Skip to main content
Track Commission analysis
13 / 32
Library

2013issue C0561

Filter option day trades by spread, volume, and fees

Listed options are not equally executable. Rank a name by bid-ask width and average daily option volume, then reject strikes whose spread or commission drag cannot be recovered inside a short-horizon order.

  • Listed options across several thousand stocks, funds, and indexes are not equally executable, so a liquidity filter belongs before the short-horizon order.
  • Bid-ask width is the first cost screen, and average daily option volume is the ranking used for short-term executability.
  • Apply the screen to front-month and weekly expiration contracts, and treat gaps on a one-minute at-the-money chart as a fill-quality warning.
  • Commission drag can erase percentage results on deep out-of-the-money contracts; after both filters, at-the-money strikes are the more balanced default.
Entries in this reading2 entries

Treat executability as a gate

Across several thousand optionable stocks, funds, and indexes, listed options are not equally executable. A liquidity filter is required before a short-horizon order is placed.

Editorial reading: rank a name by quote width and printed volume first. Then reject strikes whose bid-ask spread or commission drag cannot be recovered inside the order's life.

Start with bid-ask width

Bid-ask width is a primary liquidity filter. When typical liquid-option spreads ran 0.25 to 0.50, covering a buy-the-offer and sell-the-bid round trip required about a 0.50 move. That bid-ask spread is the first visible cost of buying the offer and selling the bid.

A 2006 penny-increment listing program for the most active names allowed some options to quote only pennies wide. By then the list covered 370 stocks and funds, described as roughly the top tenth by liquidity.

Rank names by printed volume

Sorting names by total average daily option volume is presented as the decisive ranking for short-term executability. One snapshot placed a large-cap technology name first at 2,789,112 contracts.

Screen the tenor you will trade

Short-horizon traders often use front-month and one-week Friday expirations rather than longer-dated contracts. The liquidity filter should be applied to those weekly expiration and front-month tenors, not only to the underlying name.

Gaps on a one-minute at-the-money call or put chart are treated as a warning that spreads or prints are too thin for frequent in-and-out trading. The chart-gap screen is that fill-quality check.

Add the commission filter

Deep out-of-the-money contracts can show less quoted slippage, but commission drag can erase percentage gains or deepen losses. Deep in-the-money contracts can still widen even in otherwise liquid names.

After those spread and commission filters, at-the-money options are presented as the more balanced default for short-horizon execution. The at-the-money strike is typically the most two-sided listing in a name.

Educational research material, not investment advice. Historical source context does not establish present-day performance.
13 of 32 in the Commission analysis track
201360-60 pp.Next on Commission analysisFilter futures by liquidity, open interest, and effective marginRun a liquidity filter, open-interest analysis, and commission analysis before comparing futures listings, and keep a market only when activity, standing size, and range-adjusted capital cost make an order completable.
All readings on this track · 32 readings
  1. 1985Matching ticket size to negotiable commission schedules
  2. 1985Minimum tickets can price a small book out of its own exit
  3. 1992Stop-order slippage as an execution cost filter
  4. 1993Cost-aware walk-forward evaluation of pattern-detector signals
  5. 2001Audit high-turnover operating conditions as one procedure
  6. 2002Front-load futures commission and slippage
  7. 2005Inactive account fees as hidden implementation cost
  8. 2010A pre-trade liquidity screen for futures contracts
  9. 2011Currency option venues, spreads, clearing, and premium cost
  10. 2012Filter futures contracts by liquidity and implementation cost
  11. 2012Futures commission versus one tick of cost
  12. 2012Ranking futures liquidity for executable orders
  13. 2013Filter option day trades by spread, volume, and fees
  14. 2013Filter futures by liquidity, open interest, and effective margin
  15. 2014Book futures data fees as implementation cost
  16. 2015Use a futures liquidity rank as a pre-trade checklist
  17. 2015Filter unexecutable futures by liquidity, open interest, and margin
  18. 2015Futures liquidity ranking as an execution filter
  19. 2015Filtering option trades by bid-ask width
  20. 2016Exchange quote fees as execution costs and liquidity filters
  21. 2016Filter futures by liquidity, open interest, and margin cost
  22. 2016Comparing dollar-index futures execution costs and liquidity
  23. 2016A futures liquidity ranking as a screen for executable orders
  24. 2017Filter a futures board by liquidity, open interest, and implementation cost
  25. 2017Filter futures contracts by liquidity and margin cost
  26. 2017How residency rules raise futures implementation costs
  27. 2018Screen listed futures by liquidity, open interest, and margin
  28. 2018Contract selection is the first filter on competing bitcoin futures
  29. 2018Filter futures execution by liquidity and margin
  30. 2018Commission analysis for brokerage execution costs
  31. 2019Ranking futures liquidity before you size the order
  32. 2020Brokerage selection as an implementation-cost problem
All 37 readings tagged Commission analysis
Also on Commission analysis5 readings