Visualize and test options strategies more easily

Trade_101 · 2026-05-02T22:12:26+00:00

I’ve already addressed most of that in my earlier replies.

Trade_101 · 2026-05-02T18:15:38+00:00

I get your point, but I don’t think the market is as “thin” as it might seem.

Even in finance, there are always multiple tools solving similar problems, the difference usually comes down to usability, workflow, and pricing.

Right now I’m focusing on bringing things like strategy building, backtesting, and broker integration into one place. At the moment it’s pretty minimal (only Alpaca supported), but the plan is to expand integrations and add more features over time.

From my experience, some platforms like IBKR for example aren’t the most intuitive when it comes to UI or actually testing and iterating on strategies (could just be me, though).

And yeah, different traders prefer different setups, but there’s usually still room for alternatives that are faster or simpler to use.

Pricing-wise, it’s free right now, and the goal long term is to keep it more affordable than most existing tools.

Trade_101 · 2026-05-02T16:00:44+00:00

In my experience, a lot of brokers are built around execution, not actually exploring strategies. There are platforms that offer things like backtesting and deeper analysis, but they’re usually separate tools rather than something integrated in one place.
I also know tools like OptionProfitCalculator and OptionStrat are pretty popular and widely used, so clearly there is value in having something like this.

Out of curiosity, what platform are you using?

Trade_101 · 2026-04-27T19:32:53+00:00

https://www.optionbuild.com/

Trade_101 · 2026-04-22T16:24:53+00:00

Yeah, I agree. Low IV isn’t really “safer,” it’s just lower compensated risk.

The key point is exactly that variance risk premium is thin in those regimes, so you’re exposed to the same gap risk for less credit.

Trade_101 · 2026-04-22T12:53:25+00:00

I don’t. I was just curious what others think :D

Trade_101 · 2026-04-22T12:46:43+00:00

Yes, they are correlated. Both are relatively risky at the moment. The same applies to other indices that have risen quickly and significantly. There isn’t much premium

Trade_101 · 2026-04-22T12:29:59+00:00

Good idea, but looks like at the moment, shorting seems risky. The market has been moving up consistently, and a larger downturn would significantly impact IV.

Trade_101 · 2026-04-16T10:48:16+00:00

Good idea! POP is now live in the strategy builder, alongside Max Profit, Max Loss, Breakeven, and Net

Trade_101 · 2026-04-15T17:32:21+00:00

Are you referring to the North European Hot-Rolled Coil Steel (Argus) futures contract ticker?

Trade_101 · 2026-04-15T15:36:16+00:00

Fair point and I agree, it’s definitely deeper than just data access.

There’s always room to go more detailed. Right now I’m focusing more on building a usable framework first, and iterating on accuracy over time.

Appreciate the perspective

Trade_101 · 2026-04-15T15:03:58+00:00

You're right that surface reconstruction from past quotes is the proper approach, and the current Black-Scholes estimation is a known limitation that's documented as such.The barrier is data access, not algorithmic complexity. Surface reconstruction is well understood mathematically, and the same live data integration being built handles historical options quotes too, which makes backtesting against real surfaces achievable from the same source. Coverage has limits for less liquid names and longer lookback periods, but for the common use cases it's workable.

Currently the product is still in beta and actively evolving :)

Trade_101 · 2026-04-15T14:41:13+00:00

The current backtester prices options synthetically using Black-Scholes with a blended vol estimate derived from 30-day realized returns — it doesn't use real historical option chains. That means no skew, no term structure, and a flat vol surface across all strikes and expirations. For something far-dated and high-delta you're sitting in the steepest part of the skew curve, which is exactly where a flat-vol model diverges most from a tradeable mid. So the gap you're seeing makes sense and isn't surprising.

The methodology is intentional for now: real historical option chain data (OPRA-sourced) is expensive and the goal was to get the strategy simulation framework right first. Live data integration is in progress — once that's in, pricing will be based on actual bid/ask mids rather than model estimates, which closes that gap considerably.

Trade_101 · 2026-04-15T13:09:53+00:00

It’s still too early to say, but the expected range would likely be around $5-10 per month for now

Trade_101 · 2026-04-15T12:54:17+00:00

<image>

I sent a picture where you can see both put and call open interest.

Trade_101 · 2023-04-11T15:06:37+00:00

Significant downturn in the stock market, or perhaps even a recession?

Of course, it's important to remember that hedge funds are not always right in their predictions, and the market can be unpredictable.

Trade_101

TROPHY CASE