Files
ollama-model-training-5060ti/training_data/curated/text/2b1a6e8e8ff4d967742bea96044192d74738fea06bda88df7536475db99394e3.txt

40 lines
3.2 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Permalink Blame History

This file contains invisible Unicode characters
This file contains invisible Unicode characters that are indistinguishable to humans but may be processed differently by a computer. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
Cl,apter 5: Naked Call Writing 141
In essence, the writer who is rollingf or credits sells the most time premium that
he can at any point in time. This would generally be the longest-term, at-the-money
call. If the stock declines, the writer makes the time premium that he sold. However,
if the stock rises in price, the writer rolls up for a credit. That is, when the stock
reaches the next higher striking price, the writer buys back the calls that were origi­
nally sold and sells enough long-term calls at the higher strike to generate a credit.
In this way, no debits are incurred, although a realized loss is taken on the rolling up.
If the stock persists and rises to the next striking price, the process is repeated.
Eventually, the stock will stop rising - they always do - and the last set of written
options will expire worthless. At that time, the writer would make an overall profit
consisting of an amount equal to all the credits that he had taken in so far. In reality,
most of that credit will simply be the initial credit received. The "rolls" are done for
even money or a small credit. In essence, the increased risk generated by continual­
ly rolling up is all geared toward eventually capturing that initial credit. The similar­
ity to the Martingale strategy is strongest in this regard: One continually increases his
risk, knowing that when he eventually wins (i.e., the last set of options expires worth­
less), he profits by the amount of his original "bet."
There are really only two requirements for success in this strategy. The first is
that the underlying stock eventually fall back, that it does not rise indefinitely. This is
hardly a requirement; it is axiomatic that all stocks will eventually undergo a correc­
tion, so this is a simple requirement to satisfy. The second requirement is that the
investor have enough collateral backing to stay with the strategy even if the stock runs
up heavily against him.
This is a much harder requirement to satisfy, and may in fact tum out to be
nearly impossible to satisfy. If the stock were to experience a straight-line upward
move, the number of calls written might grow so substantially that they would
require an unrealistically large amount of collateral (margin). At a minimum, this
strategy is applicable only for the largest investors. For such well-collateralized
investors, this strategy can be thought of as a way to add income to a portfolio. That
is, a large stock portfolio's equity may be used to finance this strategy through its loan
value. There would be no margin interest charges, because all transactions are cred­
it transactions. (No debits are created, as long as the Martingale "limits" are not
reached.) The securities portfolio would not have to be touched unless the strategy
were terminated before the last set of calls expired worthless.
This is where the danger comes in: If the stock upon which the calls are written
rises so fast that one completely uses up all of his collateral value to finance the naked
calls, and then one is required to roll again, the strategy could result in large losses.
For a while, one could simply continue to roll the same number of calls up for deb­
its, but eventually those debits would mount in size if the stock persisted in rising. At