Tag Archives | risk reduction

Risk Management: Making those First Critical Decisions

The topic of managing risk was introduced in a five part series. It's time to get into more of the details.

Risk Management: Choosing the first line of defense

When you own a position that can lose money and continue to become
riskier as market events unfold, the first two concerns (at least my
recommendation is that these be placed at the top of the list) are:

  • What specific action will you take before serious
    trouble arrives?
  • What has to happen to trigger that action?

Let's consider a simple (commissions ignored)
example. Writing covered calls:

You invest $5,400 to buy 200 shares of XYZ @
$27 per share

You write two
calls, expiring in 60 days.  The strike price is $25 and you collect a
premium of $350 for each option.

cost basis (or break-even point) is $23.50 per share.  In other words, if the stock is above $23.50 when expiration arrives, the trade is profitable.

When owning a covered call position, you recognize that when this stock is above
the strike price after those 60 days pass, you
will be assigned an exercise notice and sell your shares at $25.  Net
profit in this example is $300.

If the stock moves higher and higher prior to expiration, nothing is lost and risk does not increase.  The higher the price, the greater the probability that you
will earn that profit.  Some traders find a rising stock price to be upsetting.  Don't let that happen to you.  You chose a strategy, are about to earn the maximum possible reward from that strategy, and a rising stock price makes it even more likely you will win.  You win.  Don't let anyone tell you this is a loss.

If a rising stock price is good for your position, then it's likely that a falling stock price is not.  There is risk of loss when the stock is below the strike price ($25) at expiration.  After 60 days, the calls expire worthless
and you own the 200 shares @ $23.50. That's better than the $27 you paid for the shares, and writing the covered call option has been beneficial.  However, the position had little downside protection, and if the stock falls far enough, this position may be losing money and threatening to lose even more.

There must be some point at which you take action to reduce future losses, and  increase the chances of making money going forward.

Time out

'Going forward' is a key phrase.  If you want to be a successful trader this is an important, albeit controversial, concept to grasp.  Most traders – both experienced and new – have a blind spot in a situation similar to this.

The usual method of evaluating a position is based on the original trade – and the price at which that trade was made.  I take a different view.  To me the original trade is history and no longer relevant.  I examine a position as it is priced right now – and then decide if I want to continue to own the trade at its current price.  What matters to me is the risk/reward going forward as well as the probability of success.  If the position is currently profitable plays no role in my decision.  I either want to own it or I don't.  If not, I exit (or perhaps make an adjustment instead).  Only after the trade is closed do I worry about whether it made or lost money. And that's for the purposes of record keeping.

If the position is currently under water (losing) the general plan for the majority is to base a strategy on the chance to earn enough to eliminate the loss.

This is a psychological trap that hurts your profitability. I hope to convince you to avoid this way of thinking.

When trading, your top goal is to make money with an acceptable level of risk. You do not care (or should not care) which position produces those profits.  You don't care which stock provides those profits.  Your job is to gather those profits.  You already understand the concept of making money.  Managing risk is another, and more important, job.

I know some believe that if you make money, nothing else matters.   And I suppose that idea sounds reasonable.  However, if you are taking much more risk than you realize; if you are getting good results because nothing bad has happened; then sooner or later statistics become reality.  Those '90% chance of winning' trades are expected to lose approximately one time in 10.  Yet, when it happens, the trader seems to be unprepared.   It's as if he/she believes it should never happen, and that 90% truly means 100%.  If unprepared, a single loss can wipe out years of gains.   

Thus, getting back to even is a meaningless goal (in my opinion).  Your goal is to make money today and into the future. If one position cannot do that for you, exit, take the loss, and find another that you believe will be profitable.  If you can 'fix' or adjust this position so that it fits within your definition of a good position, then that's a reasonable alternative.  But don't force the trade.  If you cannot fix it, dump it.  Too many traders only heed that 'dump it' advice when the trade is profitable and almost never, when it is losing money.

End of time out

Most investors/traders would continue using this basic strategy (covered calls) to write another option if the first call expires. 

When this stock is trading under $25 per share, and you own stock after the calls have expired, i recommend that you ignore your current cost basis (that's $23.50 in this example).  I recommend that you look at the stock as it is priced today – and decide what to do.  You can hold, you can sell, or you can write another covered call.

Conservative traders sell the 22.50 or perhaps 20 strike call.  They recognize the importance of selling an option with some protection against loss (if the stock continues to decline).  That downside protection reduces risk when owning the covered call position. 

If you understand the concept of accepting a reduced profit when the stock rallies beyond the call strike price, then you already grasp the basic concept of good risk management.  You are trading potential (and that's all it is – potential profit) for additional safety.

The more bullish investor may prefer to write a call with a strike of 25, and that's okay when the reason for the trade is to bet that the stock moves higher.

However, if the decision to write the 25 strike call is based on a mindset that demands making a trade that offers the opportunity to get back to even, then it's a poor decision.  You want to make money from today onward.  You cannot be concerned with money that has already been lost. 

