Reddit Posts
Mentions
Throughout this discussion, it is critical to define what you mean by "short term" and "long term". People have different definitions in mind when they say things. Ask what time they mean exactly. I believe markets are most efficient on timescales around 6mo-2yr. On shorter scales, random noise and events are more likely to create movement as much as predictable business-based signals. On longer scales, random events accumulate and create divergence. (Technically still "efficient" in the sense that the market will price the midpoint.) Most importantly, the ~1-2yr range is where a lot of assessment is centered for the big decision makers, both the CEOs on one side and the massive fund managers on the other side. A compelling growth thesis that takes 10years is very hard to sell to the shareholders. Results are demanded sooner. So everyone is optimizing their decisions to be as correct and efficient as possible in that 1-2yr range to get their fat bonus checks, often at the expense of the 5 or 10 year plan. Thus, the best places to make predictable money off of market inefficiency (the only places one CAN predictably make money...) are at very short (<5 hours, especially <5 mins) or very long (>5 years) time scales. At short scales, you mostly need hardware and access to respond very quickly to inefficient bubbles. But for low volume tickers, the slow pace of trading slows down the process enough that retail chumps think they can find a role exploiting bid-ask spreads and sudden-volume swings. IMO, you can maybe do this on a few tickers you don't mind holding long, but overall you are still a step behind the microsecond HFT gang. Long scales, IMO, are the only place you can reliably win with consensus, public information. If XYZ is likely to blow up profits in 10 years, that wont be fully priced into the market for another 5 years or so, so you can buy now and exploit that impatience gap. Of course, this takes so long to play out that it's less useful, which again is why it exists. The only real advantage you have over the pros is time. They need results in a couple years. You don't.
I'm sorry which quarter is February in? Is it the one that Netflix posted a 12% increase in revenue? Just because you don't like the source (Q1 report) doesn't mean it's unsourced. Not sure why I'm even surprised you're demanding a source that you know doesn't exist. How about that banbet when it does come out? I'm up for it if you are. I'll bet their revenue in Q2 2025 is not only maintained but up from Q2 2024, because most consumers are just like the "I'm moving to Canada is XYZ wins" people after America presidential elections.
Invest based on specific theses for specific plays. "This company is going to grow faster than expectations or is undervalued because XYZ. The truth will be revealed in 2 years, at which point it will double, and then I will sell." Write this down. Sell when the XYZ happens, or won't happen. "That company has strong tech, margins, balance sheet, and moat. I believe strongly they will simply grow like crazy for 6 years, and I want 10% of my assets in that company." Every quarter, check your portfolio and buy or sell to stay around 10%. Confirm you still believe in that growth thesis, or sell. If you don't have a specific thesis to hold an asset, you are likely to make emotional decisions and/or react to technicals with little relevance. Also, it's almost impossible to buy at the nadir and sell at the peak. If you profit off a holding, give yourself grace and credit. You always could have profited more somehow, so what. Be consistently right, even if you aren't exactly right.
No. Do you understand cost basis? I am not telling you to buy more of the stock that's highly appreciated. I am saying sell the portion of your original cost basis and let the appreciation grow. Example: You bought 100 shares of ABC for $10/share. It grew to $20/share. If you want, you can sell 50 shares of ABC at $20/share. Your cost basis was $1000. It grew to $2000. You sold $1000 worth and kept the other $1000 of ABC to keep growing. You reuse the initial $1000 to buy XYZ stock. Tax-wise you pay tax on the capital gains unless the account is an IRA. You do this over and over again and you get a multiplying effect on your initial $1000.
> I am new to options, and covered calls (have never sold one before) and am thinking to sell them to increase yield Well first off, selling CCs does not "increase yield." Unless you think selling shares also increases yield. > I can't find the downside to covered calls? Even if they exercised it will be at a price I am comfortable selling at, so what am I missing here? It depends on what you care about. If all you care about is making successful trades, you're right, every CC is no worse than holding shares and a gain if assigned. However, people often care about more than just having a successful trade. For example, if you want to maximize gains, a CC is a terrible idea. Consider a stock that goes up $1 every week. If one trader (A) only holds shares and the other (B) writes CCs, the A is always going to have larger gains than B. Furthermore, if you care about managing risk, the fact that a CC is no *better* than holding shares is undesirable. Shares have a lot of downside risk, so using a structure that **caps your upside** while still having the same bottomless pit of a downside is not a very good risk/reward trade-off. > Even if they are sold, I can always get back into the shares once they are exercised no? Again, it's useful to compare trader A that just holds shares to trader B that uses CCs. Suppose they are trading XYZ stock and both bought at $100/share. B writes a CC at $105. At expiration, XYZ is $107, so B gives up $2/share in gains that A gets to keep (unrealized). Now B has to rebuy. He rebuys in at $107/share. The A trader's average share cost hasn't changed, it's still $100/share, but now B has a higher cost basis. Repeat after multiple assignments and before long, trader A's average cost is still $100/share while B's is $150/share. That's not good! You don't want to be spending more and more on the same quantity of shares, compared to trader A. To say nothing of the tax drag that B experiences. A got to hold his gains unrealized, which are not taxed, but every assignment is a taxable event for B, so he effectively loses money to short-term taxes that will be lower for A if he holds long-term. > If I have shares that I have bought on margin can I still sell CC's on them? Yes, but that would be a very foolish thing to do, particularly if the cost of carry on your margin is higher than the premium you get for writing the CC. If you want leverage, just buy calls. Leave shares out of the equation altogether. > Lastly, why would someone sell CC’s so close ITM are they already intending to sell the shares and don’t care if they get exercised? Beats me, seems like a super dumb thing to do. They are basically loaning out the equity in their shares, I guess? Kind of like a reverse mortgage?
