from increasing delta as the wide credit spread does in a down move. We know that if price stays above our credit spread short strike at expiration, we will make money, but when price moves quickly down, it isn’t clear that price will level off.
So, as a trader, we are left with a choice when the market drops, We can take a loss and get out of the trade, or wait to see if the market quits dropping before it tests or violates the credit spread strikes. If we are a week or two into the trade, a decent down move will not make a huge impact, but initially the trade can take a big hit from a down move. The longer we are into the trade without a big down move in price, the less the risk is of a loss. On the flip side, a big move down opens the possibility of additional big down moves that can lead to a very big loss. We reviewed the odds earlier- about 4% of the time the trade will lose based on the far short puts having an initial Delta of 4. If this trade is done enough times, there will be some losses. Let’s look at some management actions that could be taken.
1. Set a stop based on premium price. In this example, we collected just over $8 premium to open the trade. So, we could set a stop to avoid losing twice ($16) or maybe even three times ($24) our initial premium. This would mean a stop loss if premium climbs to $24 or $32, given that $8 premium is our starting break-even point. This is the simplest risk mitigation strategy. Using this will lower the overall win rate as many negative scenarios would end up fine if not closed, but this management technique will prevent huge losses that might impact the account dramatically.
2. Close the trade if the underlying price goes below a trigger point. We know this trade has a lot of cushion. We can handle much more than one expected move and be profitable. But if the move is much more than expected, we have to consider that the move is very unusual and dangerous for us. Perhaps our point to get out is when the debit spread is in the money, or when we are half-way between the debit spread and credit spread. Or maybe it is the short strike of the credit spread that is the final trigger to get out. The further down we allow price to go down, the more we stand to lose. Pick the underlying price where it gets too uncomfortable and use that as the trigger point to get out of the trade.
3. Roll out in time if premium or price triggers are hit. If the position is rolled before the credit spread is in the money, it can be rolled out for a credit. This gives more time for the market to turn around. However, it gives more time for a losing trader to lose more, because we likely can’t roll down that far and still get a credit, and we will likely have to pay to roll the debit spread or narrow the distance between spreads, making the trade less attractive. If the price move continues down, there will be much less room to maneuver going forward.
4. Simply hold on and hope the probabilities play out. With 55 days in the trade, we just need to move down less that two expected moves by expiration. If the capital is available, and the conviction is there, holding can bring max profit with a big down move. Note that as time passes and the credit spread stays out of the money, the premium has to go away, so the value can evaporate very quickly with very high Theta as expiration approaches. This can be observed in the value vs time graph for the -2 EM curve. It can also result in max loss. As expiration approaches, the difference between max profit and max loss is just a few percentage points of price movement and max loss is much more than max profit.
In this example we can see that a move down of one expected move really doesn’t challenge our position, while two times the expected move is playing with fire. So, one approach might be to hold as long as the move stays within the expected move to the downside and switch to closing or rolling once the move exceeds that or some other multiple of expected moves. In any case, a trader has to know their risk tolerance and have a management plan for both winning and losing trades.
What about calls?
A logical question might be- if this works so great for puts, why not double up and do it for calls as well? Well, there’s one problem- skew. On indexes implied volatility is higher as strikes go to lower values and declines for higher strike prices. As a result, out of the money puts have higher implied volatility than out of the money calls. More importantly, far out of the money puts have higher implied volatility than puts closer to the money.
Look at our setup for this example. Implied volatility of the single long put is around 25, while the two short puts have implied volatility of 39. This helps two ways. The short puts have more of their premium tied to volatility, bumping up their price compared to the long put. Also, the higher implied volatility pushes the strike price further down to get a matching premium to the debit spread, making the trade a higher probability of success. We are selling more of the higher implied volatility and buying lower implied volatility, a key reason to use front ratio spreads.
A similar setup for a 1-1-2-2 call trade would reverse the dynamics. The long call closest to the money would have the highest implied volatility and the two short calls would have the lowest. To collect similar amounts to the put trade, the call strikes would be much closer between the debit spread and credit spread, and the difference in the deltas of the strikes would also be closer together, meaning a narrower window of max profit, and a higher probability of max loss. While still a trade with positive probability, it generally isn’t as attractive as the put side.
1-1-2 vs 1-1-2-2
I haven’t talked much about the two long puts bought at less than one Delta to open the trade. They are very unlikely to ever be in the money, and most traders would opt to close or adjust the trade well before they came into play. So, why have them? The simple answer is that they define or limit the risk of the trade, potentially reducing the capital required for the trade, and protecting from absolute disaster in the event of a market crash of over 37.5% in under 55 days. It could happen, like it did in February and March of 2020 during the Covid pandemic. We are giving up 20% of our premium to protect for a once or twice in a lifetime super crash.
So, what if we eliminate the long puts and do a naked 1-1-2 ratio spread? Is it different in outcome or probabilities? The answer is that it is very similar in most ways, and we will also see that a lot depends on the type of account you are trading in as to what choices there are. First, let’s start with the setup of the 1-1-2 trade.
The 1-1-2 trade has two naked puts sold short, but way out of the money.
While this table shows the risk as unlimited, it is actually $618,855, the value of two 3100 puts if SPX went to zero by expiration ($620,000) less the $1,145 collected to start the trade.
Some accounts and some brokers require all trades to be defined in their risk. For example, retirement accounts generally aren’t allowed to use option margin and so any naked put would have to be cash secured. For this trade, eliminating the two long puts would mean the max loss would go up to $618,855, assuming that SPX went to zero, while we are holding two short 3100 puts. SPX will only go to zero if we see modern society end, and in that case, we’ll probably have bigger problems than our option positions. But rules are rules, and so if you want to trade without the long puts in a retirement account, you would need $620,000 capital to make a likely $800-$1200 or less than 0.2% return in 55 days or less. We’ll discuss other alternatives after we review the details of the 1-1-2 trade.
The profit profile for the 1-1-2 is very similar to the 1-1-2-2 other than the virtually unlimited loss.
Remember that our starting underlying price is $4000 and the trade is profitable at expiration as long as price is above 3100. The chart above doesn’t show losses all the way down to zero price, but just imagine zero price and -$618,855. Our probability of profit is 96% if held to expiration based on the Delta of 4 for the naked puts.
Most scenarios show a profit with 1-1-2
Looking at 1-1-2 values over time at the same price moves that we looked at for the 1-1-2-2 trade, we can see that the premium changes are fairly similar. Staying within one expected move keeps the trade moving in the direction of decay.
Zooming in on most likely outcome’s value over time
If we zoom in on the likely outcome, we see that premium behaves very similarly to what we saw with the 1-1-2-2 trade setup. We just have more premium collected to start with, taking a bit longer to fully evaporate and have the premium turn to a credit for closing. The concept is the same.
