Covered Calls vs. Naked Puts

Discussion in 'Options' started by aradiel, May 4, 2010.

  1. aradiel

    aradiel

    Are they really the same strategies? I.e., do they really yield the same results?

    I can think of at least one major reason to why one is actually better - or more efficient - than the other.

    What is your opinion on this? Lets discuss.
     
  2. MTE

    MTE

    Synthetically they are the same. However, a short put has the advantage of lower transaction costs.

    Generally speaking, if you already hold the stock for other purposes then a covered call is the way to go. On the other hand, if you don't have the stock then you are better off just writing a put.

    On a side note, this topic has been discussed here multiple times so you may wanna use the search function to find previous discussion on this.
     
  3. What is it? Lets discuss.
     
  4. Thanks MTE

    cost of buying 100 shares with IB is $1. Sure that is not significant.
     
  5. Premium

    Premium

    They are synthetically equivalent. Naked Puts require less margin/capital so more leverage is possible.
     
  6. MTE

    MTE

    Well, commissions and slippage do add up over time.
     
  7. Naked put can have as few as one commission - it expires worthless. Covered call can have as many as three - buy stock, sell call, sell stock (if not assigned). There's 3x the B/A slippage as well.

    The slippage can really add up over time.
     
  8. I have thought about this. They would be the same depending on the strikes of the put and call. Suppose I am trading the ES and it is at 1200. I want to sell a naked put. I go out 5% and sell the 1140 Put and get a premium. Now, buy the ES at 1200 and sell the 1140 call. Now, to me, these trades look the same. Both have fixed profit if the underlying stays above 1140. Here's the difference. You will find that the time value of the short put is higher than the time value of the short call. So, technically speaking, the short put is the better deal. Now, I look at the margin required for both, and lo and behold, they are about the same. So, it appears that the short put is still the better deal. Here is another point. Suppose, instead of the 1140 strike for the short call, we go to 1100--further ITM. Well, the time value available is the same as the 1140 call (and margin is the same as above). So, we get back to the old adage--more risk, more reward.
     
  9. Is it the norm for ES that the time value of the put is higher than the call?

    For equities, margin for a CC will be 2.5-3x that of a NP unless it's very deep ITM. Advantage: NP.
     
  10. stoic

    stoic

    When I calculate the marging requirement, there's a big differance.

    What numbers did you use?
     
    #10     May 4, 2010