Yeah, fair take but I think people miss that companies don’t always hire McKinsey or BCG for new ideas. There are actual innovation consultants out there (like IDEO for example), but at the end of the day, most of the work at the big elite firms (McKinsey, Bain, BCG, etc) is about validating what the client already wants to do, packaged in a way that looks rigorously validated and totally defensible to their board and the general public. It’s a way to de-risk big decisions internally and externally bc if it fails, well hey, at least it was XYZ consulting firm that said it was a good idea, not us! So yeah, a lot of projects and 'advice' from these firms sounds dumb as shit like the HBO Max > Max > HBO Max again thing, but there's a reason these firms stay in business and recruit kids from top MBA programs for like $250k a year: it's a reputation machine and clients's aren't just paying for the advice - they're paying for who signed off on it. That’s the open secret
This kind of consulting sure. But I work in industries where the experts do the [complicated and expensive thing] one time a year and the local facility/refinery/chemical plant/power plant/ etc does [the thing] once ever. So everyone you deal with is concerned and scared and worried because they've never done the thing. So no one at the facility has done it but mangers there still take all the information and then say, "We can save money by XYZ!" and our job, is to say, "No you can't because [reasons]" Mind you we aren't the ones profiting from XYZ (normally) so it is 100% conflict free. Or we are brought in because "things aren't working" and we look at "Things" and "Things" is nepotism and unqualified people who aren't being removed or educated or trained for various reasons, and we can gather data and say, "This is your problem here." etc. in a room where dad or uncle Steve can no longer protect the kid/cousin/etc What's really funny (to me) is being in the meetings and saying things like, "You should be paying [stressed out unit engineer] about 3x what he's making for what he's doing. If and likely when he leaves you will have to pay 5x to get the same amount of work done from multiple people. [these things] are things can can be done by others to help [engineer,] and [these things] are things that shouldn't be done at all. And most of the time the [these things that should be done by others] are things in the other people's job descriptions that for many reasons, don't do it. * Hell 90% of my job (when I'm hired for a consulting role) is to go in, listen to all the qualified people (People who can make legal decisions, e.g. engineers) bitch, and anyone unqualified who is actually turning a wrench or otherwise being given directions, and then to test and validate the complaints. A solid 9 times out of 10 the MAJOR problems have been identified by the locals on the ground but something like, "Management won't listen to us because they think we are knuckle draggers" E.g. unqualified to make a decision but they are doing the actual work they are told but know it's stupid, but got told to do it anyway. or "In [insert date 5 years ago] I told them this would happen. Then in [4 years ago] I even wrote it up and we had a meeting [3 years ago] they ignored me, and now of course [thing happened] but no one ever listens to me because I'm [Indian/female/young/old/not an OU fan/liberal/etc] * In my experience the amount of businesses that would straight up fail if we blocked all consultants is HUGE. I had a power plant want to skip a hot gas pass inspection because they **couldn't afford the down time at that time.** Like WTF you are going to have a really bad time when it comes down on it's own then. * The best part of consulting is saying, "Here is the data, we are the experts, this is the suggestion." And then going home to sleep fine no matter what they choose. You did your job, if they want to save 1.2 million by risking a 40 million fuck up, that's literally their choice. Very rarely are we kicked into whistle blowing mode on things and act only in an advisory capacity.
You are short the XYZ Jun $100 call and you want to roll it to the July $100 call. Sell a horizontal spread, buying (to close) the Jun $100 call and selling (to open) the Jul $100 call. You are short the XYZ Jun $100 call and you want to roll it to the July $105 call. Sell a diagonal spread, buying (to close) the Jun $100 call and selling (to open) the Jul $105 call.
I didn’t know there was an African contender. Good argument that corroborates with my comment above about infrastructure and geography. Amazon is not a business that can be easily replicated but i understand that it is so much easier to say “this is the next Amazon”. Everyone gets excited when they hear the words “young” “early” “XYZ” mixed with “Amazon”, is a great bait.
Don't think in terms of "is this the right time to get in/out of XYZ". Think in terms of "what allocation do I want" and then rebalance to there. Then when an asset class outperforms you 'automatically' sell some and move it elsewhere. E.g. right now gold is 40% of your port, is that where you want to be? (Fwiw, I'm at about 15%.) Gold plays the same rôle as bonds are supposed to; the right allocation for a 20-year-old with a time horizon of decades is not the same as for a 60-year-old who's retired and in drawdown, so what's "wise" depends on your situation, objectives, risk appetite etc.
Here are a few things to consider assuming you are going to sell all of your assets you bought through Robinhood and buy back in on Fidelity's platform: 1. When you sell your stock you hold through Robinhood, you will be taxed on any gains since these would be considered "realized" gains, since you now have the cash. In another comment you mentioned investing around $800 with your account now sitting at $860, so you would owe taxes on $60 dollars of gain. Please note that these taxes will not be automatically withheld, you will need to pay them come tax time. 2. Whether or not you close your Robinhood account, they will still send you the tax form you will need that will summarize your gains and losses for the year. This will be sent most likely within a month or two after the end of the calendar year, around when taxes are due. That said, leaving your account open and just not using it may make it easier to navigate their website and retrieve any tax info/other info you need in the future. If you are worried about data leaks you could always remove your bank account info or something like that. Either way, they are required to retain tax information regardless of whether you have an open account with them. 3. If you want to reinvest with Fidelity, you would need to buy back in at the current market price, which could very well be higher. If it's only $800ish you have invested, you could consider just making new investments in Fidelity, and whenever you DO decide to cash out specific stocks in Robinhood, take that money and make future investments with Fidelity. For example, lets say you bought stock in XYZ Company in Robinhood at $88, and it is now sitting at $130. If you think it will continue to rise, cashing out may not be the best option because you would need to buy back in at $130 or potentially higher based on how long it takes you to get the cash and make the transaction. Another strategy would be to just wait until you were going to cash out XYZ anyways, and then use that money to invest with Fidelity.
I would encourage you to take a long and deep analysis of why you bought each of these securities/investments at the price that you bought. More than likely it was both emotional and/or poorly executed. A long term investment may very well require a long period of waiting for an entry. $MU at $60 was a steal. A literal steal. $KLAC at $600? Back up the truck. $INTC at $18? Yes please. I could go on and on, the list is so long. $NKE is at $59. $NVDA was $102 just over a month ago. You are losing money in one of the best buying opportunities in several years on high quality companies because you aren’t waiting for good entries. Now, does that mean prices can’t drop for “reason XYZ”? No. But I guarantee if you start chasing prices because of some feeling about having missed opportunity, you will get crushed again. Do some homework. Look at numbers. Look at them again. And then again. Question assumptions. Put a price on what a skeptical investor would be willing to pay. And then here’s the hardest part for most people. Wait. If you can’t do that one last thing, you will fail no matter what your investment timeline looks like. You MUST have the patience to both wait for a good price, as well as the conviction to cut losses when your thesis doesn’t work out. Both are two sides of the same coin though—you must develop your **discipline.** It is 100% essential and you will not enjoy long term success without it.
Okay but respectfully, you’re still implying the use of indicators. I would like to know what they are so I can see if I can help eliminate the stress. Because how do you even “suspect” a reversal? If you’re watching an intra day gap up because of reason XYZ, then how do you know it’ll ever even reverse? What indicators do you use to find that point? I don’t care if it’s typical indicators or not. I care about what your structure is.
A stock split may involve a simple, integral split such as 2:1 or 3:1, it may entail a slightly more complex (non-integral) split such as 3:2, or it may be a reverse split such as 1:4. When it is an integral split, the option splits the same way, and likewise the strike price. All other splits usually result in an "adjustment" to the option. The difference between a split and an adjusted option, depends on whether the stock splits an integral number of times -- say 2 for 1, in which case you get twice as many of those options for half the strike price. But if XYZ company splits 3 for 2, your XYZ 60s will be adjusted so they cover 150 shares at 40. Some examples. Example: XYZ Splits 2:1 The XYZ March 60 call splits so the holder now holds 2 March 30 calls Example: XYZ Splits 3:2 The XYZ March 60 call is adjusted so that the holder now holds one March $40 call covering 150 shares of XYZ. (The call symbol is adjusted as well.) Example: ABC declares a 1:5 reverse split The ABC March 10 call is adjusted so the holder now holds one ABC March 50 call covering 20 shares. Example: Company PQRS declares a 5% stock dividend As mentioned above, small stock dividends do not result in any options adjustments. The OCC will put out a memo regarding the details of the stock split.