Summarizing the differences between the 1-1-2-2 trade and 1-1-2 trade, the 1-1-2 trade collects about 20% more premium in exchange for more loss if the market drops more than 37.5% in the 55 days of the trade. How likely is it for the market to drop more than 37.5%? Is buying the long puts for protection worth it? That’s up to each trader to decide.
Buying power requirements
I usually don’t spend much time talking about buying power because most trades I do are defined risk credit trades where the amount collected is a significant portion of the capital at risk. This trade is not so much, whether defined risk (1-1-2-2) or a naked ratio spread (1-1-2). In non-margin accounts, we collect 0.7% or 0.2% respectively, which isn’t much.
Below is an analysis of different possible ways to trade. I looked at trading each of these strategies three different ways. First, I looked at a cash secured account, like a retirement account. Next, I looked at an account with margin for naked options. Finally, I looked at a much different approach, trading futures options with span margin. The margin and span margin amounts came from entering this trade into the tastyworks trading platform.
Comparing buying power impact of different account types for the two strategies
I highlighted some key takeaway points. First, is how leveraged span margin with futures options can be for this trade. Our most capital efficient trade would be doing the 1-1-2-2 on futures span margin where we would collect 100 times the premium as a percentage of buying power (20%) than the non-margin account of the 1-1-2 trade (0.2%). Of course, with leverage comes much more risk. I chose to consider a loss of 10 times the initial credit as a practical worst-case scenario. The span margin would end up costing huge amounts more in a disaster and could potentially wipe out an account if the trade used a high percentage of the account’s capital.
A couple of weird margin anomalies to point out. In my margin account, the defined risk 1-1-2-2 trade required almost twice the buying power as the undefined 1-1-2, which is weird because clearly there is more risk in the naked 1-1-2. I think it may be that the calculation for defined risk is normally much less than undefined and the software may just assume that margin is not useful in defined risk. On the other hand, defining the risk on the futures version cut the buying power by 1/3. Different brokers may calculate their margin requirements differently, so don’t take this as universal truth. Similarly, remember that while defining risk usually increases the return on capital, it makes outsize losses more likely, especially when scaling up. Notice that the highly leveraged futures 1-1-2-2 would lose twice as much as a percentage of capital that the futures 1-1-2 setup in a 10x loss. I discussed this phenomenon in detail in my post on comparing risk.
Remember that margin and span margin change as the trade progresses depending on the market behavior. Span margin is subject to big swings when prices go against a position. A broker may force a position to close much earlier than a trader would want to get out due to expanding capital requirements. So, while initially the position is cheap to enter, a trader needs to limit each position to a fraction of the overall account size.
But the good side of this is that this trade can be entered for a very small cost. The trade is very high probability. We can also make more than the premium collected. I didn’t include it in the chart, but maximum profit for the most leveraged choice above would be $5,805 profit on $4,000 buying power, a return on capital of 145%. And there is over a 20% probability of that happening.
One final note on the buying power analysis table. To keep the quantities an apples-to-apples comparison, I used double the number of /ES futures options because futures options only control half as much value as SPX index options. So, technically, those futures options trades listed are 2-2-4-4 and 2-2-4 because they use twice the number of contracts to get the same notional exposure. I reviewed differences between index options and futures options in detail in my post about different ways to trade options on the S&P 500 index.
What about small accounts?
Readers looking at this may be thinking, “Gee, this is great for multi-millionaires, but what if the account is too small to consider any of these buying powers?” Great question- there are other alternatives. First off, a trader could use half the buying power listed by just trading options on one contract of the Mini S&P 500 futures (/ES). The 1-1-2-2 example would only take $2,000 buying power for $402 premium received. But, if that is still too much, we can make it a lot less.
Many traders are more familiar with options on the SPY exchange traded fund, which trades at approximately 1/10 the value of the S&P 500 index. For futures options, there is also options on the Micro S&P 500 futures contract (/MES), equal to 1/10 of the /ES contract size, or 1/20 of the size of an SPX option. By using SPY or /MES, we cut the size of the trade down by 1/10 compared to the above table. If the account is taxable, another choice would be the $XSP index, a 1/10 value index of the S&P 500 with favorable tax treatment, but lower liquidity. Again, all these alternative versions of S&P 500 options are discussed in my post on different S&P 500 choices.
So, for an account with futures trading capability, this trade could use /MES futures options and get into the 1-1-2-2 trade for just $200 buying power. An account with options margin could use SPY or $XSP and get into the 1-1-2 trade for $6,800 buying power. A trader doesn’t need a million dollar amount to trade this.
Concluding thoughts
I know a number of people who have traded versions of this trade during the bear market of 2022 without any issues. In fact, it could be argued that this trade, like most trades that collect credits from selling puts, works best if entering when the market is already down and implied volatility is high. Bad scenarios are already priced into option premium and there is a lot of cushion between strikes. This trade is most dangerous when volatility is low and prices are high- the probabilities are not as good, because a move of more than two times the expected move down is not nearly as far.
While not for everyone, the 1-1-2-2 and 1-1-2 trades provide a very high probability of success with a nice payout when used with leverage. The trade requires monitoring to maximize profit and to prevent catastrophic loss, so it really is not a set it and forget it trade. The key is to have a plan to manage the position if the market goes against the trade and stick to the plan.
I recently responded to a social media post which asked why there is so much hate out in the social media world regarding rolling losing option positions. If you frequent any discussions about managing option trades, and someone discusses rolling a losing position, there will be some critic who comments to say that rolling options is horrible and locks in losses, and is a low probability trade, and basically is un-American. I sometimes get these kinds of responses myself, and if you read much of what I write, you know that I disagree with that. Rolling is a key part of many of my strategies including the rolling 7 DTE trade that I frequently trade. So, the following is my thoughts on rolling losing option positions.
As someone who rolls almost all my positions, win or lose, and often writes about it, my thought is that a lot of people that write negatively about rolling don’t really understand the benefits. It isn’t an issue that everybody should roll, or that nobody should, but more that it is a method that works well for a certain mindset. Some traders approach managing trades very differently and that’s great for them.
I think the issue is when the discussion comes to managing a losing position. There’s really three choices: hold, stop, or roll. A legitimate argument can be made for each approach, but I think the right answer comes down to the type of position that is in trouble, the trader’s view of the market probabilities looking forward, and personal preferences around risk and reward.
I roll my credit put spreads on SPX in virtually every situation. I want to avoid expiration drama, so I never hold to expiration. When I used stops in the past, it seemed like I got stopped out just as the market bottomed out and I found that frustrating. I now specifically seek out trades that accommodate rolling options and develop mechanical triggers on when and how I’ll roll a position.
