Skip to main content
Track Long put
8 / 22
Search the archiveLibrary
Library

2008issue C061-2

Margin shock, defined-debit options, and selective premium

The archive used a grain-margin shock to compare a mini-contract with a long-put and an iron-butterfly when implied-volatility was elevated. A TradersWeek editorial reading is that an option-income-strategy is eligible only after range and standard-deviation extremes argue that volatility is more likely to compress than extend.

  • A mini-contract cut the dollar change per one-cent move to 10 from 50, but daily-limit translations still left 1050 and 700 one-day swings on the mini bean and mini wheat.
  • A long-option-only book, including an out-of-the-money countertrend long-put, limited loss to the premium paid, unlike futures or spreads that leave naked legs.
  • A soybean iron-butterfly debit of about 25 cents prepaid a 1250 entry, limited risk to that debit, and was given 5750 of maximum potential before transaction costs.
  • Higher implied-volatility was said to raise both premiums and the risk those richer prices embed, so an option-income-strategy was reserved for countertrend sales after range and standard-deviation extremes.
Entries in this reading3 entries
Current trackLong put26 readingsOption income strategy44 readingsImplied volatility analysis76 readings

Instrument choice after a margin shock

Full-sized corn margin was described as having risen from near 400 to a 2025 account minimum to hold one contract. Exchange margins on many popular futures were said to have doubled, tripled, or more.

A TradersWeek editorial reading is that the shock is a classroom for instrument choice under elevated implied-volatility. First decide whether a smaller futures unit still leaves an uncapped path. Then compare a debit-only long-put and a defined-width iron-butterfly as prepaid capital caps. Treat an option-income-strategy as eligible only after range and standard-deviation extremes argue that volatility is more likely to compress than extend.

A mini-contract still left an uncapped path

Mini grain futures were sized as a mini-contract at one-fifth of the matching full contract, producing a 10 rather than 50 dollar change per one-cent move. Posted margins were 405 for mini corn, 1215 for mini wheat, and 2025 for mini soybeans, versus 4388 for soybean futures.

Session daily-limit moves were translated into mini-contract dollar swings. A 1.05 soybean daily-limit implied a 1050 one-day fluctuation on the mini bean. A 70-cent wheat daily-limit implied 700 on the mini wheat.

Posted grain-futures margins after the hike

A trader should see that after the exchange hike even the smaller grain units still required hundreds to thousands of dollars of posted capital, while a full soybean contract sat more than twice a mini soybean. The dollar amounts are the contemporaneous margins Garner stated in the column, not a figure read off the author photograph.
A trader should see that after the exchange hike even the smaller grain units still required hundreds to thousands of dollars of posted capital, while a full soybean contract sat more than twice a mini soybean. The dollar amounts are the contemporaneous margins Garner stated in the column, not a figure read off the author photograph.CBOT mini and full-sized grain futures · As of mid-2008, at the time of writing

Margins are the exchange figures quoted at the time of writing in the June 2008 column. The earlier full-sized corn level described only as near $400 is omitted so the bars stay contemporaneous.

A long-put as a defined debit

A long-option-only book was presented as a way to enter highly volatile commodity markets with loss limited to the premium paid. That book was contrasted with futures or option spreads that leave naked legs.

After soybeans and wheat were cited at 16 and 13, out-of-the-money countertrend long-put positions were framed as a low-probability strike-breakthrough with a large payoff if it occurred. The same procedure was described as one that could absorb several worthless expirations first.

An iron-butterfly as a prepaid width

A soybean iron-butterfly debit was specified as buy the July 1260 call, sell two 1400 calls, and buy the 1540 call for about 25 cents. That construction was given a 1250 entry cost and a 5750 maximum potential before transaction costs, with risk limited to the debit paid.

Editorial note: both the long-put and the iron-butterfly were treated as prepaid capital caps. The long-put spent a single premium. The iron-butterfly spent a net debit that capped both cost and upside.

When an option-income-strategy was eligible

The rule of thumb that one sells premium after volatility expands and buys it when markets are quiet was treated as incomplete, because a short-option book is exposed if implied-volatility can still rise further.

Higher implied-volatility was said to raise option premiums and, correspondingly, the risk embedded in those richer prices rather than making short premium automatically cheaper to hold.

For Treasury and stock-index futures, short-premium income trades were reserved for countertrend sales after extremes defined by trading ranges and standard deviations, not for mid-range conditions. A TradersWeek editorial reading is that an option-income-strategy becomes eligible only after those range and standard-deviation extremes argue that volatility is more likely to compress than extend.

Educational research material, not investment advice. Historical source context does not establish present-day performance.
8 of 22 in the Long put track
20081-2 pp.Next on Long putRanking in-the-money puts by breakeven rather than cheapest premiumAn allowed bounce toward 1.98 to 1.99 ruled out selling a GBP/USD forward, so the directional vehicle was a long put whose maximum loss is the premium paid.
All readings on this track · 22 readings
  1. 1984A long silver put as a prepaid loss cap
  2. 1984Spectral window gates for index long puts
  3. 1990Breadth nonconfirmation as the gate for a volume fade and long-put case
  4. 2002Volatility-first construction for a bearish put or debit
  5. 2002Name the regime and the season before choosing a long put
  6. 2005Critique of put spreads versus outright long puts
  7. 2007Sector put hedges, automatic exercise, and pin risk
  8. 2008Margin shock, defined-debit options, and selective premium
  9. 2008Ranking in-the-money puts by breakeven rather than cheapest premium
  10. 2012Evaluating long-put moneyness when implied volatility shifts
  11. 2012Sizing a long butterfly for early assignment and a long option for gamma
  12. 2013Gold after the April break: option-spread vehicles and a long-put hedge
  13. 2014A defined-risk option case for the mid-February to mid-July energy window
  14. 2014Long put versus vertical debit spread on a Treasury ETF
  15. 2015Defined debit call spread on a health-insurer worksheet
  16. 2015Overbought technology index: a long put via an inverse proxy
  17. 2018Replace futures stops with short-dated long puts
  18. 2018Constructing short-dated long puts around weekly expiration
  19. 2018Four decisions before a portfolio protective put
  20. 2018Incremental producer hedging with puts and risk reversals
  21. 2019Put butterfly versus long put in a volatility spike
  22. 2020Scenario-first SPY put hedge: butterfly versus long put
By fieldOptions and volatility193 readingsBy year200870 readings
All 26 readings tagged Long put
Also on Long put5 readings
2002Name the regime and the season before choosing a long put2008Ranking in-the-money puts by breakeven rather than cheapest premium2012Evaluating long-put moneyness when implied volatility shifts2019Put butterfly versus long put in a volatility spike1984A long silver put as a prepaid loss cap