Assuming you are approved to sell naked options and have a margin account. Let’s say you have 50K of XYZ and it is 70% marginable so you will have 35K of option buying power. You can use 17.5 K as the collateral to sell naked options. Say you sell OTM naked options. If the market goes against you your options can become ITM. Your collateral will also increase. For a market drop (or increase) of 20%, I have estimated the collateral to increase 80% to 31.5K. The market has dropped 20% decreasing the buying power to 28K which is not enough to cover the collateral. You can get a margin call. If you are concerned, you can use less BP. You have SGOV. The value may not drop as much as the market. So the BP may be sufficient to cover the increase in collateral.
A covered call and a short put with the same strike prices and expiration are synthetically the same. Here are two positions. Evaluate each of them and get back to me with the P&L of each. Keep it simple - no dividends, interest, fees, etc. Just the raw risk and reward of each position. COVERED CALL: Buy XYZ at $102 and sell a $ June $105 call for $1 SHORT PUT: Sell an XYZ $105 June $105 put for $4
"Yes, it’s possible to sell a covered call and a put option on a stock you own, but they are distinct strategies with different implications. Here’s a breakdown:Covered Call: When you sell a covered call, you own the underlying stock (at least 100 shares per option contract) and sell a call option against those shares. This generates premium income, and if the stock price stays below the call’s strike price at expiration, you keep the premium and the shares. If the stock price exceeds the strike price, your shares may be called away (sold at the strike price).Selling a Put Option: Selling a put option while owning the stock is less common and not typically considered a "covered" strategy in the same way. A put option is "covered" if you have the cash to buy the shares at the strike price if the put is exercised, not necessarily because you already own the stock. Selling a put obligates you to buy more shares if the stock price falls below the strike price, and you keep the premium if it expires worthless.Combining the TwoSelling both a covered call and a put option on a stock you own is possible, but they serve different purposes:Covered Call: Caps your upside potential (if the stock rises above the call’s strike price, you sell at that price) but provides income.Put Option: Obligates you to buy additional shares if the stock price falls below the put’s strike price, also generating premium income.This combination is sometimes referred to as a "strangle" or "straddle" (if the strikes are the same), but it’s not a standard covered strategy since the put isn’t fully "covered" by owning the stock. Instead, it increases your risk of acquiring more shares if the put is exercised.Risks and ConsiderationsUpside Risk (Covered Call): If the stock surges, your shares are sold at the call’s strike price, limiting gains.Downside Risk (Put): If the stock drops significantly, you’re obligated to buy more shares at the put’s strike price, which could lead to losses if the stock continues to decline.Margin Requirements: Selling a put may require additional margin or cash reserves, depending on your brokerage, since owning the stock doesn’t cover the put obligation.Net Effect: You collect premiums from both options, but you’re exposed to both upside (losing shares) and downside (buying more shares) risks.ExampleYou own 100 shares of XYZ at $50.Sell a covered call with a $55 strike for a $2 premium.Sell a put with a $45 strike for a $1.50 premium.Total premium collected: $3.50 ($350 for 100 shares).Outcomes:If XYZ stays between $45 and $55, both options expire worthless, you keep the $350, and retain your shares.If XYZ rises above $55, your shares are sold at $55, but you keep the $350.If XYZ falls below $45, you buy 100 more shares at $45, and your cost basis for those shares is reduced by the $1.50 premium.Practical NotesEnsure you have enough capital or margin to handle the put obligation.Check with your brokerage for specific margin or collateral requirements.This strategy increases complexity and risk compared to just selling a covered call.If you’re considering this, consult with a financial advisor or thoroughly backtest the strategy to align with your risk tolerance and goals." Grok
“Would you like to round up to support XYZ charity” is the biggest scam of all time.
Medicine has become more let's not get sued so let's be absolutely certain vs odds are high this is XYZ and let's administer xyz
Fuck just happened to XYZ lmao
You underestimate how ahead Google is in the AI game. Their models currently outperform ChatGPT and while it might only be a short win until OpenAI releases another model, Google has a massive advantage: they produce their own TPUs on which those models can run. So they are able to provide those models to users either at way lower cost and/ or way higher margin than their competitors. I also cannot see how GenAI could result in a huge revenue loss in Search. The queries which generate money through ads are not being replaced by AI. Its rather those that anyways are not monetized which are replaced by AI, such as ‚Did X do Y‘ or ‚What happened in XYZ.‘.
> So if one contact is 10 shares A standard US equity options contract represents 100 shares, not 10. Adjusted (non-standard) contracts may be 10 shares, like after a 1 for 10 reverse split. For the rest of this discussion I'm going to change your 10 to 100, so as to be more standard and less confusing (to me). > this one contract could be worth more than if I just bought and sold 100 shares within the same time frame? Maybe, maybe not. It depends on what you opened the call for and what you were able to get for it when you closed it. A better way to frame the value of options is, a call that represents 100 shares *almost always costs less* than 100 shares. **The call provides leverage, while still exposing you to the price movement risk of the shares.** For example, suppose a share of XYZ costs $200. Buying 100 shares would cost your $20k. The 30 DTE $200 call for XYZ may only costs $8.00, for a total of $800. $800 is a lot less than $20k, right? Let's say the shares go up 5% to $210. This might translate to an increase of +$10 on the call, for a total value of $18.00. Compared to the $8.00 you paid for it, that is a 125% gain on the value of the call. You spent a fraction of the cost of the shares in order to get 25x more in gain%. That's leverage in action.
"Good" might be a bit optimistic, but it's an indicator and something is better than nothing. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. IVP is only as good as the likelhood that the past is predictive of the future. A lot of times it is, except for the times it isn't, and the times it isn't tend to fall into the fat tail that spells disaster for your trades. All that said, I think it's fine to use IVP and IVR to screen for trading opportunities. It's not a guarantee of profit in any way, but the IV of stock XYZ that has an IVP above 60% is a lot more likely to decline than an IVP below 40%. You're playing the odds and using historical IV to gamble on reversion to the mean.