For me the benefit of rolling a losing position is giving myself time and space to be right. I almost always collect a credit for a roll, so I’m paid to wait for a turnaround. Each roll improves the cost basis of my trade. When my position is being tested I try to roll both down and out for a credit, so that I don’t need a full recovery to come out with a profit. Since most of my positions are credit spreads, I do have an issue that if my position gets in the money, it is no longer able to roll for a credit, and I’m forced to pay a debit to stay in. Because my positions start at least an expected move away from the initial price, I rarely end up in the money paying a debit. I’ve found that with the trades I do, I collect credit 97-98% of the time, and the debits I pay have generally been about the same as the credit I get when I’m rolling a winning trade which happens much more often.
The big benefits I see from rolling credit spreads is that I keep time decay working for me 24/7. I don’t have to decide when to jump back in after being stopped out because I’m never out.
For those that say that rolling locks in a loss and puts you in a worse position, I understand that the act of rolling options, closing a losing trade and opening one is truly closing a losing trade. However, my new position is poised to earn all the loss back plus a profit beyond. Usually, when rolling a loser, the market is approaching an oversold situation and is increasingly likely to start back up. Since almost all my rolled positions are still out of the money, I usually still have positive expectancy and better than 50/50 odds of a profit. Market downturns are the best time to buy, so in many ways I’m forcing myself to buy the dip.
Rolling losing option positions does introduce a lot of volatility into a portfolio value. I get great returns through rolling, but my positions’ marked values go up and down more than many people can tolerate, and I understand. Every strategy for management has pros and cons, and some are no-goes for some traders. Each person has to find mechanics that match their tolerance for risk, and expectations for return.
It isn’t easy emotionally to roll in tough markets, but I don’t think it is any easier to take a loss when you are stopped out. I lost a lot just today, Nov 30, 2021, and did a number of rolls as part of my mechanics. However, I’ve been through this numerous times before, recovering fully each time, and built up cash reserves in good times, so that I’m ready for whatever the market is going to do.
Some types of trades just aren’t made for rolling options. For example I won’t roll a credit call spread that loses because I find they just compound losses as the market drifts higher more often than it falls, and it isn’t a fight I can win consistently. I don’t use rolls as much in individual stocks because moves can be extreme and last a long time. I don’t try to roll trades on expiration day because the numbers don’t work out. So I do have limits and don’t blindly roll every kind of trade. I find that many people critiquing rolling as a strategy are talking about one of these losing situations that even I won’t roll in.
I’ve had many people reach out to try to understand rolling options and from their questions I can see that it is a hard concept to grasp. I love it when the lightbulb comes on for someone, and it is also troubling when someone misses the point and drops a position, closing at the worst possible time. I usually get a few messages of a bad loss on days like last Friday or today, but I also get nice thank you notes from many more when the market goes up after a downturn and the person came out of a down market with a profit overall and their account at new highs.
I know my rolling approach isn’t for everyone and that’s okay. But it works for me. If it doesn’t work for you, then do what does work for you, and maybe learn a little more about rolling before you bad mouth it out of hand.
The basic 7 DTE trade is that I sell a 40-50 wide spread one week out at 10-12 delta for the short strike. I usually collect over $1.50 in premium, and I try to buy it back 2-3 days later as part of a roll for something under $1.00, usually by collecting around a dollar in a roll. For the most part, I roll the position every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday.
Since early January 2021, I have been trading a continuously rolling 7 DTE put spread on SPX. I finally took time to separate the data for this trade from my other trades to show how well it has worked. I’m averaging greater than 6% per week return on capital. The basic 7 DTE trade is that I sell a 40-50 wide spread one week out at 10-12 Delta for the short strike. I usually collect over $1.50 in premium, and I try to buy it back 2-3 days later as part of a roll for something under $1.00, usually by collecting around a dollar. For the most part, I roll the position every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. No matter what happens, I roll and try to collect additional credit.
Said another way, I’m in a trade for a couple of days and collect about 2% on average for the effort. For example, a 50 wide spread collecting a net $1 on a roll has collected 2%. The profit comes mostly from time decay (Theta) and somewhat from upward price drift.
What is a roll?
For those not familiar with rolling, it is a trade where one position is closed while a similar trade with better profit probabilities is opened all in the same trade. In this case, I might buy back a position with 5 days left to expire for $0.75 and sell a similar position with 7 days to expire for $1.75, a net credit of $1.00.
Managing when the market goes down
Most of the time (76%), the trade wins outright and I close for less than what I sold the spread for. When the market goes against my position, I roll down and out as much as possible while collecting more premium.
In the few events where I end up in the money, I use debit rolls to reposition out in time at lower strikes. In this situation, I may pay more to close my 5 DTE position than I receive for opening a new 7 DTE position. The idea is that SPX will eventually turn around and the roll won’t cost that much if I stay within a reasonable distance. I’ve used this technique on many put positions last year during the Covid crash and now on this trade. Since the trade should generate lots of credit most of the time, I’ll take the risk of a total blow-up, and use profits to protect the position however far is needed. Probably not everyone’s cup of tea, but it’s my plan- roll, roll, roll, no matter what. I don’t know where I would want to set a stop for this trade- it’s defined risk, and rolling gives me the possibility and probability of full recovery, eventually.
Historically, 98% of my rolls with this strategy are for net credit, and only 2% are a debit. That’s a lot more cash coming in than going out.
Why does this work?
The general concept is that this trade is selling a spread that starts with about a 90% chance of expiring worthless. Essentially, it would take two expected moves in the full time-frame of the trade to put the short strike in the money. It also decays quickly and approaches zero well before expiration in the majority of the time. So, my expectation is that most of the time I can get around 1/2 of the premium collected to decay in about 1/3 of the time to expiration, then get out and do it again. By always being in the trade, I take advantage of the fact that time is always passing, which is the only sure thing with options. Being two expected moves away to start allows the position to filter out a lot of noise and still make money without a lot of stress over where the market is going. When we get the expected move down, the position is still in good shape because that’s only half-way to the short strike. By rolling down and out, we can re-establish further away from the money and still collect a credit. Even several down days in a row can be absorbed, as this happens somewhat regularly. My experience is that defensive rolls work out back to a full win without getting in the money 80-90% of the time. To be really problematic, it takes a move of over 5% down in less than a week that doesn’t recover at all to move the position into the money. I’ve been in survival mode several times with this trade and recovered fully each time. I expect that there will someday be a scenario where I can’t roll enough to recover, but I have saved back cash reserves to allow starting over if that time ever comes.
On the other hand, this trade generates 4-6% return on capital per week most of the time, so it should double its value in about a five-month time frame if there is not a major drawdown and even with no compounding re-investment. I’m not sure how to calculate the probability of a winning week, but I’m pretty sure it is well above 90%. The probability of an in the money scenario is likely in the 2% range, and I expect this scenario a few times a year, with a position that drags out without recovering for over a month happening in the once every few years timeframe.
