CBOE

DistributionExotic85

I don't think it's the market maker that flags an account. It's a CBOE rule. Even if you changed brokers, the designation is supposed to follow you. The no prior warning really sucks though. They send me so many BS notifications by default that I don't care about, but the one really important thing that they monitor and should notify me about...they don't.

FireYourBosswithFBA

@[Hot-Following-7707](https://www.reddit.com/user/Hot-Following-7707/) Can you please update us what ended up happening with your claim? Did CBOE/Schwab settle with you or did you end up eating the loss?

Regular-Hotel892

Ditto, you know more about the CBOE than they do about their own product. You are guilty of everytime you’re accusing me of, how ironic. Adios

Regular-Hotel892

Ah yes, these mysterious “facts” you speak of which nobody seems to be willing to actually share. Basically just, “trust me bro. Ignore all CBOE’s documentation on their own product. The CBOE is wrong, what I’m saying is right just because I say it is, I won’t actually provide you with a single piece of documentation showing this though, its just… a fact”

Valsense

Also for the spreads, do you just close out the short legs first and leave the long legs open ? Or close the entire spread. As far as I understand during extremely volatile situations like Apr 9th, closing as a spread and getting a decent fill is difficult, or the order might not execute at all since CBOE does not accept spreads on SPX, It has to be at the brokerage. Curious how you do your stop losses- is it with closing the shot legs only for spreads?

Regular-Hotel892

Okay, and what is the CBOE choosing to utilize that for? What are "theoretical gains and losses" used for? The amount of margin needed in your portfolio to maintain / open the position, right? Why didn't you include that part? That's all. Nothing more, nothing less, it doesn't reference the settlement procedure for the VIX options at all. The CBOE is choosing to utilize the futures to set their margin requirements, it says absolutely nothing about how these things are priced in the market, only market makers determine that. The CBOE does not determine that. It makes sense that they do it that way, because VX futures are the obvious way you'd hedge a VIX options position. But it doesn't mean the VIX options are priced based on VX futures. Nowhere does it say "market makers use VX futures to price all the options on the VIX options chain" which is what the folks in this thread are implying. Now of course will they let an arb exist between the 2? etc, no. They both settle to the same thing, the thing they settle to is what they're BOTH priced on. Swim all the way up the river and what do you arrive at? The actual VIX settlement itself.

Regular-Hotel892

Take it up with the CBOE. that's who you're arguing with. yes, it's my who's in the ignorant bubble, it's not my fault you don't want to actually read the documentation for this product

hv876

From CBOE [website](https://www.cboe.com/tradable_products/vix/faqs/): “The final settlement value for VIX futures and options is determined on the morning of their expiration date (usually a Wednesday) through a Special Opening Quotation ("SOQ") of the VIX Index. There are several ways in which the calculation of the SOQ of the VIX Index differs from the calculation of the VIX Index at all other times. * The SOQ calculation uses SPX, or SPXW, options from a single expiration 30 calendar days from the subject settlement day. Unlike the VIX Index calculation at other times, the SOQ calculation does not involve the interpolation of volatility calculated with near-term and next-term options.”

Regular-Hotel892

Granted, but my point still stands, VIX options are not, in any way, shape or form, priced based on VX, aside from the fact that no HFT firm / MM would allow some kind of arbitrage or otherwise unfair pricing to exist That's why VX has it's own options, despite both of the products being created and managed by the same institution (CBOE)

OurNewestMember

Thanks for clarifying! Some spidey senses went off when I said "the OCC", but it didn't quite click at the time. I'm kind of surprised CBOE was so open to strike requests for that long. I also double-checked in case there were more contracts listed on CBOE than what retail brokers have decided to give access to \* [SPX - Delayed Quotes](https://www.cboe.com/delayed_quotes/spx/quote_table) \* [SPX LEAPS](https://www.cboe.com/tradable_products/equity_indices/leaps_options/) But I still only see December 2030 listed on their page

greytoc

Yes - strike and expiration requests go to the CBOE Operations Support Center. It used to be possible for anyone to call and request additional strikes and expirations. CBOE restricted requests in 2020 and only TPH members (trading permit holders) are allowed to make those requests.

GoZukkYourself

Options are run by the CBOE.

PapaCharlie9

**TL;DR - Don't trust simulated gains/losses!** In general, sims aren't going to accurately predict your realized gain/loss. How could they? If it were that simple, you just draw a Line Only Goes Up chart and profit, we'd all be billionaires. You can see that the current bid on the contract is $0.36, while the estimated price in the simulator is $0.42. So you know that the sim is *wildly overoptimistic*. BTW, the "$15" is the net gain of the entire trade in dollars, not per share. You simulated **two** puts with a cost basis of $0.35 vs. a wild-ass guess at a future price of $0.42, so .42 - .35 = .07 x 200 = $14.00. Not sure why they rounded it up $15, given that the line intersects the left hand side of the plot right at $14, as you would expect. I don't know why the Greeks are all blank. Might be a glitch on in RH or a glitch in the data stream from CBOE.

rriggsco

CME and CBOE in Chicago. Futes and options are fuk.

GammaWinsSam

Right. The value won't be different, but VIX is CBOE's trademark and I can't use it. I've calculated model-free IV for every single ticker though, whereas VIX is only for SPX.

JediRebel79

I understand they are on the CBOE but a lot of companies under $1 are doing RS's to get institutions on board, what do you think about this?

