Never tried it that way. But it might work that way in an option contract with really tight penny spreads. Try it and let us know!
thank you for taking the time to provide detailed answers. i appreciate it. If I can comment on what you wrote, I would add that if one hedges with DITM options, the needed volume should be lower as the DITM deltas are higher (in absolute value) compared to OTM options. I am therefore wondering to what extent this point I raise here reduces the strength of your argument. thanks for your intense contributions.
Discussed on this ET thread: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24449&perpage=6&pagenumber=1
"Beating" and "DMO": you're smart cookies. That's why NOBODY will sell you a strangle in the OTC power market. At least, the price will be considerably more than modeled FV.
I think you're raising the question of the most sensible way to hedge, and wondering if the way it is commonly done - with OTM options - really makes more sense than doing it with DITM options. It's a worthwhile discussion, but for purposes of understanding the skew I think it's more important to know what people are actually doing. Did you see the graphic I attached to a post a few pages ago? It shows clearly that a lopsided majority of volume at each strike is the OTM over the ITM. So whether it makes sense or not, the majority of put buyers are buying the lower strikes, and bidding up the volatility down there in the process.
The skew is demand-driven for the extrinsic premium. Nobody is bidding deep itm index calls out of demand; causation is the demand for OTM puts and parity which keeps strike-vols in-line. IOW, nobody is buying cheap-vol in guts as the vol is bid in pennies/intrinsic. There is ZERO flow in deep itm calls.
Well of COURSE I'm happy you agreed. My only point is that if one considers skew as a market, different people are buying puts for different purposes, it's impossible to state there is only one reason why they do so. Hence one can't completely explain skew. The way it curves is just based on "no easy free lunch over here" relationships, that's all. Intuitively it would be hard to accept the fact that an option, a OTM put with a limited final payoff (max(K1-S;0)) would be more expensive than a symmetric one, a OTM call, with a final payoff you can't already know, (max(S-K2;0)). I mean without implicitly stating that one side is disposed to be much more bloody than the other."The market is a large movie theater with a small door".
Please correct me if I'm wrong, you' re "blown up" only if you were leveraged. Since, once again, basically an index can't worth zero. The opposit side, short calls on index can blow you up without leverage. A pretty market increase is enough ( like 2000's).