I’ve adjusted my mechanics a few times during the time I’ve been trading it. I started this the second week in January, at 100 wide and switched to 50 wide contracts when I realized that the extra width wasn’t gaining much, and was extra risk and extra buying power. I’m now trading 40 wide. I’ve gradually gotten more methodical in my approach, although I’m still not that rigid. Originally, I was selling 4-5 DTE and rolling 3-5 times a week. Since I switched to 7 DTE, I’ve found the trade much less time consuming with more premium and time cushion, but slightly less decay. However, the concept is the same- sell way out of the money put spreads and roll out every two days or more often to collect additional premium.
Why SPX?
I trade SPX only for this, and I think it is perfect because it has less price swings that almost any other underlying, and it is big enough that the commissions/fees are negligible. I tested RUT and NDX and found them to be too volatile for my taste. I’ve tried SPY, but I find it hard to get filled near the mid-price on my rolls, and commissions are a much higher percentage of the trade. I got the original idea from a post in a Facebook group last December, and tweaked it until it fit with my style. There are a lot of ways to vary this, but this strikes me as a nice way to trade fairly near to expiration options with a high probability of success without a lot of drama. I know several people who now also do their version of this trade, some using stops, some getting in and out based on the market, some using technical indicators to inform their decisions.
Results summary
The sheet at the end of this post shows each individual trade. At the first of the year, I showed trades that I rolled out that were losing by their cost basis to me. So, if I sold a spread for $1.50, bought it back for $2.10 and sold the new position for $2.50, I would show closing at 1.50 and opening the next trade at $1.90, my adjusted new cost basis. In June, I decided that this wasn’t very transparent, so I switched to showing the actual closing cost and opening sales price when I have to roll out on a tested position. Either way, these were my actual trades. I think that is easier to see how the trade works when the market is challenging. I’ve scaled up the number of contracts I trade, but for simplicity, I’m showing just one contract. The dates are the expiration date of the position- I don’t track which date I actually roll.
When I charted this out, I was surprised to see how consistent this trade has been in accumulating profits. Keep in mind that my results are just for the trade, and don’t take into account having cash on the sidelines to use for defense if the trade goes into the money. My goal in this trade is to consistently generate cash as time passes by, and for the most part that is what has happened.
My results for this trade are in line with these expectations so far. In over 8 months, I have made money every single week on this trade except three, which is amazing to me, considering that the market had a few weeks where it really trended down. In the first four months of this trade I doubled my money. While this is the most consistently profitable trade I regularly do, I only use a small portion of my capital with this trade due to the tail risk from a major crash.
I hope this explanation and the data attached helps you understand this trade a little better. As you all know, this is one of several trades I do. I thought this would be of particular interest, especially considering how well it has worked. I’m very aware that there is considerable risk in this trade, despite its high probability of success, and that even in the majority of times significant volatility to the position can be expected.
I’ve shared this trade in a number of other forums and received a lot of questions. Here are some common ones:
How does this compare to 0 DTE?
One reason I started this trade was that I wanted an alternative to the 0 DTE or expiration day trades that I see a lot of people doing. I tried my hand at these using stops, and I would have long strings of wins followed by a big loss that I couldn’t get out of in time. It was very stressful to me, and most importantly, I wasn’t making money for all my effort. When I came across this concept, I saw that I could use many of the same management techniques, namely rolling, that I use in longer duration trades, and avoid expiration day stress.
Where does 4-6% return on capital per week calculation come from?
A couple of ways to think about this. I’m making at least three trades a week with this strategy. Each trade has an average profit of around $0.80 per share, or $80 per contract. The capital at risk is the width of the spread, $40 per share, or $4000 per contract. Either way, that’s 2% profit for the capital at risk. With three trades a week, I total up to 6%. I could just as easily say 25% per month, or 100% per quarter, but that is less intuitive.
Why not use stops?
I know a lot of people are big fans of stops. They prevent losses from getting out of hand, which in many situations is an absolute necessity. Stops also eliminate the possibility of a position recovering. My view is that market movement is mostly random up and down, and my experience with stops is that I often get stopped out right before the market reverses, locking in a loss that would have been much less if I had stayed in the trade. As a result, I prefer to find ways to extend out the trade on positions where I have a reasonable expectation that the position will recover in a reasonable amount of time. With the S&P 500, this has been a very reasonable expectation, especially if I can re-position my strikes down while collecting more credits in the process.
Advantage of defined risk over naked puts
I know that many people are big proponents of selling naked puts because there is more premium per contract than with a spread. However, naked puts take more capital in most situations, and have undefined risk. Because a spread requires less capital, the return on capital can be much higher. Having defined risk through a spread, provides a floor for the trade that prevents the possibility of completely blowing up an account with an outsized black swan type loss event. For those reasons, I avoid selling naked puts, and instead sell credit spreads. One caveat is that if a naked put is sold cash secured, the risk is reduced to market risk and can never blow up an account- however, returns will be a small fraction of trading a spread. It’s all trade-offs and a matter of strategy preference.
Are these three trades at once or one?
I trade this with just one position, opened and closed three times a week or more with a roll. For example, each Monday I close the following Friday position 4 days out and open a position for the following Monday 7 days out. Then, on Wednesday I close the Monday position 5 days out and open a new position for the following Wednesday 7 days out. Then, on Friday I close the Wednesday position 5 days out and open a position the following Friday 7 days out. I just repeat over and over. If the market jumps up somewhere in between rolls, I may choose to roll to higher strikes in the same expiration for an extra credit.
Why not hold to expiration if the odds are so high?
The strikes I pick decay quickly, and I expect the position I roll into to decay more than if I had held the position I closed. This is why I can make $3 in a week with a position that sells for $1.50 to $2.00 to open on average. By rolling to a new position, I make better use of my capital. Also, rolling early gives more flexibility to manage compared to positions that are closer to expiration.
What time of day is best for the roll?
I’m still trying to determine when the most profitable time to roll is. I don’t believe time of day is as critical as the action of the market. Ideally, the IV of the strikes at 7 DTE are much higher than those at 5 DTE to maximize the difference in premium. But when is that most true? What triggers that situation? It appears to be a mix of variables that I haven’t yet been able to model or pin down. My tactic is to monitor the net credit available throughout the day and trade when I can get what seems high based on my previous experience. So, it is more art than science, which is never my preference. Alternatively, I just put in the trade when I have time, knowing that time decay generally works out so that no matter what credit I get to roll, it will average out in profits in the end. I’m not convinced this is optimal, and I may be leaving some return on the table. This is an area I continue to study.
What strike do you roll to? Always to 10-12 delta?
Ideally, I’d always roll to 10-12 delta strikes if the market were constantly grinding higher. However, the market varies and sometimes goes down and rolling to 10-12 delta would require paying a debit to achieve. My strategy is to collect a credit to roll whenever possible. So, if I can roll to an ideal short strike in the 10-12 delta range for a credit, then I do it. If I can’t, then I roll to the lowest strikes I can while still collecting a credit. This causes the delta value to drift when the market is in a downturn with an expectation that eventually the position will work its way back to the ideal delta values. Because we work from values so far away from the current price, we can afford to drift closer from time to time, knowing that the probabilities still favor the position decaying.
