Files
ollama-model-training-5060ti/training_data/curated/text/842a8de5281ce90997ed0bb94cd2fec65261d413b827dea93daa4be0f20ad186.txt

38 lines
3.0 KiB
Plaintext
Raw 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.
Chapter 42: The Best Strategy? 935
period. ( Of course, one would hope that he uses only 15 to 20% of his assets for spec­
ulative option buying.)
Many investors fit somewhere in between the conservative description and the
aggressive description. They might want to have the opportunity to make large prof­
its, but certainly are not willing to risk a large percentage of their available funds in
a short period of time. Spreads might therefore appeal to this type of investor, espe­
cially the low-debit bullish or bearish calendar spreads. He might also consider occa­
sional ventures into other types of strategies-bullish or bearish spreads, straddle
buys or writes, and so on-but would generally not be into a wide range of these
types of positions. The T-bill/option strategy might work well for this investor also.
The wealthy aggressive investor may be attracted by strategies that offer the
opportunity to make money from credit positions, such as straddle or combination
writing. Although ratio writing is not a credit strategy, it might also appeal to this type
of investor because of the large amounts of time value premium that are gathered in.
These are generally strategies for the wealthier investor because he needs the "stay­
ing power" to be able to ride out adverse cycles. If he can do this, he should be able
to operate the strategy for a sufficient period of time in order to profit from the con­
stant selling of time value premiums.
In essence, the answer to the question of "which strategy is best" again revolves
around that familiar word, "suitability." The financial needs and investment objectives
of the individual investor are more important than the merits of the strategy itself. It
sounds nice to say that he would like to participate in strategies with limited risk and
potentially large profits. Unfortunately, if the actual mechanics of the strategy involve
risk that is not suitable for the investor, he should not use the strategy, no matter how
attractive it sounds.
Example: The T-bill/option strategy seems attractive: limited risk because only 10%
of one's assets are subjected to risk annually; the remaining 90% of one's assets earn
interest; and if the option profits materialize, they could be large. What if the worst
scenario unfolds? Suppose that poor option selections are continuously made and
there are three or four years of losses, coupled with a declining rate of interest earned
from the Treasury bills (not to mention the commission charges for trading the secu­
rities). The portfolio might have lost 15 or 20% of its assets over those years. A good
test of suitability is for the investor to ask himself, in advance: "How will I react if the
worst case occurs?" If there will be sleepless nights, pointing of fingers, threats, and
so forth, the strategy is unsuitable. If, on the other hand, the investor believes that he
would be disappointed (because no one likes to lose money), but that he can with­
stand the risk, the strategy may indeed be suitable.