Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Another one about OV / ONE...

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Marcas, Aug 17, 2016.

  1. Marcas

    Marcas Well-Known Member

    Hi, there.
    Eventualy I decided to purchase one of these fancy analyzing programs you gents taking about all day. I just was stuck with couple trades ideas and having something like OV / ONE will make my live easier (I think).
    I read and watched related materials and still have some questions.

    First t0 line issues.
    OV – I like JL approach. He says that OV is more stable, regarding t0 line in various market environments than ONE or TOS. Or is it? He was talking about previous modeling. Now there is new model that looks like it works fine but was it tested in different markets? If I decide to go with OV will I have a chance to work with previous models? Will I have an option to never upgrade if current version of OV is good enough for me? What is very strange that OV uses only strikes shown in matrix to calculate greeks. Am I right? That shouldn't be or at least there should be switch to turn this behavior on (because it should be off by default, means it should use all available data to calculate most accurate t0, imho). Is t0 predictability issue big enough to push me to OV over ONE?

    ONE – I'm not sure how good or bad its modeling is. I remember Jim mentioned once that ONE pulls data from TOS, and it pulls also greeks. Maybe I misunderstood smth because someone else showed big differences between ONEs ant TOSes greeks in particular situation. So I really dont know how good this t0 in ONE is. But I assume it is good enough.

    TOS – I'm using it now. I know that Ron likes vol smile here over OV and ONE. I would like to hear more about it. I started testing this: making a screenshots every day with idea to compare predictions with reality. What a cumbersome task it is! I need to take shot of v.smile, then ind.vol shot and than real position values – each day. With my schedule it will take forever to finish this study…

    Now backtesting.
    TOS – it sucks.
    OV – it is all right (I'm taking abut this stuff just by watching yours presentations.) but have some issues with functionality. I don't like for example that I have to click to open graph widow then close it to look at greeks – it is a lot of unnecessary clicks for me, especially in backtesting. I've seen couple times people tried to work with Analyze window open on side – it didn't work too well, it jammed too often for workable environment. Also I don't like that grid on graph window has flexible space between vert lines, like $9.73 separations. I've seen you changing it manually but can it be done once for good. I want vertical lines to be 10 points apart every time I open this window, when I scale in or out it or do whatever. If I'd need different spacing then I can do it manually. And I want those lines to be on 2200, 2210, 2220 exact not on 2200.37. I know that I can learn to ignore this with time, now - it is annoying. There are some other similar things but don't want take too much of your time.
    ONE – looks like it is very well designed for users. All is on one screen, I can set my trade, press 'play' button and watch my trade rolling to stop at chosen time for analyzing or adjustments. Can you give me feedback how this system works in practice, speed reliability, jammness :).

    My main goal is to get tool for backtesting. I'm not overly concerned about 'true' greeks (for now) but it would be a nice addition. Procedure like Jls: gathering greeks from all 3 programs and using average to decide of adjustments is definitely not for me (for now). I'd rather stick with less greek-demanding trades.

    So if you have any thoughts that my help, please, share. I'm aware of OV being more 'technical' with a lot of set-ups – it doesn't bother me if I end up being happy user of OV, but I wont be happy at all if I spend time learning all different tweeks to find out that it does't work.

    I know, I produced a looong post, but not like we are overwhelmed with writings here, right?. So please, share your thoughts this will be beneficial for others.
    I focused on tech side of programs – oh!! I forgot to ask about keeping tracks of trades – so, Im doing it here, I assume that OV and ONE are similar.

    I'm also aware of others issues with ONE and OV but asking here about practical/technical stuff from users perspective.
    thanks
     
  2. garyw

    garyw Well-Known Member

    My 2 cents: I went with OV a few months back. For me this was a mistake. Trying to back test in OV is like kicking yourself in the privates! I was spoiled with the relative ease of ONE back testing (compared to OV). I do not yet have a good grasp on the IV modeling differences, which caused some here to chose OV over ONE. (My primary interest was for back testing)
     