What about bear markets?
I don’t know when we will have a bear market. Obviously, if I did, I’d get out of this trade to avoid losses and get back in at the bottom. Lots of people predict crashes, and if you predict a crash enough times, you’ll eventually be correct. I’m not naïve, I know a bear market will come some time. But since I can’t predict it, I’ll deal with it when it or a significant correction comes. I’ll use the mechanics I’ve described for this trade, and fight to make a profit with defensive and survival rolls. Remember, in down markets the strategy is to aggressively roll down strikes, improving the probability that even a modest recovery will lead to a profit.
Is there a scenario where this trade could be a total loss?
Sure, this is a highly leverage trade, and as such a fairly small correction could put this position deep in the money and marked for a near total loss. Any number of events could trigger a sudden drop in the market- for example: a surprise Fed announcement, another unexpected financial crisis, a natural disaster, a military or terrorist action against the US or US interest, or another pandemic. Most situations would progress slowly enough to allow this trade to be adjusted and rolled out and down, but some could be so sudden that there would be no action that could be taken. After 9/11 the market was closed for several days, and opened way down when it did open. Is it possible that the market could be closed for the life of a contract? Absolutely. I’m sure there are numerous scenarios for total loss that I can’t anticipate with this strategy. The only thing I can do is be prepared that a total loss won’t ruin me financially because I keep cash on hand as an ultimate hedge.
How much do you scale up your position to compound profits?
This trade can provide a lot of cash. I see three ways to use the cash that is generated. One is to take it as income. Another is to save it as a buffer for when the market requires a survival roll for a debit, or even a total loss. And finally, cash profits can be plowed back in to increase the amount of contracts traded. So, how much to use for each purpose? It depends mostly on how much income you need from the position. I know that taking income distributions means that money can’t be used to build the size of the account. But, I take out what I need to. With what’s left over, I have a simple rule. I want as much cash available in the account as is required for the strategy. For example, in a $40,000 account, if I have $20,000 capital required for five 40-wide spreads, then I want to have $20,000 cash buying power available and not used. If the account grows to $48,000 balance, I can add another contract- that’s another $4,000 at risk and another $4,000 cash buying power sitting in the account. Effectively, this cuts my portfolio return in half, but with compounding from scaling up, the portfolio would theoretically
These returns seem unbelievably crazy. Are you making this up?
These results are actual trades I’ve done. I don’t know what will happen in the future, but this trade has worked well so far. There’s no guarantees, and past performance does not predict future results. This trade has substantial risk, and potential for big rewards.
Can I see a log of this trade over time?
Sure, here’s eight months of raw data:
2022 Update-
As we moved into 2022, the market changed dramatically. 2021 was a very calm year with no downturns in the S&P 500 of over 5%. However, with inflation growing and the Federal Reserve taking action to tackle inflation, the market became much more two-sided and essentially bearish.
So, for this trade, I have adjusted to sell both sides of the trade, puts and calls. Instead of a credit put spread, I now sell an Iron Condor. I aggressively adjust my strikes up and down with each roll now, using credits from moving the untested side rolling toward the current price to pay for debits if needed to roll the tested side away from the current price. This has reduced volatility of my positions and made the trade manageable in this near bearish environment.
The other change that I have made is taking advantage of Tuesday and Thursday expirations. With expirations every day, I can move my positions out to 7 DTE every day, allowing regular adjustment of my strikes while rolling out each day.
Combined, I feel like I have more control managing my 7 DTE positions in a volatile market. Results are looking positive with these changes and I will update when I have enough data to show. Once the Federal Reserve is done tightening the economy and switches back to stimulating, I will likely switch back to puts only or some hybrid that goes in and out of calls.
I’ve used my go to option strategies of credit put spreads, complementary back ratio call spreads, and using call spreads to cover calls to take advantage of the reversal from the mid-March lows
What a difference four weeks can make. From the end of February until March 23, my account dropped over 45% in value, worse than the stock market. However, since March 23 the account has gained back all of the loss and then some, a much better performance than the overall market. At the end of the day Friday, my account was up around 9% for the year, and up 4% from the high value at the end of February. All this from an account of mostly short option spreads, specifically credit put spreads. What happened, and what can be learned?
I’ve used my go to option strategies of credit put spreads, complementary back ratio call spreads, and using call spreads to cover calls to take advantage of the reversal from the mid-March lows. It’s been a fight every day, and a different approach than normal, but the positions are working.
Lots of mistakes on the way down
I made a number of strategic errors along the way that accelerated my losses. For months preceding the COVID crash, I maintained a negative Delta position in my portfolio as the market moved up to new highs seemingly every day. I watched my short calls go deeper and deeper into the money, while I sold puts just below or at the strikes of my short calls for lower and lower Delta values. I took some losses and reset my positions with more neutral to positive Deltas to go with the run up as the new year started. As the news of the coronavirus started hitting the news from China in late January, I scrambled and went negative Delta on a down day, which backfired when the market proved resilient after a one week drop. I discussed this error in a previous post. The market went on to hit new highs in mid-February and I held my own, moving to a positive Delta as it appeared that the coronavirus would not be that big of a deal. I even let a large group of underwater short call spreads be assigned for a big loss after many earlier rolls had kept hopes alive for getting my money back if the market went down.
The following Monday, the market started making big drops down. Initially, this worked out okay. I still had a number of short call spreads deep in the money that benefitted from the initial drop. But at strikes just below these call spreads were short put spreads that started growing big negative values. I had sold these to collect premium to offset the rolls I did to the call spreads, thinking that they would never approach being in the money.
In the early weeks of March I was worried that a whipsaw up would drive my call spreads back negative, so I bought the call spreads back when they reached 25% of the width of the spread, a nice improvement from values of over 90% of the width of the spread, but a loss compared to selling them originally for 15-20% of the width of the spread. Meanwhile, I let the put spreads keep going deeper into the money. I even sold some additional put spreads at what seemed like high volatility and low Deltas, only to see them get swamped a few days later when the market dropped 5-10% multiple days in a row. By this time, whatever the market lost, I lost double. One day the market went down 10% and I lost 20% of my account- in one day! Those were hard days to keep a positive attitude.
The data that kept me going
I never really considered cashing out to stop the losses. If anything, I knew that getting out would simply lock in the losses I had in my account. The losses were paper losses- once the position is closed, the loss or gain is real. That doesn’t mean that there is any guarantee that a paper loss will reverse- in fact, the raw option probabilities at the time suggested otherwise. But other data gave hope for better days.