XYZ has a right to defend itself, by attacking proactively
Extrinsic value comes out in time and rapidly drops close to expiration. Let's do an example. Buy 100 shares of XYZ for $100 per share. ($10000). Sell the 90 call for $1100. If by expiration you are at $90 per share you would have collected that full 1100. Your stock position would have dropped by $1000, but it was offset by the intrinsic of the option ($1000) + extrinsic when you bought ($100). You can now rinse and repeat but now you will go DITM from the current value so you can collect intrinsic and extrinsic again to offset more loss (Something like the $80 ditm call).....basically the original stock position is a wash, you just kept the extrinsic. Now same example but stock finished at $100 per share. Now your covered option will still have a value of around $1000. That means the $100 of extrinsic was collected.....but you need to decide what to do with the call. Can buy it back for $1000, and rinse and repeat to collect the income. Now price shoots up to $110. At expiration your call is now worth $2000. You still collected the $100 in time, but now you are $1000 down on the call, but up $1000 on the position....so the position is a wash. You can buy the call back, then sell the position. (I guess you could let it get called away too but that could lead to a small fee plus some interest if it drops you to the negative so better to buy the call back and sell the shares in that situation) Here is where the working capital part can come in. Let's say he doesn't want to lose the shares. (Conviction price is still going to stay even or go up) He would then have to pay the extra $1000 to buy back the call. He has gained the value in the stock....so he hasn't lost anything per se, but the stock gains are unrealized, and ponying up the cash is actual cash. Now he can rinse and repeat again to collect extrinsic. Two things of note, selling a ditm call and selling an otm cash secured put both have the same pay structure and outcome. (Both only lose money if price drops below the strike....minus the extrinsic.) The interesting part is skew exists....and you might be able to gain a decent bit more extrinsic from one vs the other. As small as those few dollars might sound, it can really add up. (The difference a fraction of a single percent can add up over time can be huge)....that being said, bid/ask spreads will be worse on DITM calls so be aware of that. Dividends make exercising a DITM call against you more enticing. But you do potentially gain those dividends as you run your income campaign. The reason why he likely 'rarely' gets exercised is because people are greedy and will hold onto their bought options hoping for maximum price increase....and if price really blows through his strike, he might be using working capital to proactively roll before it just gets so deep it becomes almost a guaranteed exercise....so a combination of him knowing about ex div dates and his willingness to use working capital to roll up probably are why he doesn't get exercised as often as you would think. I hope that made it more clear about how he extracts income and uses working capital.
Better buy XYZ before it’s $500 in a few years
Circle wants to be the Coinbasr for stablecoins, the jury is still out on whether stablecoins take off, I personally doubt it but the reason it took off is because it does have something a bit special/different. Chime on the other hand is going against much better and more established players (SOFI, PYPL, AFRM, XYZ, etc.) and it doesn't have any special moat to take on those big guys. Having said that, anything is possible in this environment as there seems to be a concerted effort to jump into new IPOs before lockup and before options and drive the stock up; if you know when to get in and out, you can make a pretty penny. Most everyone though will not.
Look at the bids, not the asks. The ask can be literally any number. If XYZ stock has a $100 share price and you are looking at the $150 call, when XYZ has never been within $20 of $150 its entire existence, what is to stop me from asking for $420.69 if no one else is offering? The contract is worthless, so there is no risk to me to sell you a worthless contract for any number I can make up in my head. Whereas the bids have to be grounded in reality, because if you bid too low, no one will sell to you, and if you bid too high, you're giving free money away. So there are natural limits that constrain the bid to be closer to a reasonable valuation of the contract. Although, it's important to remember that the standing bid is the highest price **that no one is willing to take**. It essentially puts a floor under the market's value for the contract.
Oh perma-bears, I’m sure you’ll be right the 420th time you’re 100% confident that \[XYZ financial reading\] will matter and cause us to crash back to Liberation Day levels https://preview.redd.it/nlshu6ii6b6f1.png?width=1281&format=png&auto=webp&s=6c5b24afe7ba6c99828f58bfb7ee4882be05cf76
Pooh: you know what? Sure. Thank god XYZ country is offering 15% tariffs on soybeans.
You may save on taxes through amortization, but the sole intent of that is to save up enough money to buy a new car in the future. In case he just blows all that earned money on stupid shit, he will be jobless once his old car breaks down. These tax deductions (amortization costs in accounting) are not just ways for people to avoid taxation. So, whenever he boasts about earning $XYZ a year driving a cab, he better subtract all the costs, including the car's price tag (spread over multiple years).
i asked ChatGPT and the response was “I can’t show a real person such as XYZ in a demeaning way but I can create a satirical generic person bla bla bla” Leonardo.ai same I didn’t bother trying others to be honest
“I’m not understanding how trading works”. My whole argument is because I do understand. You shouldn’t have the ability to conduct trades with a contra party via a dark room and not have your large order tank the price per share. You should be forced to come play in the lit exchanges and if your order gets front run it is the cost of doing business. No retail trader with their own managed portfolio is benefitting nearly as much as institutions through these alternate forms of order execution. I understand your point that retail traders benefit from the access their pension fund managers get to these services but these services completely spit in the face of a free and open market. “Buy side doesn’t mean broker” enlighten me then who else is setting up these dark rooms inside of dark pools and ATS. There has to be someone there to buy them and it’s brokers who set it up, if they bring another party into the room and allow them to purchase some of the order you will never know. It’s part of the issue with these rooms and claims that are made by those using them that they suspect other institutions of getting in on their orders but they can’t prove it and the brokerages setting up the rooms deny it. Retail doesn’t benefit anymore if there is 30,000,000 shares traded a day or 60,000,000. Your average retail traders are not swinging a line even remotely close to impacting these securities. These benefits are primarily consolidated in the hands of the giant institutions who utilize them. There rules in place ensuring best execution yes but in reality unless you are trading in 100x lots your order may get filled by broker but it’s not actually gone to the market and impacted price discovery. So you can get the spot price on your market order 63 shares of XYZ but did that actually hit the market and have it adjusted the price accordingly? No. Those shares went to sit with your broker until they could be batched to a round lot of 100x then put to market. Don’t come at me with the bullshit of “you don’t know how trading works”. While you lick the boots of institutions who lobby to limit actual price discovery so they can collect large hair cuts by providing liquidity for large block trades.
If the talks are currently in progress then scheduling a press conference could easily be part of a negotiation tactic to try to force their hand. “We’re going to announce XYZ at 4:00 if you don’t agree to…”
Yes, you can backtest data. It’s quite common. Former computer scientist here. Algorithm trading is intensely popular. But humans are not deterministic. If interest rates go up, XYZ might happen. But it also might be ABC. Because interest rates are not even 1% of the worlds activities. So you could plug in interest rates, traffic patterns, purchasing, employment, and 50 other metrics. Will you find a pattern they all share? No. Because we’ve all looked. I take this even further to use a time travel scenario. If you slap someone in the face, they will respond A01. If you could go back in time so that every single parameter that you can see is exactly the same and slap the same person again, you might get A02 response. Because there are chemical variations. Your movements were not perfectly identical. Humans are insanely complex. Just ONE human. Just one you can’t predict even if you have the same time, place, environment. We’re that random and complicated. IMHO. Now try and do it to 50 million people over the entire world. What are they all going to do in the market tomorrow? And realize, a lot of the activity is actually from other algorithms. So you’re guessing how they were coded. I’m not saying you can’t do it. But from what I’ve seen you need an enormous amount of money and many, many, MANY cases. Let’s say you have a 50.00001% prediction ability on 100 stocks. You can’t throw all the money at just one of them because that will be enough to skew your prediction so that it’s no longer slightly in your favor. You have to spread it all over the place and scoop up pennies after pennies and do this over long periods of time. It is my opinion it’s currently impossible for small groups of non-wealthy individuals to find success doing this. What you can find are clues that make you adjust your trading. If a stock always rises after earnings, that’s a good piece of info—knowing it’s still not a guarantee. But this topic comes up a lot. I probably write the exact same thing you just did, except 25 years ago. And before and after there were armies of ppl wondering the same things. Good luck
I been buying otm calls for couple years now. I hit more often than not. I never intend to hold them to maturity but betting on stock going up, the option will also move as much with significantly more leverage and higher chance of return. A recent example of otm calls I did well with. XYZ Sept 72.5 calls after they report disappointing earnings. The stock was 45 after the big drop. I made 600% on them. volume is not huge so don't assume u can buy more than 100 calls unless u want to move the price drastically.