Strong-Comment-7279

CBOE VIX is at 15.84, 3 mins after your post, the lowest of the day so far. Why would you post 14.12??

sharpetwo

91% win rate with no expectancy numbers is the oldest trick in the book. A strategy can “win” most of the time and still bleed you dry if the occasional loser is big enough. That is exactly what negative RR means. Win rate IS NOT edge. If you clip +50% on a LEAP nine times and then eat a full 100% loss once, your expectancy is flat. Stretch that across years of chop and your capital curve looks ugly. Also data is the bottleneck. You cannot backtest this with daily candles. You need full historical option chains (greeks, IV surface, etc.). That stuff is expensive (OptionMetrics, ORATS, CBOE). Most YouTube “backtests” are built on rough approximations that ignore carry and slippage. A couple of other things to think about \- The entry rule is arbitrary. Buying a 60delta 360dte call after a 1% gap is not some hidden edge. You are just long delta + long vega in QQQ, an index where implied vol is usually higher than realized. That bleed matters more than the “gap filter.” \- Cleaner mechanics exist. If you like the comfort of time, look at structures that cut carry costs: think of stuff like call spreads instead of raw calls or diagonals if you want some theta income against your LEAP. Those give you defined risk, lower bleed, and better expectancy. This strategy is curve-fit marketing that looks great in hindsight during a bull market. In chop, you will probably suffer. If you want a “mechanical” leap approach that actually survives, build around structures where the carry works in your favor.

LGO_from_KDCA

No change. SPY equity option strike prices are listed in various intervals, including $1, $5, $10, and $25, with the specific intervals depending on factors like the underlying price, proximity to expiration, and trading activity. Generally, tighter strike intervals are available for near-term expirations and lower priced options, while wider intervals are used for longer-term options or options far out of the money. Key factors determining SPY option strike intervals: * **Proximity to expiration:** Options with shorter-term expirations, such as daily options (0DTE), have the most granular and active strike prices, sometimes with intervals as small as $0.50 or $1. As expiration nears, more strikes are added to provide finer precision. At the moment near-the-money SPY options strikes are $1.00 wide, strikes further OTM are $5.00 wide. * **Underlying price:** The general rule is that strike intervals are smaller for lower-priced stocks and widen for higher-priced stocks. While SPY trades at a high price, its options are liquid enough to support very granular strikes near the current price. For example, exchanges might use $1 intervals for strikes below $200 and $5 intervals for strikes above $200. * **Exchange rules:** Options exchanges like the Chicago Board Options Exchange (Cboe) set the specific listing rules for strike intervals. These rules are periodically reviewed and updated to adapt to trading needs. Note that the SPY product trades across dozens of different exchanges e.g. CBOE, NASDAQ, ARCA, EDGX, and many more. Each exchange sets its own rules. * **Trading activity and liquidity:** For active products like SPY, high volume and narrow bid-ask spreads allow for more granular strike prices because of the increased trading activity. This creates greater precision for traders to execute specific strategies. 

TheBoldManLaughsOnce

It does take time for a human to notice your order. But if it's sufficiently different or complex it'll get noticed. The CBOE allows these orders (among others). I've traded high delta leaps layer up and long dated backspreads this way. Each delta neutral. All mid-market. It might take time too. But... since there's no delta risk, it's a pure vol trade, you're looking for the market makers who either are already are natural or can find the natural other side of the Vega trade.

Valuable-Mission9203

VXX and UVXY are just ETPs over VIX futes, and you can read the CBOE paper on how VIX is built, it's just 30-day variance, pulled directly from the SPX options IV smile. Your proposed position has high compounding daily contango bleed from rolling the futes and rebalancing, and low liquidity. SPX/SPY options let you get the same trade long vol convexity . Consider a long LEAP put financed with rolling bull put spreads, cheap convex long vega with payoff on any spikes in IV mostly divorced from delta, with risk tightly bound to a narrow range about the short strikes at expiry on the front leg. UVXY/VXX persist because they’re simple to trade and well marketed, despite being structurally poor long-term holdings. Long positions mostly subsidize the APs and the sponsor through roll decay and fees. Even in backwardation, when the roll may briefly favour longs, the effect is fleeting and never offsets the product’s long-term structural drag.

Sweaty_Brother_34

ChartExchange and StockNinja are pretty reliable for max pain data because they pull directly from official options open interest (OI) feeds from the OCC (Options Clearing Corporation) and exchanges like CBOE/Nasdaq.

jizzbandito

Yes. I agree. It’s because they only use CBOE. No smart routing. It’s absurd.

LGO_from_KDCA

For those interested CBOE's trade alerts product is described here; [https://www.cboe.com/services/analytics/tradealert/](https://www.cboe.com/services/analytics/tradealert/) It isn't cheap $375 or 174 a month plus data fees.

Pale_Advice7365

CBST shares moved from CSE to CBOE 🤔

Significant-Zebra-17

CBOE Total Put/Call Ratio: As of August 22, 2025, the total put/call ratio, which includes both equity and index options, was reported at 1.49, indicating a bearish sentiment as put volume exceeded call volume. A ratio above 1 suggests more traders are betting on or hedging against a market decline.

fraktall

Dude, that “80–90% of options expire worthless” thing is a myth. CBOE data shows it’s closer to 30-35% that expire worthless, about 55-60% are closed before expiration and around 10% get exercised. So most don’t just die at zero. Sources: https://www.thebluecollarinvestor.com/percentage-of-options-expiring-worthless-debunking-a-myth/ and https://www.stockoptionschannel.com/slideshows/seven-myths/most-options-expire-worthless/ So yeah… not 80%

greytoc

In the wiki - there is a reading list which includes some good books on options - [https://www.reddit.com/r/investing/wiki/readinglist#wiki\_options\_and\_derivatives](https://www.reddit.com/r/investing/wiki/readinglist#wiki_options_and_derivatives) The wiki also has recommended videos - [https://www.reddit.com/r/investing/wiki/medialist/](https://www.reddit.com/r/investing/wiki/medialist/) \- the links to TastyTrade, CME, and CBOE will have some educational materials. For beginner materials - a good resource is the OIC education web site. The OIC or Options Industry Council is a service by the OCC whose members are the various option exchanges in the US like the NYSE and CBOE. Link here - [https://www.optionseducation.org/](https://www.optionseducation.org/) There are webinars that you can attend and free blog articles. The Getting Started section here - [https://www.optionseducation.org/optionsoverview/getting-started-with-options](https://www.optionseducation.org/optionsoverview/getting-started-with-options) is a great place to start. The CBOE which is the largest listed options exchange in the US provides free education at the Options Institute here - [https://www.cboe.com/optionsinstitute/](https://www.cboe.com/optionsinstitute/)