Volatility is mean reverting. When volatility is at historic highs, it is likely to come down sooner than later. At its peak, the VIX was just over 80, implying an 80% move in the S&P 500 in the following year, based on option prices. Normal VIX values are around 18. It will take time to get back to normal values, but values in the 50s, 60s, and 70s are unsustainable. The way the VIX comes down is for the market to go up. The only question was when it would turn around.
The VIX almost always overstates what future moves will be. And volatility skew drives put premiums to high prices in all market environments, but especially in times of high volatility. The only time that owning puts makes money is while the market is dropping quickly, and that is the only time that being short in puts loses. My position lost money due to both changes in underlying prices that moved my put strikes into the money, but also due to increased volatility that made the premium go up. Knowing that these premiums were unsustainable, I felt comfortable that I would get my put premium back if I could hold on long enough.
The options I sell are typically 5 to 8 weeks out from expiration. That gives me time to wait for a reversal, time to adjust positions without panic. Normally, I close positions 2-3 weeks prior to expiration, but conditions will sometimes drive me to either act earlier, or go closer to expiration. The key is that having time gives me choices. Normally, I look at time decay as my primary consideration for how I manage my positions. During this crash and partial recovery, price movement was my main concern. In Greek terms, Delta (price movement) was the primary concern, while Theta (time decay) and even Vega (volatility changes) took minor roles.
All of these factors have been drilled into my head from watching and studying the research of the great folks at TastyTrade.com. They have presented numerous studies that show how market downturns are opportunities for those who can take advantage. Of course, you have to have capital to really take advantage, and I was pretty tapped out by the time we hit bottom.
I have my own approach, and I also build a variety of models and studies to help guide my strategies. I’ve never been comfortable with undefined risk strategies, the use of naked options. This recent period has re-inforced that point of view. My research has focused on how to use spreads to define risk, but also provide a profitable rate of return. Spreads behave differently than naked options, and require different strategies. Ideally, I get the majority of my profit from far out of the money credit put spreads. On the other hand, I mostly sell calls as part of a back ratio spread, because I’ve found credit call spreads to be problematic due to long periods of market up movement.
My recent winning approach
As we approached the bottom on March 23rd, I closed the remaining credit call spreads in my portfolio. My sense was that we were getting to a point where upside risk was greater than downside risk, and I didn’t want to lose on the way back up.
1. Rolling the credit put spreads
With the market down 20-30%, I had many credit put spreads that were deep in the money with strike prices as much as 20% above the underlying price at the time. I figured that if I could move the spreads even half way closer to the current trading price, I’d have much better odds of getting some or all of my money back. On the worst down days, I rolled my put spreads down, either widening the spread, or paying to be closer. This meant rolling short puts with Deltas of 90 or more and moving them to around 70 Delta. Many of these moves paid off big within a week of the move when we had a 10% move up of the market in a day. I used up days to roll out put spreads that were at the money or slightly out to later expirations, collecting premium and giving myself more time. I wrote a separate post on this strategy a few weeks ago.
2. Adding delta neutral back ratio call spreads
I generally take both sides of the option spectrum in my trades. I sell puts and calls on the same underlying at the same expiration. I use the same amount at risk capital on each side. As I got rid of my call spreads and rolled my credit put spreads down, I wanted to double-dip with calls, but without the risk of getting beat up with a whipsaw move up. If I sold credit call spreads, I feared that big up moves would drive these new call spreads into big losses. I didn’t want to lose on both the way down and on the way back up. So, I used back ratio spreads instead. The way I set these up is I find call strikes that have the same width as my put spread, and have Delta values where higher strike is half the Delta of the lower strike. I sell the higher Delta call and buy TWO of the lower Delta calls. The call position is Delta neutral and takes on no additional capital risk, because I use the same width as the put spread I already have. For example, I may sell a 30 Delta call and buy two 15 Delta calls. If my puts are out of the money, I may even sell calls in the money, for example sell a 60 Delta call and buy two 30 Delta calls. I collect a premium, which I keep if the strikes end up out of the money. If the underlying goes up, I make money from owning twice as many calls as I sold. For more details, read a further explanation on my web page on back ratio spreads.
I do have some long stock positions where I have sold covered calls in the past. Most of those calls have gone deep in the money a long time ago, and I rolled them periodically to collect a small premium. The recent COVID crash gave me an opportunity to finally get out of these positions and reset for a turnaround. Even out of the money, these positions still had a lot of time value due to volatility being at high levels. As I looked at each position, I generally did one of two non-traditional things- I sold a credit call spread, or even a back ratio spread in a later expiration. What this means is that while I still sold a call on my position, I used some of the proceeds to buy higher strike calls. By doing this, I have choices if prices go up substantially, but I’ll still keep premium if prices go down or stay flat. The back ratio spreads have the potential to create additional profit, with two long calls outgaining one short call, on top of the return from the underlying shares that are being covered. There are some minor downsides to this, but in a period where price movement is the key consideration, back ratio spreads are a great use of calls, even when covering long shares of stock.
How it worked out
From late March through the middle of April, the market has gone back and forth, up and down, with more up days than down. The market is up substantially from its low on March 23, but still well below the highs reached in late February. My positions have taken advantage of these moves.
My put spreads get more and more healthy as the market moves up. Almost all of them are now out of the money, although I still have a few under water. I’m rolling them out as they approach 21 days to expiration, and only for a credit. I actually rolled up a put spread that had gotten too far out of the money- the short strike had a Delta in the single digits, so I reset the spread to a 19/13 Delta because expiration was still 35 days away. I now use down days to open put spreads with slightly higher volatility. It feels more like normal times.
The call back ratio spreads have generally worked out great. They benefit from big price swings, but are vulnerable to decreases in volatility. They work best with long expirations- 4 to 10 weeks, so I’m pushing my expirations out to accommodate them. I also adjust them frequently, rolling up when the market goes up and rolling down when the market goes down. I collect premium both ways, moving to Delta neutral each time. In a declining volatility environment and an up and down market nearly every day, collecting additional premium keeps me ahead of Theta and Vega decay.
I do have a few regular credit call spreads where the width of my put spreads were too small for a corresponding back ratio call spread. These are my new problem positions because the big up moves have put some of them in the money. I’m determined to fight these, and one by one, I’m converting them into back ratio spreads or closing them before they get out of control. I’m also only opening new put spreads that have a width that a optimal back ratio call spread can match.
Of the upswing back, I’d say that 50% of the gains have come from put spreads getting out of the money, 25% from my long stock/ETF shares, and 25% from call strategies.
Looking ahead
Now that my portfolio is getting closer to my normal strategies, I’m starting to pay attention to Theta values and work toward a more neutral Delta position. I’m still negative Theta because of how many long calls are in my back ratio call spreads, but I’m working these down by going to strikes further out of the money where Theta is more in decline. The underwater put spreads also have negative Theta, which should reverse when they get out of the money. I’m still long Delta, but my call positions are slightly negative. As my puts get more out of the money, Delta will go down. I’m also working to free up capital, so I can have funds to jump in if volatility spikes back up.
