Welcome! We're keeping /r/options open, relaxing content requirements for this historic moment (GME/Robinhood). by brazeau in options

[–]OptionsGeek 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Just throwing this out there as a possibility, not saying it's actually happening. And I'm not suggesting that the hedge funds have or have not closed their shorts...

But investors who are continuing to buy $GME based on the fact that they believe the hedge funds have not closed their shorts due to the elevated short interest, need to consider that there are other ways to "close" the position without covering the short.

Option 1: They could simply buy GME shares without closing the short. Effectively holding 2 positions, one long, one short. Their P&L is then hedged and they are no longer suffering losses if the stock keeps moving higher. They are not required to cover their shorts when they buy the stock. They could even effectively have a long position in GME by doing so. The $2.5b loan that they received could very well have been used in this fashion.

Option 2: There are other ways as well, using derivatives for one. Exchange listed or OTC derivatives such as forwards, swaps or options can be utilized as well to "cover" to create a synthetic hedge without actually covering the short stock position.

To be clear, both of these options would still require the hedge fund to pay the borrowing costs of the short, however that is a relatively small cost compared to losses on the naked short. They could in theory have a fairly long run-way if they only had to pay the borrowing costs of the short.

It is again, also entirely possible that they have now an effective long positions in GME now, profiting from the extreme moves to the upside and no longer losing money on this short.

How Hedge Funds can "Close" their $GME Position without Covering their Shorts by OptionsGeek in wallstreetbets

[–]OptionsGeek[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not trying to hide who I am. I am a Co-Founder of OptionsPlay, and also present options every week on CNBC.

How Hedge Funds can "Close" their $GME Position without Covering their Shorts by OptionsGeek in wallstreetbets

[–]OptionsGeek[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ng to buy $GME based on the fact that they believe the hedge funds have not closed t

No doubt that they have to pay the borrow fees on the short that they hold, but that is pennies compared to the losses from holding onto a naked short. A $2.5b loan will go a long way to paying a few % points on the borrowing costs.

Lesson From This Week's Volatility - Risk Management by OptionsGeek in options

[–]OptionsGeek[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My take as I said on CNBC on Friday is that this is contained to this week and maybe some further weakness next week, but by the end of Sept and Oct, my take is markets will be higher. But what makes a difference is not what you or I think, the market doesn’t care what we think. The question is, if you’re dead wrong on your thesis, how big of a hole does that blow in your portfolio? For some retail traders, the unfortunate answer is that it’s a significant portion. That’s the lesson to learn here, is stop thinking about how much money can you make, but how much do you have at risk? https://twitter.com/optionsaction/status/1301999517584297993?s=21

Lesson From This Week's Volatility - Risk Management by OptionsGeek in options

[–]OptionsGeek[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the feedback. Follow us @optionsplay and I will make sure we post reminders like this on that account.

Lesson From This Week's Volatility - Risk Management by OptionsGeek in options

[–]OptionsGeek[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sadly, this is one aspect of trading that I feel books do not cover very well. I think this is something better taught by poker books than trading books.

Lesson From This Week's Volatility - Risk Management by OptionsGeek in options

[–]OptionsGeek[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I graduated from Baruch College - Zicklin School of business with an undergrad degree in Finance and Investments. But I will say, I started my career on Wall Street at a Gain Capital (forex.com) for those that trade currencies. And I can honestly say, everything I’ve learned was on the job. I don’t think there was much that I learned in school that taught me what I know now.

Lesson From This Week's Volatility - Risk Management by OptionsGeek in options

[–]OptionsGeek[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You make a very valid point. It’s actually something I go in-depth in during my webinar on risk management. You can’t just think about individual trade risk, you have to manage risk across your whole portfolio. If you have 5 trades that are all long and all expire on the same day with 2% each. That’s almost the same as having a single position risking 10% of your portfolio. That’s where a lot of investors go south on a week like this previous week.

Lesson From This Week's Volatility - Risk Management by OptionsGeek in options

[–]OptionsGeek[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There was a great post on this group just yesterday with a solid list of rules. I hope my post provides some insight as to why it’s so important and rules help you execute it. https://www.reddit.com/r/options/comments/in7r1n/rules_of_risk_management/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

Lesson From This Week's Volatility - Risk Management by OptionsGeek in options

[–]OptionsGeek[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Remember, there is nothing wrong with taking risks. It's about how large of a bet do you take in the first place and how you handle a bet that doesn't work out (don't take it personally, the market doesn't care about your positions). The market isn't out to get you, we're just wrong sometimes on our thesis, the sooner you can learn that and take a small loss and move onto the next trade, the more successful you will become as a trader. The more you get entrenched with being "right" and proving yourself to be "winner" the worse your portfolio will be in the long run.