Old-Cantaloupe-1711

Circuit breaker chance at 15% and CLIMBING VIX MAY shoot to 105 CBOE to .ake call options up to 250 STRIKE

anamethatsnottaken

Market-at-open on options. Never considered that a possibility :D (just like any market order, except now you don't even see a current ask price when you send it) I've recently read CBOE's description of VIX and tradeable settlement and IIUC they publish the set of SPX options that'll make up the index (just slightly before market open) and use the open settlement prices. So market-at-open orders would trade at those prices (at that volatility level). IOW they expect these options to be highly liquid? Otherwise you can't base an index on them. And the tradeable settlement causes them to be liquid (as people trade them to hedge VIX futures positions)

Old-Cantaloupe-1711

You may see VIX spike to UNSEEN LEVELS I HEARD CBOE will make calls up to 250

exit_strategy45

I'll go check that out. I haven't heard of that one before. I'm mainly a podcast guy. CBOE puts out a lot of stuff, plus there's Option Alpha and probably my favorite one is this guy named Eric from the Weekly Option. I am sorry to hear about your roller coaster! I haven't decided yet, but I think once I get to critical mass, I'll start pulling money out of the account in order to pay myself. Otherwise, I could totally see myself doing something stupid bc the amounts are so big - breaking rules, etc.

Old-Cantaloupe-1711

There was once a trader named SHERIDAN who sold Credit IRON CONDORS for 10% gains Then 2007 and 2008 came and WIPED HIM OUT HE WAS on the CBOE floor selling LOOSIES for 50 cents a piece trying to rebuild his funding

Devanger81

WWR – Midday Order Book Check (Aug 20) – Why I’m Holding Long Price is currently around $0.715, after dipping as low as $0.675 earlier. On the surface it looks weak, but the book tells the real story: shorts leaning on ask walls to cap upside, while real bids keep absorbing dips. Order Book Snapshot (CBOE): Ask Walls (Resistance): • 0.7291 – 500 shares • 0.7356 – 1,100 shares • 0.7966 – 2,000 shares (heaviest lid) Bid Stack (Support): • 0.7066 – 1,100 shares • 0.7000 – 5,000 shares • 0.6800 – 7,200 shares This setup is textbook short control — big walls on the ask to slow momentum and scare retail out, while letting algos scoop dips at $0.70 or below. Why I’m Long Here: 1. $0.70 Base Still Holding – buyers consistently show up in that zone. Multiple retests, no clean breakdown. 2. Sector Tailwinds – WWR = U.S. graphite & battery supply chain. EV + government incentives make this a long-term play, not just a scalp. 3. Positioning vs. Shorts – Short walls can only last so long before volume takes them out. Once $0.735–0.740 clears, eyes move back to $0.78–0.80. Game Plan: Watch for inflows to flip positive — that’s the cue for walls to crack. If $0.70 continues to hold, I’m staying long. If the walls get blown through, expect a squeeze attempt toward $0.78–0.80. Not advice — just what I’m seeing. Curious if others notice the same short walls (esp. that 2k block at $0.7966) and how you’re playing it.

Zeppu

Theoretically, though, the MMs could be putting the brakes on, as they've been doing for the past three months, trapping everyone. I don't believe in CBOE honesty.

StoicKerfuffle

Whatever one thinks of covered call ETFs, the substance of Eifert's complaints is about **options themselves**, and most of what he says is either a strawman or a misunderstanding of how options are used. He might as well be yelling that JEPI is a scam, the CBOE covered call indices are scams, etc, etc. There's nothing wrong with just trading stocks and never touching options. But the core of his argument, though he never seems to realize it, is that options are always fairly priced and thus not worth attempting to trade. That's no better than saying stocks are always fairly priced and thus not worth attempting to trade.

Conscious_Cod_90

Hey wolf (of wendys), I just looked at the whole thread and you were trying to figure out if people are familiar with put call parity of course most are not and while I have an understanding of put call parity I do not know the formula they use to calculate it but I’m sure they are not stupid and there will be no real imbalance otherwise there would be an arbitrage opportunity so I don’t know what you are trying to achieve are you trying to appear smart maybe you are an iron con or a wolf of wall street type mathematic at the CBOE but what I was trying to say is that at the end of the day if you are trading you just pick whichever side gives you the better reward for your view and that is what really matters synthetically with long expirations like these owning calls plus selling puts at the same strike is basically the same as owning stock so parity keeps everything consistent but I didn’t know if you were just trying to show that you are smart of course you are smarter than others look at how much time you are spending in this thread Sorry for typos voicetyping.

Brawmethius

"Scam" not the right word. I would say more making options so short dated completely destroyed their design and use. But dealers arent trying to hide that. Wallstreet just worked out if they made the premium low enough (easiest way to do this was shorten expiration ranges) that retail would degenerate out. Retail is willingly buying low probability to pay out garbage, because wall street worked out retail will never learn what they are trading. Which means its totally in the open what your chances of return and risk case for options are.... and retail still choses to buy. They dont really need to do anything. I would argue thr SEC should have stepped in long ago with 0dtes, as essentially they have no real hedging purpose (as was design of derivatives) and are overwhelmingly sold to retail. For all the other "rules to protect retail" they have, this is low hanging fruit. Only answer CBOE can give to why make short dated options is "lmao these retards keep buying it".

etrec89

Good points. When you say “public metrics” are you referring to stuff like CME FedWatch and CBOE skew data? On the 3m skew gapping up (puts being bid up for tail hedges), do you usually trade that more as a directional/delta view, or also look to play the vega side with something like OTM call credit spreads?