Conclusion
While I’m not happy with how I got into this mess, I’m feeling quite fortunate to have beaten the market back to for the year. The challenge is to keep up the positive momentum.
Generally, there is a way to roll any option position to a new more favorable position and even collect a credit, if more risk is taken on. This may mean converting a $10 wide spread to a $12 wide spread and collecting $0.05, but improving the the possibility of profit.
Every good option trading resource says that a trader needs to have a good management plan to avoid big losses. Usually this is followed with vague explanations of setting mental stops and adhering to them. I fully agree with this, except that I believe a trader shouldn’t have vague plans. When an option trader opens a trade, the trader should know what conditions, good or bad, will necessitate an exit. And a system like that will work great until it doesn’t, like maybe during a coronavirus outbreak.
Most of my option strategies involve selling defined risk credit spreads that I enter with many weeks until expiration. My plan is to exit every position 2-3 weeks before expiration, buying back the spread for less than I paid for it. For each strategy, I have a target profit to exit, and a loss limit that I use to get out.
But, sometimes a good plan just fails. What should I do if the market drops 5% overnight and my options strikes were 2% below yesterday’s close? I can wait for a bounce back, which once I’m underwater makes sense if I have time to wait. With my approach, I usually have time. But when a 5% drop becomes 15% or 25%, it’s pretty clear that the odds are I’m not going to see my spread get anywhere close to getting out of the money. This is one of several desperate scenarios I’ve found myself in, not just the past month, but other times as well.
So, what is there to do? Most professionals will say to take the loss and start fresh. If the position is a total loss and hopeless, just leave it until expiration and hope a miracle occurs. All the capital is gone. That’s probably sound advice, and if anyone asks what they should do, that’s what I’d say. But, that’s not always what I do.
Against all advice, and probably all probabilities, I will take a total loss and roll it into something else that has a better chance for success, but increases capital at risk. To repeat, I add even more capital at risk to try and salvage a bad situation, perhaps making a bad situation worse. If that just freaks you out to think about it, just stop reading and move along. Options involve risk, and these approaches might be called risk squared.
If you are nutty enough to still be with me, let me explain. More than most investments, options truly balance risk and reward. Or maybe it is more like a balance between probability of profit and potential reward. Most initial strategies I open have a high probability of profit, but a somewhat limited reward. Those strategies therefore have a dark side, the potential for big losses a small percentage of the time. More often than I should, when those losses happen, I choose to fight to get my money back, because the odds are somewhat switched the other way- I hope to get a big return on the additional capital I add to the position by recovering much of my loss.
Here’s a quick example of a credit/bull put spread. Let’s say I sell a $10 wide spread and collect $1 premium. In real money, I’m risking $1,000 to make $100. Since I collect $100, I’m really only risking the other $900. The odds are probably around 90% that if I hold the spread to expiration, the options will expire worthless. Or I probably have a 95% chance of being able to buy back the spread for $0.50 or less around halfway to expiration. I like those odds. (The odds are actually better, but that’s a different topic.) A few months ago, I did a trade like this over and over, and won 26 times in a row, each time keeping way more than half of what I collected. That’s great, but this post isn’t about the good times, it’s about that 5%, 10%, 20% or whatever percent that things don’t go as planned.
When a trade like the one above has the underlying equity drop in price many times more than the expected move, the position sits at max loss. So, the above $10 spread would sit with a value of $10, a cash value of negative $1,000 in my account. When this happens, it usually happens to a lot of positions at once, even if the portfolio of options is well diversified in every way possible.
Here’s what I do for this situation.
Plan A- get out
First, I try to get out before it gets this far- plan A. In a slow moving market, this is often possible, and I lose something like 1-2 times the premium I collect, but keep over half my capital. When I can, I do this, but there is downside to this practical strategy. Often, underlying prices fluctuate a lot and a position will show a loss, but then turn around for a profit. There is a whole statistic around this, the probability of touch. Read about it in my Greeks section of the website, under Delta. Suffice it to say, if I’m too quick to take a loss, I’ll take more losses than I should. So, the more time I have, the more leeway I give the position to recover. And when there isn’t time, I aggressively get out to preserve capital. In slow moving markets, that works, and it’s the smart trade.
Plan B – wait and see
When the market moves quickly against me and just blows through my strikes, I can continue with plan A and take a bigger loss, but assuming I’ve lost 80-90% + of my capital at risk, there isn’t much capital to preserve. At this point, closing locks in a huge loss to save a small amount of capital, or I can wait and potentially get a big chunk of capital back. Since I trade in a timeframe of several weeks, I like to take time to evaluate the situation. This is a luxury compared to day-trading options that are at expiration. The first question I ask is, how likely is the trade to turn around in the time left on the option contract? If the issue that caused the price drop appears temporary with the possibility of recovering by expiration, then it makes sense to do nothing but wait. If the issue behind the drop is continuing to make the underlying price drop, I will also wait to see how bad it gets before acting, even though that likely guarantees that the position will move to max loss. I wait, and I evaluate options.
Plan C- roll down and widen the position
When a position looks hopeless, I can either give up or do something about it. Generally, there is a way to roll any option position to a new more favorable position and even collect a credit, if more risk is taken on. This may mean converting a $10 wide spread to a $12 wide spread and collecting $0.05, but improving the probability of profit, or more accurately the possibility of profit.
Recently, I had a chance to do this when more than one put spread was blown out by the huge market drop from the coronavirus. Here’s one example. I had sold SPY puts spreads with strikes of 310 and 305 when SPY was trading at over 330 in mid February this year. I like to think of the trade in terms of Delta values. The 310 strike had a Delta of around 18 and the 305 was around 10. That is the sweet spot for me to open a put spread, and I collected $0.75 per share. Expiration was set for late March with a plan to get out in early March. However, the market dropped rapidly, due to the coronavirus, and SPY was well below 300 in a matter of days, and below 275 a week later. By that time, Delta values were between 80 and 90, and the spread was trading between $4.50 and $4.75. I was hopeful that maybe this was temporary, so I waited. When the price of SPY dropped to below $250 on a huge sell-off day, I rolled the spread down to 275 and 267.5 with an April expiration, and collected $0.03, and now increased my capital at risk. I thought more time would allow me to get out, even though my Deltas were still over 75. Unfortunately, the market kept going down. A little over a week later, SPY dropped below 220, and I decided to act again, rolling down to 240 and 230 for another $0.05 credit. Still, Deltas were over 75. Then the market went up, a lot. When SPY went over $250, the Deltas were under 30, and the spread could be bought for $2. I bought it back. In the end, I lost $1.18 premium per share. My original position would have expired a $4.25 loss. I could have rolled out and down again to get a chance at an actual profit by May, but I really wanted to free up capital with the market up. A few other similar positions were rolled down and out further using the freed capital, and maybe they’ll end up a profit. The point is, this position was set up for max loss, and by aggressively converting through a risk-adding roll, the loss was significantly reduced.