  3. ACS

    ACS Well-Known Member

    ONE is a newer, user friendlier and more customer responsive choice than OV but the Greeks it generates are different from OV which is the program that John Locke used to create and back test his strategies. The guidelines for his courses are based on OV Greeks and if you want to use ONE then you will need to do extensive back testing to create new guidelines and verify them. Avoiding all that time and effort is probably why people here use OV while also hoping for the day that ONE finally has a competitive model. The model in OV was changed but it generated a firestorm of protest and the change was reversed, maybe not 100% but close enough to the original to satisfy John. I have done a lot of back testing in OV and a little in ONE during a trial period and cannot really complain about OV except for the fact that the 5 minute data in ONE allows more realistic testing than the 30 minutes in OV. Both ONE and OV get their data from outside but only prices of the underlying and options. All Greeks and theoretical option pricing is generated by the programs which is why ONE and OV will have different Greeks using the same data source. If you want to use the Locke stable of trades then OV really makes thing much easier. If you are doing something else than ONE will be fine.
     
    Murphy Tan and Tps like this.
  4. Kevin Lee

    Kevin Lee Well-Known Member

    My take on ONE vs OV : ONE is a better designed software, user experience is definitely miles ahead but it's options analysis capability is limited and options modeling is suspect. OV provides better options analysis and more accurate modeling but it's user interface is last century and the whole user experience is lousy.

    However, one thing I'd say is OV's options modeling is more accurate not just for JL's strategies. It appears to be so because the inaccuracies are well documented and researched.

    With regards to back testing, ONE is faster. OV is slow and clunky. However there is a work around, ie by downloading the archive data onto your pc and operate in offline mode, OV's speed is fast. Example - if I access OV servers, the normal update speed is about 3 to 8 secs, depending on time of day and how much data is needed. In some crazy days, the update speed might slow to 20 secs or longer. That's when it really frustrates people. But if I access local data in offline mode, the refresh becomes 1 to 2 secs and it's not dependent on network speed anymore.

    With regards to options analysis, what I really like is the "R" column. That allows me to slice and dice the position. When I do back testing, I like to do "What Ifs", ie there might be 5 different ways to achieve the same delta adjustment, I want to study the pros and cons of each. I'd put in all 5 adjustments into the position and separate them by R values. Then as I click through the dates, I will flip through the R values to see how each of the adjustments behave. This is enormous. I can learn a lot by doing this type of back testing and at times discover better adjustment techniques.

    Another feature that I think is invaluable is the ability to download ALL historical options data into excel. This to me is worth a ton of money. Commercial intra-day historical options data is extremely expensive, ie in hundreds of dollars per ticker symbol. With OV, this is free. In the initial learning journey, one might be more concerned with the ability to execute the trade plan and there isn't a need to analyze options data in excel. But as you become more advance, you might be interested to understand how options really work, eg. how IV and IV skew affect the position's profitability. By then, having options data in excel will be critical.

    Hope this helps.
     
    Rtb likes this.
  5. garyw

    garyw Well-Known Member

    How can I find out how to do that?
    Thanx,
    Gary
     
  6. Kevin Lee

    Kevin Lee Well-Known Member

    Hi Gary,

    I made this video some time ago. It explains how to download OV data into excel

     
    Bruno and Rtb like this.
  7. garyw

    garyw Well-Known Member

    Kevin: Thanx. Very good!

    Regards,
    Gary
     
  8. Marcas

    Marcas Well-Known Member

    Thanks for your thoughts.
    I try to understand present situation with OV and ONE not to end up saying, like garyw, that it was a mistake (whichever soft I choose).

    I don't mind OV's look like from '90's. It doesn't bother me at all, I appreciate that it provides pretty easy access to basic functions – one click ahead. Kevin said that 'users experience is lousy'? I heard JL saying that it likes to crash a bit – 'often' he said, I think. Is that what you mean Kevin? or is it low responsiveness or smth else?

    I see some differences in opinions about modeling. Garyw and ACS and others too lean toward position that OV and ONE are just different, none is really better than other or only slightly if so. OV s greeks are better known because it is longer on market and a lot of testing being done with it. On other hand Kevin says that ONEs modeling is 'suspect' and OV modeling is 'more acurate'.