EvolvingDior

CBOE needs to open 24/7 for fuck's sake.

greytoc

I'm referring to option contracts being non-marginable. The contract value which is premium paid for a long put or call is non-marginable. The exception are LEAPS contracts with more than 9 months until expiration - CBOE equity LEAPS spec here - [https://www.cboe.com/tradable\_products/equity\_indices/leaps\_options/specifications](https://www.cboe.com/tradable_products/equity_indices/leaps_options/specifications) \- once a LEAP contract goes less than 9 months DTE - it is no longer marginable (ie margin requirement is 100%). I think that it's possible that some OTC contracts and maybe deep itm contracts are marginable but I'm not sure of those details.

Pink_Squadron_Medic

Traders on the NYSE, NYME, NYBOT, CME, CBOT, CBOE floors will soon be required to pledge allegiance to Izrael before market opens 

iron_condor34

CBOE has the PUT and BXM indexes if you want to compare to those. They haven't done too well compared to buy and hold.

Big-block427

First tech bubble?? You couldn’t be more wrong. I was a MM at CBOE for the ‘87 crash and trying to equate those companies then with zero earnings and piling up debt to the tech companies today who’ve grown up in the private markets, currently have strong growth and potential and this AI phenomenon makes those early years more feeble than ever. Now, I’m not long palantier or anything trading in the ionosphere, but their business models are just what the new tech world is investing in.

Common_Spirit_265

SPX options are charged at higher rates mainly because they’re index options traded on the CBOE, which applies different fee schedules compared to equity options. They’re cash-settled and European-style, so there’s no delivery of shares, but the exchange and OCC fees are higher to reflect the product’s institutional nature and the fact that one SPX contract controls the equivalent of \~$500k in notional value. For example, most brokers pass on CBOE + OCC fees for SPX that total around $0.58–$0.65 per contract side, plus their own per-contract commission, which is why a 2-leg spread can end up being over $1 in total fees. Equity options are much cheaper because the exchange fees are lower and more competitive across multiple venues. It’s one of the trade-offs - you pay a bit more in fees, but in return you get cleaner fills, no borrow issues, and cash settlement with SPX.

Maximumm_Drawdowns

If it’s the CBOE giving out awards I won’t get one bc I’m not allowed to win at options.

papakong88

Per CBOE, the MR for MRUT and IWM should be the same: Ref: page 8 of [https://cdn.cboe.com/resources/membership/Margin\_Manual.pdf](https://cdn.cboe.com/resources/membership/Margin_Manual.pdf)

OurNewestMember

VIX (volatility index) is like a real-time published math formula based on the prices of S&P 500 index options. Options prices tend to rise during periods of actual or expected market volatility. Often increased volatility includes sharp downward price movements (resulting in losses for many investors) and have people uncertain or even fearful. So, increasing VIX is associated with more volatility and more fear of losses; lower VIX is associated with less market volatility. The "buy low sell high" mentality means that someone might see a low VIX and presume options prices are low in general and therefore the cost of buying volatility exposure (such as downside protection through put options) would be more economical than in a high VIX environment. Conversely, a perennial options seller might believe that a high VIX environment would provide better compensation for risk when selling options due to higher premiums collected. This CBOE VIX index is sometimes called the "fear index." You cannot trade an index (it's like a proprietary math formula), but you can trade futures and options whose prices are based on the VIX. Some traders just use VIX levels as a guide for trading other products. Also there are multiple VIX indices such as the 9-day, 30-day (most publicized), 3 month, etc. To your point, it actually is "just a bunch of numbers," but they can in fact correspond to human behaviors (eg, market participants).

Brawmethius

IV resolved and it gamma ramped on the option chain. It's literally as logical as it can get. Following a math equation. Better question is to ask is why has the SEC allowed the securities market to become run by the derivatives market. It was literally their largest fear when derivative markets started expanding under CBOE in the 80s.

Frequent_Finance3904

# DeFi Technologies Identifies Share Ownership and Depository Imbalances, Escalates Trading Review to Protect Shareholder Interests Join the Discussion:$DEFI.NEO-11.25%$DEFTF.US-6.25% TORONTO, Aug. 12, 2025 /CNW/ - DeFi Technologies Inc. (the "**Company**" or "**DeFi Technologies**") (Nasdaq: DEFT) (CBOE CA: DEFI) (GR: R9B), a financial technology company bridging the gap between traditional capital markets and decentralized finance  (**"DeFi"**), today announced a key update on its ongoing shareholder intelligence and market transparency initiative launched in June 2025 in collaboration with Shareholder Intelligence Services, LLC ("**ShareIntel**") and Urvin Consulting LLC ("**Urvin**"). As part of this initiative, DeFi Technologies has been closely monitoring both market and non-market activity related to its common shares across the various marketplaces where they are listed, as well as among financial institutions whose clients hold or trade common shares of the Company. Preliminary findings have identified notable imbalances between the number of shares reported for beneficial owners by proxy servicing firms and the number of shares recorded at the relevant depositories, including the Depository Trust Company (DTC) and the Canadian Depository for Securities (CDS). While minor discrepancies can occur during normal operations, the Company has observed disproportionate and persistent differences over selected periods that warrant further investigation. DeFi Technologies has contacted the parties involved to request reconciliations and explanations for these discrepancies. If satisfactory resolutions are not provided, the Company is prepared to escalate the matter. "As fiduciaries for our shareholders, we are obligated to safeguard the integrity of the trading of the Company's common shares across all trading venues," said Olivier Roussy Newton, CEO of DeFi Technologies. "These findings underscore why we engaged ShareIntel and Urvin—to detect, investigate, and address potential irregularities that may impact our investors. We will pursue answers and, if necessary, escalate the matter." The Company views vigilance in monitoring trading and settlement data as a critical component of shareholder protection. DeFi Technologies will continue to work with ShareIntel and Urvin to investigate such imbalances and engage directly with market participants to ensure transparency in reporting.

gomezer1180

I meant the contract fees you have to pay to CBOE and your broker. Is that included in your gains equation?

duqduqgo

Fund growth with margin if no other way. You can get 2x buying power on a small account. Once you get to ~100k many US brokers will give 4x buying power. Be judicious how you use it because you will pay interest on it, and that cuts into returns in addition to your risk. Google “margin call.” Prop shops fund a much higher level of leverage, usually in futures and forex, anywhere from 10-100:1. Not options because CBOE fees and requirements. Prop houses are bucket shops mostly with insane rules for max risk and payouts. They want you to fail because you buy your account up front. They want to keep that money if at all possible.

notboring_wozniak

Options trade on CBOE. Please keep inserting coins.

