626 Part V: Index Options and Futures 
Once one realizes that a PERCS is equivalent to a covered write, he can easily 
extend that equivalence to other positions as well. For example, it is known that a 
covered call write is equivalent to the sale of a naked put. Thus, owning a PERCS is 
equivalent to the sale of a naked put. Obviously, the easiest way to hedge a naked put 
is to buy another put, preferably out-of-the-money, as protection. 
Do not be deluded into thinking that selling a listed call against the PERCS is 
a safe way of hedging. Such a call option sale does add a modicum of downside pro­
tection, but it exposes the upside to large losses and therefore introduces a potential 
risk into the position. It is really a ratio write. The subject is covered later in this 
chapter. 
REMOVING THE REDEMPTION FEATURE 
At issuance, the imbedded call is a three-year call, so it is not possible to exactly 
duplicate the PERCS strategy in the listed market. However, as the PERCS nears 
maturity, there will be listed calls that closely approximate the call that is imbedded 
in the PERCS. Consequently, one may be able to use the listed call or the underly­
ing stock to his advantage. 
If one were to buy a listed call with features similar to the imbedded call in a 
PERCS that he owned, he would essentially be creating long common stock. Not that 
one would necessarily need to go to all that trouble to create long common stock, but 
it might provide opportunities for arbitrageurs. 
In addition, it might appeal to the PERCS holder if the common stock has 
declined and the imbedded call is now inexpensive. If one covers the equivalent of 
the imbedded call in the listed market, he would be able to more fully participate in 
upside participation if the common were to rally later. This is not always a profitable 
strategy, however. It may be better to just sell out the PERCS and buy the common 
if one expects a large rally. 
Example: XYZ issued a PERCS some time ago. It has a redemption price of 39; the 
common pays a dividend of $1 per year, while the PER CS pays $2.50 per year. 
XYZ has fallen to a price of 30 and the PERCS holder thinks a rally may be 
imminent. He knows that the imbedded call in the PERCS must be relatively inex­
pensive, since it is 9 points out-of-the-money (the PERCS is redeemable at 39, while 
the common is currently 30). Ifhe could buy back this call, he could participate more 
fully in the upward potential of the stock. 
Suppose that there is a one-year LEAPS call on XYZ with a striking price of 40. 
If one were to buy that call, he would essentially be removing the redemption fea-­
ture from his PERCS. 
Assume the following prices exist: