When you trade options you have risk on one or more of the greeks. You have done that intentionally. Most traders focus on delta risk and/or vega risk. There is a cost to reduce the risk you have created by placing a trade counter to your strategy. You don't want that cost to out way the probability of success with your strategy. I find playing smaller is the best hedge and has a lower cost, IMO.
The problem with CHF for the last few years has been the negative carry. I'd almost replace it with SGD.
Maybe not within listed options but the culprits for CHF negative rates are a number of factors more influential than "crash protection" such as SNB and ECB monetary policy, demographics, and technological innovation to name a few. Policy-driven stupidity happens all the time. Look at Soros and the BOE
Yeah, pass. One thing is paying for convexity, another is paying for fkkall. Thanks for the look, Renaud
Topical -- name the sell-side note. Emphasis mine: "In previous issues of Global Money Notes we’ve referred to FX swaps as the outer rim of funding markets. Money is hierarchical, and in the hierarchy of funding markets FX swaps trade at a premium to other market segments: OIS is at the bottom of the hierarchy, secured repo trades at a spread to OIS, unsecured Libor trades at a wider spread to OIS, and FX swaps typically trade at a spread to Libor. In recent years, the most lucrative money dealing activity was to raise dollars at lower levels of the hierarchy and lend them via FX swaps at the outer rim. The typical borrower of dollars was a real money manager from a negative rate jurisdiction looking to buy dollar assets – bonds – on a hedged basis."