Tim Apple made a bet that Trump hates China more than he loves saying he brought production of XYZ back to America. Bad bet. Mango really likes bragging he brought XYZ back to America. Just taking it away from China isn't enough.
I wouldn't even say it classifies as insider trading. /u/FrigginPorcupine hasn't TRADED anything based on inside information. They bought the shares unaware of any insider information and haven't sold them. Actionable insider trading is when someone makes LARGE gains off of unpredictable stock movements. Holding a minimal amount of shares over the long term is completely legal. I think of insider trading this way: My buddy is higher up at a company. We're having a beer and he says "we're negotiating this huge buyout with XYZ company." I go buy 1,000 shares. A month later it pops, I make a ton of money and then sell. OP keep the shares, it's fine. People own shares in companies that they work for all the time. If you had to police your shares based on who you know that works for them, eventually you'd never own anything.
This may sound gay but.. I am holding XYZ shares
Buying a put gives you the right but not the obligation to sell 100 shares of the underlying at the strike price. It’s basically an insurance contract and a form of hedging. So if you bought stock XYZ at $100, but you also scooped up a put at $100, and the stock tanks to $50, you can exercise the contract at get out of your position. Many people just buy puts as a way of betting something will go down with no intention of exercising it themselves, and then flip the contracts for a profit, like I did here.
Selling a "covered call" means that you sell to someone the ability to buy your shares at the strike price. So, let's say you own 100 shares of stock XYZ currently at $100/share. You can sell a contract for 100 shares (has to be in lots of 100 shares). Let's say you do it for $1.00 per contract at a strike price of $105. What this means is you get a premium of $100 ($1.00/share x 100 shares) that you can immediately pocket. Functionally, you have reduced the cost basis per share you own. Your stocks *can* be assigned away to the person you sold the options to *at any moment*, but this is pretty rare below the strike price. If that happens, you make the money of the assignment price and no more. This is the downside: your profit is capped, but you don't have the potential of literally infinite losses since your loss is just whatever the share moves naturally. Hence why I only sell covered calls on things that 1) I wouldn't mind owning; and 2) I wouldn't mind selling if the price shot through the roof. The value of the option you have sold still goes up and down, but you immediately get that premium (and you can buy back the option if, say, the price of the stock decreases dramatically or time passes enough that the option significantly loses value). Your maximum profit is the value of the option, which you hope to expire worthless. *That* is the strength of covered calls for a lot of investors like me: it's basically making premiums on stocks you already own, with the risk that one day those stocks could be assigned. But you still get the money for the stocks you sold *plus* the premium. Your maximum profit is simply capped at the premium + strike price. In this case, it's $110/share.
For the first part, you might get a better answer asking on r/interactivebrokers. For the second part, initial margin is the amount of buying power required to open the position. Maintenaince margin is the additional amount of buying power you have to pay if the trade moves against you (would cost more to cover). Example: Say XYZ shares are $100/share and you want to write a $90 leveraged short put on it. The cash reserve to open a CSP (no leverage) would be 90 x 100 = $9000. Leveraging the short means paying *less* than the full assignment amount in buying power to open the short. A typical initial margin for short puts is 20% of the assignment value, so you'd only have to expend $9000 x 20% = $1800 to open the short put. However, if XYZ drops to $80, your short put will now be ITM. Your broker may want you to put up more money against the 9000-1800 = $7200 shortfall, as the risk of the put being assigned has increased. That additional buying power is the maintenance margin.
$CRCL Square XYZ pair please
The actual problem is the legal concept of "fiduciary duty." Wherein if a group of investors have a bunch of shares in $XYZ and they think the company is not being run in a way that they like, instead of lobbying the board or using their votes to run it the way they like, or simply selling their shares and moving on to something else that they do like as any individual investor would, they go crying to the government to spend taxpayer-funded court time and resources to make them behave how they want.
Yeah, there's a lot to the topic. It boils down to the concept that Tom and TT started on the sell side which became their default. They prefer higher POP and accept the capped upside - this doesn't mean it is better, it is simply their preference. In most of their studies, they are demonstrating what we'd call "dumb" strategies: "every month do XYZ" with effectively no filtering applied. Then they show some variation of the sell strategy with "the base does this, if we do XYZ it becomes that". Back to the original discussion and your second paragraph, selling strategies are not generally better - it's simply your preference which is completely cool. The problem traders have is effectively evaluating various strategies. Example, you saying "As someone else pointed out, the advantage of selling is being able to benefit from time instead of it working against you…if you don’t define that as an inherent edge (though it may not be an edge you yourself create, but it is an edge over other types of trading, objectively) then I don’t really know what I can say here." Time being "on your side" is in no way an edge. I've made several posts discussing this and it's a frustrating realization to come to. Don't take my word for it, research Euan Sinclair's work. (btw the reason is because there is no free edge. if there was inherent edge in collecting theta, again, the other side would abandon. the cost to you having positive theta is negative gamma and convexity). Its absolutely essential to evaluate the expected return of a strategy, not it's win rate, not it's POP, etc. A trader can have a long option breakout strategy (i do) that bats a 42% win rate if things go well that is massively positively expectant. conversely, a trader can have a 95% win rate on a short trading strategy that is negatively expectant. the key here i not relegating yourself to buying or selling - there are conditions that massively favor the other. i've learned long ago to simply analyze a market effect and select the best structure that fits that specific opportunity. not default to buying or selling.
i was gonna full port into CRWV at IPO, instead i bought XYZ after the dumps 
There is a money printer, but it is slow. It is owning equities. The only "free lunch" in equities is diversifying, and that's it. You can and should keep options in mind, but wait until you have a real, actionable thesis. It should be: "I think stock XYZ will go up between X%-Y% by a \*specific\* date less than 2years away because of <something that implies this, that very few people understand, and you understand because of a very good reason explaining why you are so special>" Not "Options could make me rich". The same can be said for going to a casino.
The Ole convince yourself of something that should happen because of XYZ and then lose your money when it doesn't happen strategy.
1. $AIRBNB - the Amazon of hosting & travel. 2. $XYZ - Jack is cool 😎 3. $TSLA - revolutionary company (energy, FSD, & humanoids) 4. $ASTS - connecting the unconnected & innovative company with more than 3000 patents. 5. OKLO - Sam involved
Ok - my fellow options nerds, here is a question on Vanna. I understand what it means (2nd order greek - derivative of vega to a change in delta) etc. But here is a very basic question - how do we intuitively think of Vanna - * Long Vanna - does this mean if volatility changes, delta will change in the same rate as volatility (irrespective of direction)? i.e. if we are long call and long vanna, vols going up means delta will change too at the same rate? * Short Vanna - does this mean if volatility decreases, delta will change at a lesser rate than vanna (irrespective of direction)? i.e. if we are short call and short vanna, vols going up means delta will change at a lower rate because of the Vanna benefit? taking an example, assume I'm short XYZ call option (Short Vanna) - I have a short delta and short vega position. Assume spots are down, and vols are up. How would I intuitively imagine the effects of Vanna on my portfolio? Is it right to say I would lose money on Vega, make money on Delta and lose money on Vanna (as short Vanna resulted in a lower change in delta than it would have been if I had NO Vanna)? Also, a second part to this question - understand Vanna is highest just OTM (puts and calls) - is that true. Does that mean the Vanna effect is much lower for ATM options (almost zero?)