    I think that Kevin means that OV modeling is more usefull than ONEs. To clarify what I mean or how I think about this let's use old example of two clocks (slightly modified). One clock is always 45 minutes late, other – utilizes :) random walk: sometimes it runs fast, sometimes slow, sometimes runs backward or stops for a while. One may say that second clock is more accurate than first one because there are instances that it is pretty darn close to real time while other never gets to this level of accuracy. Of course fist clock is more useful. Now, Kevin, do you mean that OV is more useful because it was studied more and ONE has not been studied yet (so to speak its 'offness' is still unknown while we know that OV is always 45 minutes off) , or it was tested and is less predictable than OV ('random walk')? Can you give me some references?

    My plan is based in conducting a lot of backtesting. I intend do do multiyears of back-tests of many different strategies. I will be satisfied with 'ball park' results in first phase and time and simplicity is more important then accuracy, so 'slow and clunky' doesn't sound good. Even mentioned way around when I will have 1 or 2 secs refresh time isn't good enough, while, I admit, it may be acceptable for testing one or two or three particular trades. This 2 sec delay tells me that OV probably does not utilizes multitasking or has overgrown security features.
    If I download database on local computer can I work completely off line or do I have to be connected to OV s server all the time just to use the program?

    Abut R column. It is very useful feature but I think the same can be achieved in ONE. I'm not sure how exactly but you have to create copy of tested trade before adjustment (inside or outside of ONE, in worst case scenario you have to create new trade same as first one) and just perform different adjustments switching not between 'a' and 'b' from R column but between 'Trade001AdjustmentA' and Trade001Adjustment2'.
    I agree with Kevin that this is enormous technique and it is in my plan to use it (I'm using it in TOS now too) to study adjustments and way of entry which is basicly the same thing, but I leave it for phase 2 (or 3) of my plan (and I would also like to know more about my software greeks by then).
    So R column is not a big issue to choose OV over ONE. Only, maybe, that it seems easier to switch between different variations in OV.

    Loading historical data to spreadsheet is great, no doubt. I just dont understand what do you mean by 'ALL'. Can I with one click download 10 years of SPXes EOD? How? It may be bigger issue. I was taking with Paul lately about this and he said that even if you purchase data from somebody you can not be sure about quality.
    On other hand purchasing EOD just for RUT and SPX still will be cheaper than subscribing to OV. I'm talking about EOD (EndOftheDay) data because I dont need intraday for 10 years only for selected periods of time and these I can download manually from TOS (in worst case scenario).

    As I mentioned I don't mind 'ancient' look of OV but I do mind extra clicks (TOS puts constant pressure on me in that matter :) ). I worked with pretty complicated software that was highly customizable and I know that you can set up program to do your work with light-speed; without customization, when you work with default setting some tasks are relay tedious. I don't expect the same level of customization form OV or ONE and will have to use given settings of program's interface. It seems that I can do my testing faster in ONE (I thought about automation but at present state it is not worth, imho) but usefulness of it's greeks and t+0 line are still unknown. They are not important now but they will be in future. Some people use both OV and ONE and I think they use TOS too because of it's unique features not known to OV or ONE. I don't want to go this way for two reasons: time and money (btw: they are not the same). I'd rather start well with right program and don't worry 'bout it any more.

    So, what do you think?
     
  9. Marcas

    Marcas Well-Known Member

    Small update.
    It appears that I can copy trades for various adjustments inside ONE which is best option. I can easily switch between different trades using monitor window and it looks like using the same monitor window I can observe how different adjustments behave side to side, same time. Not bad. Minus is that I can't (?) display multiple t+ lines.
    I'm creating little wish list too :) Fe I would like to adjust vol skew manually and than ONE will do rest of calculations (same wish for OV).
    I will take closer look at OV during weekend, hopefully.
     
  10. Kevin Lee

    Kevin Lee Well-Known Member

    Here's a video I did last year about using R columns and some other OV features. It'll give you a better idea of what slicing and dicing with R column means. Since then OV has enhanced the features, eg. now you can select which R values to combine from a drop down. It's really easy - you can add multiple combinations of adjustments if you like.

    Yes, you can copy trades to make a new position to compare but that's impractical because you'll end up with too many. Imagine you start with 5 different adjustments and then lead to other 5 later on depending on how the trade progresses. That was exactly what I did before but I got overwhelmed by the permutations.

