x% per month return is totally the wrong way to look at covered calls. If it were that easy, the gurus would just systematically write CCs and be done with it.
They don't.
Let's look at this a different way.
Supposing you own a basket of shares; you have two choices, just hold the share or systematically write calls over them.
Which is going to perform better?
In a rampant bull market, the CC strategy will underperform, just holding the shares will do better.
In a stagnant or bear market, the CC strategy will outperform the straight out share portfolio. You might not make a profit, but you will lose less.
...but in certain circumstances, the CC strategy will work against you over a series of trades no matter what the market is doing overall.
"Insurance" changes the structure of the returns because of how it affect the Greeks. A covered call with put insurance is simply a synthetic bull vertical spread, AKA a "collar".
This strategy has its uses and is a good one in the right circumstances, but it is no Holy Grail, despite what the seminar clowns say.
...and please do not use the term "share renting". It is inaccurate and misrepresentative of the mechanics of the strategy.
Anytime you hear someone waxing lyrical about "share renting", think to yourself - "muppet".
But then again i sell naked calls and puts with only a few covered calls thrown in.
Cheers for the explanation, I don't understand some of the terms you mentioned because I don't do call options or options at all myself.
But just wanting to get a grips on the potential returns etc that is available.
Ugh seriously Wayne, there should be a sticky thread on the derivatives section with one of your explanations on covered calls, collars etc.
Generally folks can't tell the difference between naturals and synthetics, how market makers work, hedging etc...
Well, basically anybody that says x% per month is talking out of their @ss. Anybody promoting 5% per month is specifically targeting stocks with high implied volatility (AKA perceived risk)
Why?
It only considers the premium received for the call and ignores the movement of the underlying.
Let's say you have a $100 stock on which you receive $5 premium on the ATM call... a purported 5% return.
But at expiry the stock has gone down to $90.
Have you made 5%?
Nope!
On the other hand, what if the stock has gone to $120?
You keep the $5, but have your shares assigned, forcing you to sell at $100.
Yes a 5% return, but it could have been a 20% return.
NB There are dynamic management procedures that can be used to potentially boost returns, but the principle remains the same.
That's a bit callous. Shouldn't they be entitled to a fair trial first?If you don't mind your shares getting executed its an AWESOME strategy...
Let's have some examples where you have done this MoM.And yes 5% a month is do-able EASY!
However you run the risk of limiting your profit return
Oh Brother!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?