Who's he talking about I missed it? I love that question is "would you pardon XYZ" and his answer is "he doesn't like me, so not sure".
now im confused, “also remember that if theres a purchase within 30 days before a sale for a loss that makes it a wash sale” ? so if i go by scenario 2; buy 100 shares XYZ at $10, buy another 100 shares at $7, then sell 100 shares at $9 using LIFO, so the $7 lot is closed. then the stock dips down afterwards and i buy 100 shares at $8. then i sell all 200 shares at $9 a few days later (so there are 2 lots now, the original 100 shares at $10, then the new lot at $8) , It would trigger a wash sale?
Plenty of good stocks have big dips for no substantive reason. 10% isn’t much, 3-5% is nothing, I have seen the Mag7 regularly do that in a day. If you see 15%, 20%, 25%, that’s a dip. A lot of the time some of the dip makes sense, but the rapid sell off triggers a lot of stop limits and stop losses and the market orders obliterate the limit buys. If you’re watching in the right 15 minute window you can buy at an incredible discount before the price corrects. Then it’s up maybe 5% at the end of the day on the lowest point, and it goes up from there to whatever the new sensible price is. Have a look at how XYZ reacted to its most recent earnings report, because that’s what buying the dip looks like.
That doesn’t make sense. He said he would do XYZ if he became president, when elected people believed he would do those and it would boost things, market responded positively. When he announced tariff plans, before they even took effect, the market had a negative reaction and went down. It’s literally the same thing. So you either give him credit for the uplift or you don’t blame him for the down, you can’t have it both ways…speculation on both sides
That's the magic of this particular issue, there's nothing Trump or his lackeys can do about it. Court says no tariffs on XYZ, XYZ importers simply won't pay them. They go to put a lien on the goods, lower court will rip it up before it goes before a judge. IRS or customs doesn't collect money at gun point...yet.
Yea but what Sns2500 said a dollar is a dollar A dollar of growth is no different then a dollar of divends If stock ABC is $100 , then through 1 year pays a $5 dividend and appreciates to $103 you made $8 If stock XYZ is 100 , pays zero dividends and appreciates to 108 you made $8 If you need $5 to pay the bills you can simply sell $5 of XYZ and be left with 103 In either case your the same. There is no reason to focus on ABC because it pays a dividend
I also sold my BTC miners at break even to preserve capital. I bought XYZ at 40 and sold at 45. I bought COREWEAVE at IPO and sold early. But you know what I still hold? Fucking Google.
You’re asking the room for clarity as if we know. The CEOs of trillion dollar companies don’t know. But let’s ask Reddit. Ultimately, I’d GUESS that since you’re asking, looking for reassurances, we haven’t hit your comfort level for investing. No amount of posts will likely change that. We don’t know you. If you aren’t comfortable sticking your money in XYZ at this time, then don’t. Wait until you’re comfortable. You might miss out on $ and you might not. But how much is avoiding an ulcer and a lot of sleepless nights worth?
I feel you're overthinking it a bit. Did you leave some money on the table? Yes. Did you profit overall? Yes. Any number of things could improve your position, but are you beating yourself up for not buy XYZ stock and riding it up when other people doubled their investment? All you did was de-risk during a volatile time. Maybe not ideal timing, but you did it and stressing about it now won't change anything. There could still be plenty of volatility ahead. There could still be a recession. Or not. And if not, you're still 70% invested and have a healthy cash pile at 30%. If we keep going up, you're still benefiting and you'll gain back what you lost and then some. If we go up, then pull back, you have 30% cash to pump in. If we go down again from here, you have 30% cash to pump in. Worrying about what happened in the last 1-2 months feels like a bit of a waste of time in the long run. Just learn from it and from your reaction to the results. Meanwhile put that cash in a HYSA and at least earn a bit from it.
JACK DORSEY’S BLOCK $XYZ PLANS BITCOIN $BTC PAYMENTS ON SQUARE TERMINALS - Bloomberg Sir this is a Wendy's Hang on hang on Yes, btc is down 2 percent my food is cheaper now. Pays Nooooo I overpaid by 4 percent
GOOG and XYZ calls are printing. It will cover my losses on UNH 
My current stock research process goes something like: 1. See a tweet that says “$XYZ is the next Amazon.” 2. Google “Is $XYZ the next Amazon?” 3. Read one bullish Reddit post. Confidence = 100%. 4. Buy one share. Feel like Warren Buffett. 5. Stock drops 15%. Suddenly realize I don’t even know what the company *does*. 6. Panic-research the 10-K like it's a Netflix true crime doc. 7. Repeat. In all seriousness though… I should probably start using screeners instead of vibes 😂
You're very close. However, it looks like you forgot to adjust the dividend yield for the timeframe. There is 1 dividend payment in this period, likely about \~$1.7. If we use this number instead, we get a forward price of $583.32. This gives us a difference of only $3.62, or 0.62% But otherwise, your instincts are correct. If the forward price based on dividends and interest were 564.56, and the price of the synthetic long with options was 579.7, you would want to sell a synthetic short (sell the call, buy the put) and pair it with long stock to extract the price difference The key to doing something like this efficiently is usually with something called box spreads. Box spreads are a product of Put-Call Parity in cash settled products with European style options (like SPX, for example). The basic concept is that you trade either two credit spreads or debit spreads (put and call) such that they completely protect each other risk-wise. So, for example, I could sell the XYZ 90/110 call credit spread, and the 110/90 put credit spread. This will result in a credit just shy of the max risk of the position (with the amount missing being the 'interest'). People with portfolio margin can utilize these box spreads to finance other trades at the market interest rate (in fact, the market interest rate is usually derived from these box spreads). So, if someone were to exploit a situation like the one above, they would sell box spreads to pay for the long stock (which doesn't take away from our profit, because if you remember, the formula already assumes we're borrowing at this rate to buy the stock). Then, because portfolio margin has risk based margin requirements, you could likely put on the synthetic short for little to no additional cost, allowing this to scale up really fast. Some traders take the other side of the box spread, which is essentially a bond but usually at a slightly higher rate. This side can be done without portfolio margin However, there are much easier and more feasible ways for retail traders to utilize Put-Call Parity in their trading. Learning about synthetics opens up a whole new world, and a new way to think about things. One quick example- selling a short put vs a covered call at the same strike/expiration are synthetically equivalent positions (that is, their risk profile is the same, thanks to put call parity). But if you have margin on short options, one of them is much more capital efficient than the other. Because of this, you will notice that the more capital efficient option (the short put) has a lower premium, and this lower premium is almost always equal to the market interest rate for the capital you're saving. In other words, by using the more capital efficient synthetic position, you're able to 'borrow' from the market at about the same rate as the big traders using box spreads and portfolio margin
No, you're not understanding it correctly. Have you sold CCs against stock? You mentioned the Wheel and being long stock, so I assume you've played that side of it too, selling CCs? If you own XYZ at $100 and sell monthly CCs on it for a year, and XYZ is still at 100, have you made anything? Of course: all the premium from the sold Calls. Same with a long Call, mostly. The 'mostly' qualifier is because of time/theta decay. *Which is why you buy them deep ITM*. Let me use WMT as an example: Go out 388DTE to the June 2026 expiration. The 80-delta Call is the 80-strike, selling for 22.68. 6.34 of that is time value. 28% of the price. In 388 days, if WMT is still at 96.34, like it is today, that 80C will be worth 16.34. We get that equity back that we essentially put into the stock.
