I am an options guy as well, most days that I watch the illiquid chop I can't imagine trading the outright's. Then again, as you probably notice, much of the way these futures trade has a great deal to do with which strikes are in play and the fact that there are three weekly expirations. A lot of "ramp and camp" and "bleed out" type of action most days. I also use BWB's, mostly leg into my positions, vary the expirations and do other plays with different ratio spreads, but I have found the past two weeks tricky for even legging basic positions.
Index markets and moves in vola are inverse corr. You can't have a 200 point SPX rally without a huge drop in vola. This is like markets 101.
Or not. Today, like many other days when some smell "trouble" -- one reason they *smell* trouble, is that VIX and indices moved in the same direction. *This* is like Markets 401.
You're assigning a +corr to noise. So either you're conflating it to be correct for it's own sake, or you don't know WTF you're doing. Jeez, you think there is news on Friday? Perhaps? Where has the worry been expressed in the last 60 days? In a 200 point rally?
Wrong. I am assigning an observation sufficient merit to be note-worthy. *You* have inferred cause|effect. Try again.
ok, you're stating that since you ate tonight there is no world hunger. You win! You ignore magnitude in order to prove a correlation. You also ignore the 200pt SPX rally which beget a 12-handle on VIX cash.
Wrong. I am assigning an observation sufficient merit to be note-worthy. *You* have inferred cause|effect. Twice. Try again.
i cannot quantify "trouble" any more than "note-worthy." Assigning your observation sufficient merit... is quantifiable as valueless. Trouble (cause) = VIX +; SPX + (effect) Try again, asshat. Oh, and I tried the correct spelling, without the hyphen... no luck. I continue to get that null error.