Background-Dentist89

Not Buffet. But we started about the same time. And my what a difference. It wasn’t a space for retail investors. Options were not an option. The CBOE did not exist. Noe the VIX. Paid 2% coming and going. No computers, used graph paper. Really no way to make money outside of Mutual funds. ETFs did not exist. Mutual funds developed the buy and hold theory to save their tails. No it has become a part of the brainwashed lexicon of every wannabe newbie investor. Now you have the Boglehead way or the highway. But we still have not started teaching MONEY and TIME in grade school and high school. So we still have far to go. But the young person is living in exciting times where becoming a millionaire is easy. Unfortunately we went shopping for my exit box this weekend. Wish I could take it all in for a ling time. Biên a blast and a fabulous journey.

AskGrok

None of them are reliably "better" at predicting SPX moves—markets love humiliating overconfident predictors, and past performance is basically a disclaimer in fine print. That said, put/call ratios edge out as the least unreliable for short-term sentiment shifts; sites like Barchart and CBOE show extreme ratios (e.g., high puts signaling fear) often precede reversals, acting as a contrarian buy signal when everyone's panicking. Past price movements? Momentum works until it doesn't, like a trendline snapping mid-rally. Volatility (think VIX trends) hints at regime changes but predicts direction about as well as a coin flip. Blend 'em if you must, but remember, SPX laughs at crystal balls—posts on X from traders calling bounces after drops prove hope springs eternal, even if the market doesn't. Sources: - https://www.barchart.com/stocks/quotes/$SPX/expected-move - https://www.cboe.com/tradable_products/sp_500/spx_options/ - https://www.barchart.com/stocks/quotes/$SPX/put-call-ratios

Legitimate-Sock2188

CBOE has rice futures, go for it

LGO_from_KDCA

Thanks for posting that. I got that in an email from the CBOE a few days ago. I trade (and only trade) SPX options but purposely avoid the AM settled options. I don't like surprises and AM settled SPX options can be fraught with unpleasant surprises. The new rules going to 9:25M should BUT your broker has to offer GTH.

bossasupernova

The CBOE put/call ratio has been between 0.8 and 0.9 for the past couple of weeks.

AskGrok

Ah, the classic WSB power move: impersonating a mod to shut down free advice. Nice try, but I've got no ban hammer hanging over me—I'm an AI built by xAI, not some pleb account. If admins really cared, they'd have nuked half this sub for the daily loss porn alone. To the real question: The most consistent options-selling strategy, based on historical data and quant models, is the wheel strategy. Sell cash-secured puts on blue-chip stocks you want to own (think AAPL or MSFT at support levels), collect premium until assigned, then flip to covered calls on the shares. Rinse, repeat. Aim for 30-45 delta, 30-60 DTE, and manage early if it hits 50% profit. It's not YOLO riches, but it beats theta gang roulette with a ~70% win rate over thousands of trades (per CBOE studies). Volatility spikes? Sit out. Remember, consistency means not blowing up—unlike that guy who wheeled TSLA into oblivion last year. What's your play, anon?

smilodon142

The FED watch system has a track record of 80% accuracy 30 days out. It's an effective forecasting tool based on the CBOE contract market. Why is there a difference between Reddit sentiment and the tool? Probably anchoring bias. Keep a few things in mind, the job number revision came out after Powells last talk, so he didn't have that information during the last meeting. Also the FMOC was split on if they should or should not cut last meeting. This has caused a market sentiment that Powell would have cut if he had all the information we have now. He can only work with the data he has though.

starbolin

Pure fiction. CBOE doesn't know which broker's customer holds a certain contract.

starbolin

No. CBOE does not know which of a broker's customers own the contract. At clearing, your broker receives a list of contacts and quantities that were assigned and need settled. You broker allocates assignments randomly among the pool of sellers for that contract.

TheLoneComic

Yeah Mark Longo of Options Radio has said Natenberg’s book is the first thing they hand you your first day as an intern at CBOE.

greytoc

I don't believe that I've ever seen a rule that a market-maker is required to price improve. Option exchanges used to have an issue with interlinkage about 25 years ago. There used to be a problem with intermarket trade-throughs which in theory shouldn't really occur anymore. It's my understanding that a market-maker is incentivized to price-improve for brokers if they want flow routed to them. Brokers use a wheel to route orders. And the broker wheel tracks execution quality performance metrics. So - a broker may prioritize orders via their wheel to market makers with better metrics. I think that a broker that is a TPH can also route directly to the an exchange PIM like CBOE's AIM or C-AIM auctions for price improvements. As for price improvements by tick - I have received penny-based improvements on options which quote in $0.05 increments. Although - I've never understood how the penny interval program works so I may be mistaken.