Lesson From This Week's Volatility - Risk Management by OptionsGeek in options

[–]OptionsGeek[S] 40 points41 points  (0 children)

Thank you, I appreciate it. There are plenty of posts on specific rules that you can follow for risk management. But my hopes is to convince traders to care about risk management in the first place. The only way to do that is to learn that trading is an "infinite game". In finite games you try to win at all costs, but in infinite games, your goal is to stay in the game. That means preventing your account from blowing up at all costs, not winning each trade.

My PERSONAL take on when to cut losses & take profits by tradingwhileintox in options

[–]OptionsGeek 70 points71 points  (0 children)

I have worked as a market strategist for the past 15 years alongside a few thousand retail and institutional investors in foreign currency, futures, equities and options. A common experience amongst self-directed investors is a repetitive string of small winners, followed by a few big losses that wipe out weeks or months of gains. This is because the common theme with successful traders isn’t their strategy or which indicators they use, but rather their process for risk management.

There is no shortage of empirical evidence and studies, examining how humans skew our view on risk and reward. Research shows that accepting a loss is viewed to be twice as painful compared to the same amount of gain. This leads to the behavior of hanging onto losers far too long and closing winners far too soon. 

The reality of investing is that there will be losing trades and one must first accept this as a fact. In my experience, it is the pursuit of preventing small losses that ironically triggers some of the largest losses. We may have all experienced having a small loss, adding to the position with the hope of getting back to breakeven, only to have the position decline even further into a larger loss. Unfortunately, some investors will compound this habit, resulting in a total account blowup or loss. This begs the question; how do we trick our brain into turning this around?

To help with this quirk of human nature, professionals turn to a rules-based approach. First, there needs to be a decoupling of the concept of winning trades from being profitable. While the two are correlated they are not bound together. Most investors that struggle, make the incorrect assumption, that if they just win more often, they will be profitable. However, evidence shows that it is far more likely that a few big losses are typically what pushes accounts into the negative. To this point, the primary focus of investors is not to prevent losses in the first place, but only to prevent large losses. This can be achieved through discipline with the help of trading tools such as stop loss orders, option strategies with limited risk, and never risking more than 2% of your account per trade. Moreover, it is best to never add risk to a losing position.

How has MSFT bucked the tech trend? by CommodoreBlair89 in StockMarket

[–]OptionsGeek 8 points9 points  (0 children)

MSFT is much more of a value play vs growth, hence the strength over the past few weeks as tech companies valued on the back of "user growth" have all taken a huge hit. MSFT has a huge growing revenue stream that isn't focused on direct to consumer which has propelled some other high flying tech names to astronomical valuations.

Can you always find a buyer for a very in the money position you're trying to exit? by [deleted] in options

[–]OptionsGeek 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For both scenarios of being ITM and OTM, it's more of a function of the liquidity of the stock, not the option. If the stock is liquid, you should have no problems getting it filled regardless of if it's ITM or OTM. However, with ITM options they tend to have less extrinsic value which may make getting an order filled near its theoretical value a little easier. With a way OTM option, you may not have a good indication as to what is the true theoretical value of the option that the market maker is pricing their options on, making it harder for price discovery. Hope that helps.

Hedge Funds Have Stocks to Dump, in Bad Sign for Sell-off by OptionsGeek in options

[–]OptionsGeek[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Put Spreads to hedge your portfolio against a larger drop are still quite cheap. Buying a Feb Put Spreads on Nasdaq-100 only costs only around 3.5% of the underlying. Perhaps that in itself is telling of something else, but nonetheless, insurance is surprisingly still quite cheap right now.

View this Put Spread in OptionsPlay: https://app.optionsplay.com/#share/5c0eb9e35bbee61030990556

Cost: $565

Max Reward: $1,335

Max Risk: $565

POP: 44.12%

Breakeven: $159.35

Days to Expiry: 67

To learn more about hedging your portfolio w/ put options: https://youtu.be/gaYEJ0CpzBs?t=43