A few things I consider when I do this. I try to roll down underwater put spreads on big down days. This may seem counter-intuitive. If I’m at max loss and the market drops more, my position doesn’t actually change much. A $5 wide spread might go from a book value of $4.85 to $4.90 on a $15 underlying drop. I could then roll down the spread $15 for a small debit, or widen the spread to $5.50 or $6 and collect a small credit. I usually play around with different possible rolls, both on the same expiration date and later dates. If I can get more time for not a lot of extra cost or capital risk, that is preferable, since I’m waiting for a recovery.
Indexes vs. Individual Stocks
I also tend to do this more with equity index ETFs than I do with individual stocks. There is a lot of historic examples of markets bouncing back from big drops, even if the bounces are temporary. Individual stocks have more complexity in that they may or may not follow the rest of the market and have their own unique issues that drive their price in unique ways. My goal in a desperate situation is to use big declines in market value to reposition my option spreads to be able to get out of the money when a bounce occurs. I’ve just found that indexes are more likely to accommodate that strategy.
Spreads partially in the money
I want to differentiate between a spread that is fully in the money and one that is partially in the money. When I have a credit spread where both the short and long options are in the money, then I’m fully in the money, and max loss is a real possibility. When only the short option is in the money, but the long is still out of the money, I’m likely only sitting with a premium value of around half the width of the spread- $2.50 for a $5 wide spread, so the position is partially in the money. When a position is partially in the money, I have a couple of active choices, close before I lose the other half, or roll out for additional time and a credit. If the underlying price is actually closer to the short strike than the long, I can almost always roll out to a later expiration date with the same strike prices for a credit, and I may be able to roll down or narrow the width for less credit. The point is there are more positive choices that don’t add capital risk when a spread position is only partially in the money.
Naked put considerations
I also want to point out that these types or rolls are for credit put spreads, not naked puts. If you sold a naked put and you are in the money, the only choice available to avoid a loss is to roll out in time. The good news is that it is almost always possible to roll to the same strike price at a later date and collect a credit, something that isn’t true with a spread. The bad news is that there aren’t really any other choices. A naked put has undefined risk, and if the underlying price keeps dropping, the losses keep adding on.
Reverse an early assignment
When positions get deep in the money, the risk of early assignment grows. Assignment is when an option buyer exercises the option before expiration. Since we are talking about market downturns in this post, this is when a put buyer makes a seller buy the underlying security. Because I try to close or roll positions well before expiration, I don’t get assignments very often. But it can happen, and when it happened the first few times, it can be very troubling. I woke up one day and found that I had bought $500,000 of SPY, and also had an accompanying -$500,000 cash balance due. Before panicking, remember that a spread has an equal amount of long contracts to the amount of contracts that were assigned. If I had 20 short contracts assigned into 2,000 shares, I also had 20 long contracts still sitting in my account. When I get an early assignment, it usually means I get a negative cash balance in my account, and I can’t make any other trades until the assignment is adjusted in some way. There are a number of choices on how to get out of this and either not lose any more, or even reverse the situation and roll into a position to get some of the losses back.
The simplest thing to do would be to just sell the shares, which would likely get the cash balance back positive, and eliminate all the new shares. However, if the assigned shares are sold by themselves, the link between their value and the long options hedging them is broken. What link am I talking about, you may ask?- I don’t have a spread anymore, I have shares and long options. The link is that the shares were bought at the short option strike price. Let’s say I have a $5 wide spread, short a $250 strike put, and long a $245 strike put. If one contract is assigned, I buy 100 shares for a total of $25,000. But the assignment was because the underlying security was trading for less, say $225 a share. If I sell the shares at the market, I’ll only get $22,500 for them, a loss of $25 a share. Didn’t I buy a $245 put for some reason to help with this?
Another transaction I could do would be to sell both the shares and long put at the same time. Most likely both are well in the money. If that is the case, I could sell the combination and lose no more than the difference in strike prices. In my example above, I would make at least $24,500 to sell the combination of shares, because the long option price would be relative to the underlying price. For example, if the underlying price is $220, the long option would be worth $25, and the sale of the combination would be $245 per share, or $24,500 cash. If the underlying price was closer to the strike price, the sale might make a little more if there is time value in the long option.
My experience is that puts that are exercised early usually are exercised at very near the low of whatever is going on, say after a day when the market was just devastated. If the shares are sold alone and the long put is held onto, the market is more likely to go up and eat away the value of the long puts, which locks in the oversize loss. I’ve done it myself, but I don’t do it anymore. Instead, I look for ways to reset my position without losing a hedge.
An easy way to reset the position that was in place before an assignment is just undo the assignment- sell the shares and sell the same put that was assigned. So, if a $250 strike short put was assigned, just sell the assigned shares and re-sell the $250 strike short put. Likely, the sales price will be just under $250 per share total, maybe $249.90- just under due to the bid-ask spreads of each leg and any remaining time value in the option being sold. For example if the underlying was trading at $220, the shares would well for $220 and the $250 strike option would sell for just under $30, at total of just under $250. So, the total cash received would be just less than the $25,000 that was required to buy the shares. And we’d basically be back to where we started before the assignment, less a tiny amount of pricing spread and maybe some time value in the option. The problem is that since shares were assigned the previous night, they might be assigned again the next night, and the we’ll be right back in this mess again.
Here’s one more choice- let’s reverse our position at a different price and different expiration, a four legged trade. Some brokers allow this to be done as one trade, but most will require this to be done in at least two separate trades, which is fine. The plan is to sell the newly assigned shares with the remaining long put, and then open up a new spread that is more favorable, like we could have if the short option hadn’t been assigned. Using the example, we’ve been using with our $250/$245 spread with the $250 short strike assigned to us, we’d sell the shares and the $245 strike long put for about $245 a share, or a total of $24,500 cash. Then we sell a new put spread closer to the money, and maybe a bit wider to collect a $5 or more credit per share or $500 total per contract. After all that, we have a position more likely to get out of the money with more time, albeit with a bit more capital at risk.
Conclusion
So, when the market trashes a put spread, there are ways to recover, even if there is an early assignment. I try to pick the least bad of several terrible choices. Some ways are more complicated than others, but desperate positions may lead to desperate measures.
Final disclaimer- this information is just information, and not my advice. Trading options involve significant risk, often multiple times the value of the initial trade, and every trader has to understand and consider the risk of a trade for themselves. Every situation is different, and there is no correct answer for every situation. Adding addition capital to a lost position can likely lead to loss of that capital as well.
