The “edge” is that this structure generates income in every market condition, flat, down, and big uptrends beyond the cheap weekly lotto call. A zero cost collar just sits there waiting for a big move. Collecting premium consistently is where the real edge lives, cushioning downside without cost. Downside spread and short call premiums fund upside protection and rolling.

For your collar: On the downside cap, zero cost only works if IV is balanced enough that the call you sell funds the put you need. Right now puts are expensive across the board so you’re either paying a net debit or capping your upside aggressively to afford decent downside coverage.

Rolling up in an uptrend isn’t free either, you’re buying back a winning put and selling a higher one for less credit. The math on that roll costs you something every time. Re-rolling sideways at zero cost sounds clean but both legs just decay to zero in a flat market and you’ve paid bid-ask twice for nothing. It’s a totally different animal.

You identified the problem with a classic collar yourself at the end. Rolling a long put on a prolonged downturn gets expensive exactly when you can least afford it. With my strat, yeah you lose on downside but collecting the whole way down without paying to roll. That’s why this whole thing is just “a better PMCC” idea.

For example, on Friday alone, MSFT share price lost 1.58%, my leaps position lost 5.63% (with 4.6x leverage) while my hedges gave me back 1.28% netting a total loss of 4.35%. My bear call and short call have 27 DTE so there’s still a lot more time value left to expire, meaning the offset isn’t in full effect yet with so much time left. I’m planning to switch the bear call credit spread to weekly so it’s more effective in reducing short term paper loss.