Next time he says, “80% tariffs on XYZ country” the market won’t bother dipping 1% and will just go straight to a 3% rally. Just skip the down part.
I feel like now the market goes down weirdly Not all at once, like in the beginning of april, but in a way where you can lose money by getting puts on XYZ company and calls on ABC company even when they are in the same sector and are equally big
I feel like now the market goes down weirdly Not all at once, like in the beginning of april, but in a way where you can lose money by getting puts on XYZ company and calls on ABC company even when they are in the same sector and are equally big
They trade in 100 share blocks unless there's a stock dividend. Then that series is adjusted by the number of shares in the dividend. Next, a new series is opened using the standard lot size. Very rare occurrence, but be aware you could potentially be uncovered for some shares if you write a new contract on the adjusted series by accident. I.e., you have 100 shares of XYZ but write a call against an adjusted series of 105 shares.
99% of comments: I'm holding bags in XYZ. Come help
Let's accept that capitalism is dead, Republicans killed it, and we're moving towards a system more like Nazi Germany, Maoist China, or modern-day Russia: -Threatening to conquer your trade partners if they don't let you hoover up their natural resources -Threatening your proxies with non-defense in the face of war with a superpower if they don't do XYZ -Saying crazy shit, like 'kids will get by with fewer dolls and pencils' (hitting Maoist notes here) -Blanket tariffs -Targeting specific companies with tariffs, but not their competitors doing the exact same stuff -Picking winners (Tesla) -Quid pro quos -Massive weekly insider trading -Attempts at central control of the economy (showdown with the Fed, trying to cut rates) -No logical consistency in preserving States' Rights or constitutional congressional authority in matters of commerce. Every day is just 'what psychic injury is eating Trump today'.
To be honest, based on what I know of the deal (at least as of the last time it was big in the news) it legitimately sounds like it is for the best that the merger happened. Iirc Nippon Steel wanted to upgrade a lot of the facilities, something that US Steel didn't have the means to do. This will actually keep a lot of their workers employed rather than have them jobless in a few years when US Steel inevitably would have gone bankrupt. I personally believe the only reason why this was ever held up this long was because you have a company essentially called Japan Steel buying a company called US Steel. If the names were ABC Steel and XYZ Steel, I don't think this would have been as big of a story. The US and Japan are allies with a very intertwined military alliance. I don't think this is going to really damage America's national security like they made it out to.
yea i also heard the more you post a regarded comment like "get ready for XYZ" in WSB dailys the more true it becomes
Social media happened. When a scientist who has spent a career can point to something with peer reviewed documentation and say for certain "XYZ is happening", and some fool online who barely finished high school can make a meme saying that isn't true, and its' got millions of shares and likes, you know we're cooked. I believe this country has been in a civil war for a handful of years now. All the right wingers think a civil war will be like the first civil war, shooting and killing each other with cannons. Nope, we're in a misinformation war, and depending on what side you sit on, your reality is different from the others. We are completely divided as a nation. We're not physically taking up arms against one another, but we are in our own bubbles. When citizens of a nation aren't rowing in the same direction, that nation becomes rudderless and weak.
Hi, could I get you to read this book? You need to learn about options before you do much more with them. [Options for the Beginner and Beyond](https://www.r-5.org/files/books/trading/schoolbooks/W_Edward_Olmstead-Options_for_the_Beginner_and_Beyond-EN.pdf) by Professor Olmstead of Northwestern University It's a pdf, so just click on it and start reading. Read Chapter 1, the Calls parts of Chapters 2 & 3, the Delta part of Chapter 4, Chapter 5 so you'll get a little understanding of Profit & Loss graphs/charts, then skip to Chapter 14, Covered Calls. That's not a lot of pages to learn something as important as stock options. Prof. Olmstead doesn't talk about Delta when choosing what strikes to sell, but TastyTrade did backtesting, and said the sweet spot for CCs is 30-delta, 30-45 days out. Then buy them back when they've lost half their value. Everybody does it, it's the standard mantra. Other things can work, but that works, and it's easy to implement. No, it's not a naked Call. A Call you sell just has to be backed by something. Something you could theoretically provide if "called." Most commonly that's stock. But it can also be a Call you own. (At a lower strike.) Think about it: You're holding a Call that lets you buy XYZ at 15 (your example). XYZ is trading for 40. You sell a Call at, say, 45. XYZ goes up to 46 at expiration. The Call holder (contract owner) says, "Sell me 100 shares of XYZ at 45." You say, "Hold on a minute." You use your 15 Call to get 100 shares and sell them to him for 45. Done. You don't owe any shares or money or anything. In fact, you made Max Profit for that trade as it was set up. You can do it, it works, and it's no different than CCs on stock shares. Here, watch [InTheMoney Adam ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmqbVg9zqjQ)on YT talk about the Poor Man's Covered Call. He's speaking directly to you at the beginning: don't buy STOCK to do CCs on, buy CALLS. Cheers.
Because “XYZ stock was down 10% yesterday, today it’s up 10%,” does not mean it recovered, but that’s how people would interpret the news.
lol I just got like 5 “XYZ has moved below your custom price target” notifications 
Counting the 3 week period is inevitable, though. "If we ignore these 3 weeks, XYZ." Well... Those 3 weeks existed and they were fucking volatile 😂 alternate history speculation or ignoring things that happened to make a point is counterproductive.
At face value, XYZ puts looks good..
Exactly! Prices always either stay about the same....or go up. What ive been trying to explain to people is that even if some companies do in fact somehow relocate manufacturing back to the US....it will still mean the consumer is going to pay a huge hike in price. EG: Company A makes XYZ products outside the US, therefore pays a tarriff and as a result raises prices 50% per item to cover. Company B makes the same XYZ product and is also paying the tarriff, but decides to move manufacturing back to the US. They now are free from the tarriff increase. If the consumer is forced to choose between the 2 companies, isnt company B going to price all their goods at a 49% increase still anyway?! Why wouldn't they - they are technically still the consumer's best option - yet all the savings from reboarding back to US is going to go to them......not the consumer. Like the consumer can choose company A at a 50% increase , or company B at a 49% increase.....company B is never going to leave that margin for the consumer to save - they will just eat it as extra profit!! The same way that they say a price increase will always roll down to the consumer - a price decrease will always be eaten up by the company's profit margin!