    One more thing - don't bother with EOD data. Options prices often go haywire at end of day. Just observe your own position, at end of day, sometimes the P&L will suddenly go up or down by a lot just at the last few seconds. For me, I always use data at 3:30pm if I want something near end of day.

     
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2016
    Bruno likes this.
  11. Marcas

    Marcas Well-Known Member

    Thanks, I have seen this video before but it was good refreshment.

    I understand why you said 'slow and clunky' :) . I hope that new features in OV makes process of analyzing and dissecting trades way easier.
    As I said, it is nice technique, but it can be also achieved in other software. In my view best experience you will have with TOS. Where, after set up, you can easy turn on an of any part of trade or adjustment – just one click and voila! I like that. But ofc, we are dealing here with lack of backtesting capabilities and modeling issues (?).

    I understand what you mean by exponentially growing number of trades in ONE during testing, I wouldn't do it this way anyway but I see same issue in OV, where I can easily get lost in multitude of numbers and letters in R column in more complicated analysis. I only wish that smth like R column is introduced to TOS where you can group existing positions the way you want and easy turn these groups on and off.

    But this is not that important and I do not want convince you that you shouldn't like OV ;) , not at all.
    I'd rather want you to convince me that modeling in OV is that better than in others.

    Another thing I like from above video is the easyness of pricing BWBs, you presented. That was good. It can be done by other means but it is nice when such a feature is ready for you – then you have more time for other stuff. I noticed also way you use Classification column – I like that! and was wonder if I can change/add my own groups to 'calendar', 'butterfly', 'condor' items in ONE to use it similar fashion.

    And thanks for warning about EOD data, I heard it before. I will have to think if this distortion is important to study I'm thinking about. Here I repeat my question: can I download automatically year(s) of data from OV to spreadsheet?

    For me most important issue in this discussion now are differences in modeling t+0 line between OV, ONE (and TOS). Somebody mentioned that this was discussed in one of TrGroup2 sessions. I will have to dig it up, but will appreciate few words from you.

    thanks
     
  12. Scott Slivnik

    Scott Slivnik Well-Known Member

    My OV subscription expires 10/4 and currently evaluating ONE. I am heavily leaning towards renewing my OV subscription, primarily due to ONE's poor modeling. Here is an example trade setup in both.

    First, I noticed that ONE's expiration graph is incorrect on the upside. If the market rallies and all options expire, the DITM call will expire with more intrinsic value than the price paid for the call. The further the market rallies, the lower the overall loss will be. If ONE cannot get the expiration graph correct, what else is wrong entered my mind. ONE appears to be ignoring the intrinsic value of the DITM call.

    The second issue I noticed was the modeling (greeks). I have been using ONE with Volatility Surface checked. ONE's delta is considerably more positive than both OV and TOS Vol Smile. For reference, TOS Vol Smile's delta for this trade was +6. I have noticed with the trades I do, OV's delta tends to be a bit too negative and TOS's delta tends to be a bit too positive. I often use the delta half way between OV's and TOS's delta. If I relied on ONE, I would get slaughtered during rallies. ONE looks to be a great record keeping application though. Hopefully ONE improves the modeling in the future. The modeling has definitely improved with the addition of Volatility Surface but is still BAD.
     

    Attached Files:

  13. Marcas

    Marcas Well-Known Member

    Hi Scott,
    thanks for input.
    I notice lack of representation of DITM call on ONE's graph. while T+0 line seems to becorrect. Maybe it has to do with DITN call being in different expiration than Fly. What version of ONE do you use?

    It may be bug of ONE or it may be different method of showing profit. OV may include profit from expired call into presented expiration graph, when ONE books profit in trade log and shows only existing position at expiry date (when call is not present). Or, what I think is the case, that profit is included in ONE's graph – that is why 0 line is way higher on it's picture comparing to OV.

    I would say that rather OV's graph is not correct when it shows presence of DITM call on graph while that call expired month ago.

    But it may be only different way of showing the same thing just convention one has used to.

    Second issue need further investigation from my side. Deltas are not the same, but which one is more accurate and more consistent? I don't know. Rons observations shows that TOS delta is closest to what will happen to your P/L tomorrow. I dont know for how long he was testing it.