The concept of 'making money going forward' is not often discussed, but there is plenty of talk about break-even prices.

The money has already been lost, and the best way to 'get back to even' is to find another profitable opportunity.

The 'get even' mindset is not one that's in tune with good risk management.

to be continued…



Read full story · Comments are closed

Picking the Right Hedge


I think
what I might not fully understand on Risk Management is exactly what
type of hedge is needed. For example: On my Cash secured puts..what is a
good hedge, is it buying long puts and when? When the market starts in
the other direction or when first selling the puts?  What type of hedge with
what type of trade?



You enter into a trade with the expectation of being able to earn a profit.  If all goes well, you exit the trade and collect the profit.

When the trade is not working, you have choices.  The first is to stubbornly hold that trade.  In my opinion this is foolish, unless you (be honest with yourself) truly want to own the trade with its current risk and reward potential.

The next obvious choice is to acknowledge that this specific position is not working and that you no longer have any confidence that it will work. Exit the trade.  There is no reason to hedge or adjust a position that no longer meets your needs.

The most popular choice among option traders is to hedge (reduce the risk of holding) the trade.  Your question deals with knowing what to do when making this adjustment to your position.  Before replying, I must mention that attempting to salvage a bad position – with the hope of recovering losses – is an over-utilized strategy.  

The only time (this is my opinion, not a law) to adjust a position is when you can modify it so that it meets your qualifications for a new trade.  In other words, ignoring any loss incurred so far, the position – after it is adjusted – must be 'good,' i.e., you want to own it.  Remember it's quick and easy to exit, so if you make the adjustment it should be because you like the prospects of the altered position.

Far too many traders 'fix' the current problem, hoping to recover losses – and not because the fixed position is worth holding.  This is a trap.  Do not fall into it.  You already incurred the loss, so your job as an intelligent trader, is to find the best way to invest your money going forward.

Let's assume you elect to hedge the position.

There is no 'best' answer to the dilemma: Which hedge to choose?

Your position is naked short puts.

1) Size the trade. The maximum possible loss must be acceptable – not be a happy event, but one you accept.  Thus, the first hedge occurs at the time of the trade: don't sell too many puts.

2) Yes, buying other puts is the easiest and safest method for reducing risk. It's my first choice, but that does not mean it's your first choice.  It costs cash to buy puts and not every trader is willing to make that trade.  It severely cuts profit potential, but it also establishes a maximum loss.

But does it give you the position you want to own?  There was a reason you chose to sell naked puts, rather than put spreads.  That suggests that this is not the right hedge for you.  If it is, you must understand why you prefer to sell naked puts as the initial trade.

3) If you elect to buy puts for protection, when is a good time?  There are many reasonable times. 

You can buy when you enter the trade.  That means selling a put spread instead of just selling puts.  That's a different risk/reward profile – and no one can tell you which trade is better suited for you, your investment style, your investment goals, and your tolerance for risk. That is for you to decide.  No one can help with this decision.  If your goal is to aggressively seek profits, then put spreads may be too conservative.  If your goal is profit with reasonable risk, then put spreads should be more appealing.

You can hedge when the market rallies and the put becomes cheaper, but most people avoid that, believing the hedge is no longer necessary.

You can buy puts on a decline, when the position becomes more risky to hold. It's more expensive to buy puts in this situation, but to compensate, there will be many instances in which you never have to hedge.

There is no correct answer.  There is no best way to handle this decision.  There is only your trade plan.  How much risk are you willing to take?  How much reward do you need to take that risk?  When do you acknowledge that the original plan is not working?

4) What type of hedge with what type of trade?  This is a topic that I'll be covering to some degree in the series on risk management, but you must know there is no universally accepted correct answer.

Donald, I think you are looking for simple answers to complex questions.  They do not exist.  For example, some traders prefer to hedge a short put (your trade) by selling a naked call.  I would never do that (although I did it many times, many years ago).  It's too risky for me.  But how can I know if it's too risky for you?

If you decide to buy puts, how will you choose the strike price or the expiration date, or the quantity to buy?  There are many ways to attack this problem.  My suggestion is to consider several alternatives, examine the risk graph for each and find a scenario that leaves you with acceptable risk and sufficient reward.

This may seem to be a big time waster, but it's not.  Eventually you will find a style of put buying that works for you.  There are so many reasonable choices that you must (ok, should)  practice (paper trading account?) to see which type of trade leaves you in a comfortable position. 

Some traders prefer to do nothing until the trade reaches a point where prudent risk management dictates exiting and taking the loss.

Some traders use shares of the underlying stock to occasionally move the trade back to delta neutral.  This is a very popular method.  I don't use it, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't.

You have to find your own answers.  I hope this reply has given you enough to begin the search.


Expiring Monthly electronic magazine.  All options all the time


Coming in the May 2010 issue:

The Case for Commodity Options. Jared Woodard discusses commodity volatility and why its profile is so different from that of equities.

Read full story · Comments are closed