Probably something in between. "Weeklies" doesn't mean you have to roll them once a week. You can get a weekly expiration a month in advance of expiration. So you'd have to say more about the rolling schedule. In any case, the more frequently you roll, regardless of the expiration schedule, the more transaction fee overhead cost you will have and the more tax drag you may have, if each roll is a gain on average. Furthermore, the closer to expiration you open, the higher the daily rate of theta decay. Opening a weekly on the Monday before it expires will have much higher daily theta decay than a weekly you open 4 weeks before its expiration. So what I would recommend is: * Use monthly expirations, not weeklies, for best liquidity * Open 60 DTE * Roll every 30 days Example: You open the July XYZ put today. On June 20th (the June monthly expiration date), roll out the put to the August monthly expiration. On July 18th (the July monthly expiration date), roll out the put to the September monthly expiration. This reduces the number of rolls you have to do to cover the 3 month period, while also using contracts that should have the best liquidity and lowest daily theta decay rate for a rolling scheme. However, even with this less frequent rolling, the total cost of the rolling scheme might still be higher than the total cost of just buying one 3 month put and holding it. You'll have to run the numbers for the specific contracts you want to see how they compare.
Haha. It was nothing negative. I actually own XYZ. They were once SQ I believe. They have not made me any money but I like how widespread their technology is.
Do you think XYZ is an actual solid company worth investing in or is it a meme stock?
Retired economist here, old and fading but not innumerate. Been doing 0dtes for a couple of weeks now. It's worked out well. Yeah I know there could be many more for whom it has been a fiasco and who therefore say nothing. My general view is people here are cursed with too much information. Indicators, etc. There is always a reason to do what you wanted to do anyway. I read a book on technical analysis. I think it's bullshit. I prefer to stay ignorant with a few simple rules. The basic Internet options scam goes like this: "If you think XYZ is gonna do this, you can make $$ doing that." But nobody knows what XYZ is going to do except cheaters. TastyTrade's variation on this is to use IV, but nobody knows what that is going to do either. I think you just have to go by probabilities (as determined by the market), go with that and hunt for premiums. Feel free to blow up my view. You won't hurt my feelings. I've been selling SPX iron condors at 10 or fewer deltas, spread width of five. Ten contracts on each end. Doing this you risk $5K and can easily make $400 a day, or $2,000 a week. That's all I need. I watch the Prob ITM, and relax once it falls below 10 at both ends, let it go to market close. Between 10 and 20 I keep watch. Above 20 I dump. Hasn't missed yet. The problem with closing earlier is the commissions on 20 contracts -- $26 at Schwab. That's a bite out of the $400. My other bit which hasn't worked out as well is to do shorts ATM with the longs 30 points out, just one or two contracts. Then you can manage without spending much on commissions. This was the advice on Tasty Trade, banking on theta decay over the course of a day. Comments, insults welcome.
Just rename these threads to "Weekend Gay Bear Coping Thread for the Weekend of XYZ"
XYZ is a real ticker now so I am not sure if you were specifically mentioning them or the general saying of XYZ. Sort of funny.
Block changed their ticker to XYZ? Cool bro, what about doing something innovative that results in some positive price action now?
Go look at the history of Dow Jones, Nasdaq, and S&P500 over the last 50 years and you will have your answer. I suggest you invest and put a specific date in mind like 15 years so in May 2040 you sell whatever. The market loves panickers like you it's how they make money. Stop beating yourself up over a loss, everyone has them. I do believe another dip in the market is on the horizon, so wait and buy back in, but then again it may not happen. Find companies you like and use like Costco, Kroger or Walmart etc, and then put $$ in emerging markets like Ai, or Quantum Computing. But you really want diversified portfolio buy ETFs like QQQ, SPYI, or MAIN and just let it ride. I daytrade extremely successfully and you need nerves of steel somedays. Do your research, don't try to reinvent the wheel, and most of all never listen to your brother in law trying to get you to buy XYZ company because they will make you a millionaire. Buy solid companies with proven track records over time of making money like Coca Cola, Colgate and Johnson & Johnson.
IWC is exactly a discord full of rocket emoji. “I told you FAM, stock XYZ will recover!” when everyone already lost money on his trades. And that’s the guy who told everyone to trade without any stop losses or you will be constantly losing money. What a clown.
If I have a margin account with $50k deposited, I could buy $100k of XYZ marginable stock (maybe 1000 shares at $100/sh), and I would have a -$50k USD cash balance and be paying 5.75%pa to 13%pa to the broker on it. Or instead of 10 round lots of shares, I could buy 10 synthetic long options spreads with the long call about 45 points ITM -- you will have 1000 long shares equivalent for about $50k upfront capital, and it should cost about 4.2%pa before slippage. Market rate. Although there are various other factors to consider, too. Or you do the first way, but then you bring your -$50k balance back up to zero shorting ITM options like with a short box spread which, for European style options, should cost about 4.4%, and you can get the broker margin loan down to $0.
Try it. Decide how much risk you want to take with the trade and then set it and forget it. "I think XYZ is going to make a 10 point move to the upside, options cost 200$ and I'm buying 5. I'm willing to risk a 200$ drawdown before I recalibrate position." So set stop loss at 1.60$.
Selling covered calls does not have unlimited risk. If you have 100 shares of XYZ worth $10 a share and sell a $12.50 covered call for $200 you pocket the 200 and have the obligation to sell at $12.50 if the buyer exercises. This limits your maximum profit during the contract period to the $200 from the call sale plus the $250 profit from selling at $12.50 with a $10 base price, total $450 profit on $1000 invested. Not bad. However, you're locked into those shares for the duration of the contract (unless you buy it back) so there is the risk that the stock craters to $0 and you're left with only the $200 from the call sale, a maximum loss of $800. That's pretty unlikely though unless you buy AMC just before they declare bankruptcy. Heh. The risk with covered calls is low, but there's no scenario where you're making a 10x profit either.
Find them in your portfolio and click the SELL button. Don't be sentimental about the specific shares you hold. They aren't special. You can sell them and buy them back in an instant. Imagine your whole portfolio was liquidated to cash. What would you buy? I'm guessing all your stocks are very liquid and your tax implications are negligible, so this is effectively the situation you are in. If you wouldn't buy stock XYZ from an all cash start, you shouldn't be holding it.
The average cost basis is pretty much irrelevant for deciding whether to sell a covered call or not. Think about it like this: say you own 100 shares of stock XYZ, which is trading at 80, has been in a range between 77 and 83 for a while. You firmly believe it won't go above 83. You see nice premium on the 84 calls. You do believe in company XYZ, and appreciate the idea of keeping the stock even if it goes down a bit. Does this sound like a good candidate to sell covered calls?
Tesla stock has always been overpriced and over inflated. Its stock price continually defies logic. Its value is based on future revenue. Therefore, there has to be a continually flowing narrative of "just around the corner there is XYZ product" The new model Y CyberTruck Full self driving x lots of promises Robot taxi Ai Perhaps, one day people will wise up. Maybe they won't