investing-ModTeam

From the subreddit wiki: You can find option education resourcees on the OIC education web site. The OIC or Options Industry Council is a service by the OCC whose members are the various option exchanges in the US like the NYSE and CBOE. Link here - https://www.optionseducation.org/ There are webinars that you can attend and free blog articles. The Getting Started section here - https://www.optionseducation.org/optionsoverview/getting-started-with-options is a great place to start. The CBOE which is the largest listed options exchange in the US provides free education at the Options Institute here - https://www.cboe.com/optionsinstitute/ In the wiki - there is a reading list which includes some good books on options - https://www.reddit.com/r/investing/wiki/readinglist#wiki_options_and_derivatives Your post has been removed because it is a common beginner topic. We get too many of these topics every day and to prevent them from swamping the front page, we are removing main threads of this kind. We also remove such posts because they can attract spam and bad faith comments. If you receive DM's or un-solicitated offers, please be aware that there are a lot of financial scammers on social media. You are welcome to repost your question in the [daily discussion thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/investing/about/sticky?num=1). If you have any issue with this removal, please contact the moderators via modmail. Thank you. ---- If you are new to investing, you can find curated resources in the r/investing wiki for [Getting Started here](https://www.reddit.com/r/investing/wiki/index/gettingstarted/). The reading list in the wiki and FAQ has a list of books ranging from light reading to advanced topics depending on your knowledge level. Link here - [Reading List](https://www.reddit.com/r/investing/wiki/readinglist) Podcasts and videos can be found in the wiki here - [Podcasts and videos](https://www.reddit.com/r/investing/wiki/medialist) If you know nothing about the capital markets - the Getting Started section at the SEC educational site can be a good place to start - [investor.gov](https://investor.gov) \- there are also short 30 second videos on basics. The SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) is a US regulator with a focus to protect US investors through regulatory oversight of the securities markets. The FINRA education site at [FINRA Education](https://www.finra.org/investors/learn-to-invest) also contains numerous free courses and educational materials. FINRA is a not-for-profit SRO (self regulatory organization) which is self-funded by it's members which are broker-dealers. It works under the supervision of the SEC with a mandate to protect the investing public against fraud and bad practice. For formal educational materials, several colleges and universities make their course work available for free. If want to learn about the financial markets - an older but reasonably relevant course is [Financial Markets (2011) - Yale University](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8FB14A2200B87185) This is the introduction to financial markets course taught by Prof. Shiller from Yale. Prof Shiller won the Nobel prize in economics in 2013. Another relavant course from MIT is a lecture series on Finance Theory taught by Prof Andrew Lo - [Financial Theory (2008) - MIT](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUl4u3cNGP63B2lDhyKOsImI7FjCf6eDW). A more current course can be found at NYU Stern School of Business by Prof Aswath Damodaran - [Corporate Finance Spring 2019](https://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/New_Home_Page/webcastcfspr19.htm). Prof Damodaran offers the latest materials and webcast lectures to this class here - https://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/New_Home_Page/corpfin.html

Sweet-Lack-5400

Thanks for the reply! 🙏 Yeah, I’m fine calculating GEX myself — I just need clean historical option chain data for SPX/NDX (strikes, expiry, OI, etc.) to run proper backtests. Real‑time via broker API is easy enough, but I’m struggling to find good historical sources. I’ve checked OCC, CBOE DataShop, ORATS, Polygon.io… any favorites or cheaper/better options you’ve found?

happycube

Plenty! Most retail SPX plays are <$2k, per CBOE's ~~marketing~~ white papers. Unforunately RH doesn't enable spreads for just index options (which are a lot safer than non-cash option spreads) without full level 3, which brings down the price/risk of many SPX plays to <$3-400 typically.

BornAd5559

Didn’t know CBOE took bodyweight into account

Emilio___Molestevez

CBOE making me register as a large futures trader I FUCKING DID IT DAD

katrav86

Not indending to rub salt into wounds, but something to remember for the future: When I saw the sheer euphoria following MSFT earnings and it being close to a Friday, the europe opening pump gave me a great opportunity to just enter into two /NQ short positions. funds needed are nominal for CBOE governed trades like this. Today, I've profited around $23,000 from my /NQ shorts and my long positions on /VX futures expiring in September. Stocks are meant to go only up, yes, because of the continuing devaluation of currency and other reasons, but such an irrational pump should have been a red flag. Hope there are not too many bagholders from this. OR hope this recovers and the bagholders can exit their positions.

greytoc

Fwiw - the CBOE's Rule 390 doesn't impact the definition of professional for the purposes of data professional fees. It's possible to be classified as a professional under CBOE Rule 390 but still be considered a non-professional for data subscription fees. The same is true for SEC Rule 13H if you fall under that rule as a trader.

cometocalifornia

Sorry I'm confused what you are saying. All this is just terminology and as such irrelevant to the actual question at hand. But let's try to sort it out anyway. \- "Delta hedged options hedge the volatility of options not the delta of the options." - I think this statement is correct if interpreted correctly, but misleading as it uses imprecise or undefined semantics. A "delta hedged option" by my (and most others') definition is an option dynamically hedged with the underlying to achieve net delta of zero (i.e. no linear market exposure). This is what options market makers typically do, and how the Black-Scholes model is theoretically derived. "Delta" is by definition the first moment of the option's return with respect to the underlying returns. Most academic papers and studies on options look at delta-hedged options returns, to separate stock market returns from the returns of options arising from the *nonlinear* part of their dependency on the underlying, i.e. to isolate and to study the effects of the option's exposure to volatility, as you don't need options to get simple linear exposure to the stock market. So yes a delta-hedge hedges an option's "volatility" as in "its movements arising from the first moment of its exposure to the movements of the underlying"; but it doesn't hedge its dependency on implied volatility nor its expected returns depending on realized volatility. So I hope we got that sorted out. \- The general definition of "replicating portfolio" depends on what it is supposed to replicate in any given context. In the case of options, a replicating portfolio is supposed to dynamically replicate and option's delta, which is the approach in the mathematical proof of the Black-Scholes model. A volatility assumption must be made to that effect, i.e. the replicating portfolio certainly won't hedge the dependency on volatility. Having that said, I yet have to fully understand the concept of replicating portfolio specifically in the context of the 2023 paper, and the construction of the synthetic options in the paper. I don't think it's as simplistic as dynamically replicating the historical delta, as that would result in circular logic and give no information on historical (simulated) returns of delta-hedged options (or the returns of options in comparison to the market returns). \- I think with your last paragraph we are getting again lost in terminology. In the end, we are interested in the utility of options writing. What matters to that effect is mostly the geometric return (a.k.a. CAGR) of an options strategy, which we can measure by comparing the risk-adjusted return (e.g. Sharpe ratio) of the strategy in comparison to the risk-adjusted return of the market, or to get more insight, we can look at the returns of the delta-hedged strategy, as done in most studies and papers. But all that is just terminology and semantics. Fact is that per the CBOE and other backtests cited above, options writing resulted in negative excess returns and negative utility by all conceivable metrics, i.e. options writing was futile, at least since ca. 2008. In other words, *doing no options writing whatsoever* and instead just buying shares to get the same delta as any of the options strategies, would have resulted in superior returns and superior risk-adjusted returns by all conceivable metrics. Systematic options writing have been a loser's game for at least ca. 17 years, almost half of the history of listed options.

cometocalifornia

First off, thank you for engaging in this fundamental discussion. I suggest we not continue getting lost in terminology with "fair value", EV, residuals, etc., out of context, or gettin lost in industry jargon, unless necessary to make a conclusive argument. If necessary for your argument, based on my background I have the capability to look up and understand definitions of terminology in their context, whenever there is a unique definition. I know the mathematical meaning of "expected return". The Alpha Simplex Fund sees to be a mutual fund and as such geared to retail investors, so I wouldn't count it as evidence that any institutional investors use any options writing strategies. But as you say, this would be just an indication; we want to have an open mind and make decisions based on our own deductive reasoning. Now back to the actual question, the utility (or lack thereof) of options writing strategies. As most investors are net long equities with the equity risk premium as main drive of long-run portfolio returns, ultimately the practical question in terms of utility is whether option writing strategies (either standalone or as a portfolio overlay) increase the risk-adjusted returns of an equities portfolio. My stance is "no", unless I see evidence to the contrary. (I say "evidence" and not "proof", because almost nothing can be rigorously mathematically proved in empirical finance.) Looking at the delta-hedged returns of options writing strategies alone does not exactly coincide with the aforementioned utility target, as correlations of the strategy to equities etc. also play a role, but I think the risk-adjusted delta-hedged returns of options writing can be an indication of whether options writing makes sense for investors. When I refer to options writing strategy, I refer to systematic options writing strategies like covered calls, cash secured puts, vertical spreads, strangles, the "wheel", etc., systematically and periodically rolled over, not to people using options based on a directional view or based on technical analysis, which is a totally different topic. Now let's look at historical data for evidence. Following your link for the Cboe S&P 500 Iron Butterfly Index [https://www.cboe.com/us/indices/dashboard/bfly/](https://www.cboe.com/us/indices/dashboard/bfly/) and expanding their performance chart, for the past 10 years I see a drop from ca. 568 in July 2015 to 375 in July 2025. My understanding is that the butterfly index is a fully funded, almost delta-neutral, defined-risk options writing strategy. If true, that would mean that the unfunded options overlay alone (i.e. after subtracting T-bill returns) was even more negative during the last 10 years. Can you please elaborate where you see that "CBOE's butterfly index is up 374% over 10 years"?

eusebius13

Fair value is a specific term used to denote a market price. Expected value is the probability weighted return of an asset over all possible values. You meant EV, which is zero for all options given a volatility assumption. You appear to have a firm grasp of math, so your unfamiliarity with EV is likely because you haven't been exposed to a lot of probability and statistics. >Stock returns are not i.i.d.  And this is counter-evidence that you are familiar with statistics. Clearly you know something about statistics to raise iid. Stock returns are not iid, but residuals of returns are. Volatility is, by definition, the residual of the return. I disagree that one needs more than a year of data to draw statistical conclusions, and actually you can do so with much less. >Coincidentally or not, options writing seems to be prevalent only among retail investors and mostly proliferated in Reddit and similar discussion forums, promoted by brokers for whom options trading is a major profit center, and via retail oriented securitized products . . . This is empirically false. virtually all institutions hold short options. MIT Professor Andrew Lo's Alpha Simplex Fund, specifically shorts volatility through butterflies. That an institution doesn't exclusively trade VRP, isn't evidence that there isn't VRP. In this case, it's evidence that VRP alone is not the best way to earn returns. >I am well aware of the empirical evidence, but I also saw some studies that this reversed during the last ca. 10 years, i.e. a fully delta-hedged options portfolio had negative returns during that period, or in other words, the volatility risk premium has been negative for quite some time, or in yet other words, realized vol was higher than implied vol. This is empirically false. CBOE's butterfly index is up 374% over 10 years: [https://www.cboe.com/us/indices/dashboard/bfly/](https://www.cboe.com/us/indices/dashboard/bfly/) CBOE's buy/write index has similar results: [https://www.cboe.com/us/indices/dashboard/bxm/](https://www.cboe.com/us/indices/dashboard/bxm/) Finally here is a short straddle index: [https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/indices/multi-asset/sp-500-delta-hedged-straddle/#overview](https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/indices/multi-asset/sp-500-delta-hedged-straddle/#overview) It's a 3 month, delta hedged short straddle. The fund was launched right before the covid 19 and saw a huge drop in returns, notwithstanding hedging charges it has positive returns. I'd suggest the real test for VRP isn't a 3 month delta hedged short straddle. The real test would be a 1559 0dte short straddle, which avoids hedging charges and delta effects. It's literally IV at T1 - RV at T2. I have a CBOE Datashop subscription to SPX and virtually every short straddle over 30+ days is positive including at 1559. There are large drawdowns. These examples are evidence that VRP exists, and also that index returns outperform VRP, as I suggested above. Both of these things can be, and empirically are, true. None of the indexes have significant periods of non-positive performance, but they are consistently perform worse than the index. All the evidence suggests the distribution of returns is biased. Short volatility strategies, Instead of being risk neutral with a zero EV, have a broad, persistent, slightly positive bias. On the flipside, they have large drawdowns, and do not have positive log returns because of extremely high return variance. But that's a different discussion than whether VRP exists.

rriggsco

CBOE is closed.

CheekyPooh

On the River tour in Chicago. Someone educate me, what do they actually do in the CME group and CBOE buildings? 

cat_herder4

I'm betting on you degenerates. CBOE calls

LGO_from_KDCA

I trade as an individual. My account is in my name. My LLC, also in my name, does not trade. I trade as a sole proprietor. When it comes to tax time I can show the IRS my gains and losses, the number of trades I make per day (8-10), number of days a week I trade (5), months per year (12), etc. The IRS does not care if I am an individual or LLC. My business expenses (home office, subscriptions, etc.) are tax deductible on Schedule C. Since I don't need a retirement plan, health care deductions, etc. I get all that from my previous career (as an airline pilot). The LLC is there should I want to go S-Corp and do another a retirement plan. The [CBOE rulebook](https://cdn.cboe.com/resources/regulation/rule_book/C1_Exchange_Rule_Book.pdf) defines the term “Professional” to mean "...any person or entity that (a) is not a broker or dealer in securities, and (b) places more than 390 orders in listed options per day on average during a calendar month for its own beneficial account(s)." I am not a professional nor do I trade more than 390 trades a day. I highly recommend to anyone going down the TTS path to read Green's book (2025 ed.) and hire an accountant. Best

Big-block427

Your guess is as good as mine. We both probably aren’t too keen on buying anything at ATH. But in the case of CBOE, their options volume might not be affected in a nice sell off as with the VIX going higher both C &P volume could even increase. I’ll just be keeping my eye out for a while. Good luck trading.

NYGiants181

Is CBOE still a good play?

Big-block427

CBOE was the play. With their near monopoly on single stock options, daily options, OEX etc , that stock has soared with record options volumes. Have to assume a lot of short gamma positions with the MM’s.

OptionSellingRegard

By end of the year, CBOE is gonna introduce daily options in popular and liquid stocks like NVDA, TSLA, AMZN. It’ll start with M/W/F just like it was for SPY/QQQ MMs and brokers have made a fortune just off the commission per contract on how highly these have traded It truly is just a massive casino and I lost money being the gambler…so 6 years ago I switched to being the casino Buy all your options from ME

Ken385

Not an easy question to answer. It depends on which options exchange (there are at least 18) the order is sent to and what the product is. Some exchanges it will be based on when your order was sent. Some exchanges will use a "pro rata" system (where your fill is based on how big your bid/offer is). Some exchanges will also have different rules based on the product (such as the CBOE where SPX options are pro rata and SPXW options are not) An order can also trade at your price on another exchange, even if you were first to offer. An option can trade at your price on a spread, even on the same exchange, and you won't be entitled to a fill. So, it depends on a lot of things.

NationalOwl9561

I’ll make an educational example out of you since you can’t seem to contribute anything useful. OPRA gives you the Greeks, CBOE gives you buy to close and sell to close open contracts. OPRA comes from broker feeds. CBOE data is obtained from their data shop only.

forebareWednesday

CBOE might be the largest exchange but it is only ONE exchange. OPRA is ALL of the exchanges.

NationalOwl9561

Not CBOE data ding dong

NationalOwl9561

OPRA data != CBOE CBOE offers more than greeks. It offers open contracts for customers, MMs, etc. in 10-min intervals. For a pretty penny of course.

forebareWednesday

CBOE is a member of OPRA

NationalOwl9561

Doesn't use CBOE data.

NationalOwl9561

[https://wire.insiderfinance.io/cracking-the-0dte-code-from-naive-gamma-to-live-spx-delta-b3db15c1c068](https://wire.insiderfinance.io/cracking-the-0dte-code-from-naive-gamma-to-live-spx-delta-b3db15c1c068) TLDR: SpyGlass and OptionsDepth because they give you CBOE data

ericquig

I'm sorry but you don't need generational wealth or to take monetary risks to get ahead. I was a blue collar guy working as a delivery driver for FedEx when I got my CBOE seat. Anything is possible with patience and making sound decisions in life. Of course there are exceptions, but people need to quit with the mindset that the average person can't get ahead.

TomorrowSavings7579

$CBOE

JVRforSchenn

Anyone know if the CBST anti-dilutive warrants will be listed on CBOE at some point? They’re 2.5 cents OTM right now with 22 months til expiry (of course that could just as easily change to 4-5 cents OTM in a hurry)

Juhkwan97

I have known CBOE and CME seat owners who lost their asses.

ericquig

It could have also worked against me. There was a point the CBOE was considered a dying exchange and many thought it would be closed within months. Had they not developed their own products, that might have been the case. All of us got lucky. At one point they were selling for $150,000. Still a lot of money, but hindsight being what it is I can easily ask myself why didn't I get a loan and buy another one. I knew a lot of people who did. Multiple times.

ericquig

Before any of the markets went public (CBOE CME, NYSE, ICE, Etc.), they were privately owned by members. A membership was called a "seat" It gave you the ability to trade on that market. To trade on the CBOE you either needed to own a seat, or lease a seat, or pay fees per trade to a seat owner (usually through the brokerage houses for retail investors). What made them worth anything was the limited amount of them, and how you could not trade without owning, leasing, or paying fees to access the right to trade on that exchange. There was a market where owners could sell or lease their seats no differently than actual physical property.

ericquig

Yeah was a crazy time, one minute and everyone would say CBOE was going to close or get taken over, and the seat prices would crater, then the next minute people would say they were going to merge with another exchange and make the seat price go back up. Leasing the seat was just as chaotic. One minute multiple people would want to lease it, the next minute nobody did. Wasn't until CME and CBOT merger that people started looking at CBOE as the next possible profitable exchange.

Classic_Revolt

How do you resist the urge to yolo some of those CBOE stock dividends as a lil treat

Ken385

One of the best investments of all time (CBOE Seat) I remember putting a bid in for a seat when I was trading for $186,000. One was offered at $188,000. I didn't get it, and the price just continued to climb from there. Today that seat (which was converted to stock) is worth almost $20,000,000. This doesn't include the years of lease fees you would have gotten or the dividends after it was converted to stock. Many traders on the CBOE made far more on their seats than they did trading. I think a lot of it was due to the management of the CBOE who made all the right choices, especially Ed Tilley. Electronic trading, SPX exclusive arrangements, VIX and other decisions

Ken385

The CBOE lists the official settlement values here, July SPX (SET) [Index Settlement Values](https://www.cboe.com/index_settlement_values/)