    I did find related recordings of Tading Group 2 and I'm little embarrassed. I should check them out before posting – most of my questions were discussed there. Even sometimes same words were used. Well, now I have better understanding of this problem.
    Generally I will have one or other issue with deltas in either program, even if specific program delta looks correct at present it may change in future with changes in model. Because of this I will try to stay with 'visual adjustments'. In one of meetings Tom asked about how he manage new deltas in updated OV said that he doesn't even look at deltas – he knows what adj. to do in specific places of tent. Others mentioned the same, I plan to do the same just don't have necessary experience yet.

    In one of Group2 meetings Ron showed a trick how to easy separate elements of trade in TOS. I want to show you another one, how to adjust your vol. smile line to be in accordance with actual P/L.
    First of all we will be better to take actual P/L from Account statement not from Ind. options model. If you have multiple trades in underlaying just highlight expirations you want and read what total selected says – it still is not perfect but close enough to figure out what your position is worth today.
    Than calculate difference between actual P/L and what Vol.smile shows. Let's say the difference is $350.
    In Analyze tab where you have your position displayed enter two extra trades: Buy one position (it can be anything underlaying, call or put in same expiration date as your trade – it is easy for eyes to pick smth like 1000C or 2220P, as we do not have possibility to change background colors) and other trade will be selling the same position. Now for price of Buy enter $1 and for price of Sell enter $351. This will shift whole graph exactly $350 so P/L shown in slice line will match the actual one.

    This way you don't even have to take pictures of yours today position – just observe how much t+0 graph is off from next day actual P/L (it is better to take this picture anyway).

    I didn't watch all TrGr2 meetings yet. I will do so and I will wait for Kevin s answer as I value his opinion but for now I'm leaning toward ONE.
    Most appealing features are:
    - speed of backtesting,
    - possibility of backtesting multiple trades at the same time (here I wish for any annotation tool that I can do marks on graph wherever I want – just to make backtesting even easier, smth a la slices in TOS would be enough)
    - easiness of use

    I know ONE is not ideal program but no one is :) I can only wish that someday, somebody will combine ONE with TOS and make soft pretty darn close to ideal.

    I let myself couple more day to think and wait for more thoughts from you.
    thanks again
     
  14. Scott Slivnik

    Scott Slivnik Well-Known Member

    I am running ONE 1.27.29.

    Yes, the DITM call is included in the T+0 graph. The DITM call is in a different expiration but that does not matter. The expiration graph should include all options involved in a trade regardless of expiration. The P&L of a trade includes all options in a trade in one or more expirations. My decisions are impacted by whether SPX is inside the expiration graph or not, so ONE's incorrect expiration graph alone is a deal breaker for me.

    ONE is definitely faster and more user friendly than OV, however, it is clear to me that OV has a higher probability of maximizing my profit and that outweighs ONE's advantages for me.

    I re-read the thread and noticed you mentioned John Locke. If you would like to use ONE to trade John Locke strategies, I recommend having both OV (monthly subscription) and ONE for a while. As Andrew stated above, John Locke's guidelines are for OV. After you modify the guidelines and are happy with your revised guidelines for ONE, cancel the OV subscription. If you do not modify John Lock's guidelines for ONE, you WILL get knocked around.

     
  15. Kevin Lee

    Kevin Lee Well-Known Member

    A lot has already been said about the pros and cons of ONE vs OV. It really boils down to personal choice on which trade offs you value. Between better profits and ease of use, my decision was quite easy. I'll choose profits over ease of use anytime.

    Before I transitioned from ONE to OV, I traded with both s/w side by side for a while. The same trades but they triggered different adjustments on each s/w. The net results were heavily in favor of OV. My profit was several thousand $ higher on OV. So, despite the fact that I was trading a significantly smaller size then, the incremental profits was enough to pay for OV's annual subscription several times over.

    To be honest, I struggled for the initial 6 months after I transitioned. But after that, I learned to live with the short comings and appreciate OV's unique features. The way I rationalize was while I was frustrated by all the ease-of-use issues with OV, but I would be 10x as frustrated when I get slaughtered (as Scott alluded above). Moreover, OV has already resolved the speed issue with the offline mode. To me, the back testing speed is now completely acceptable.

    I actually tried modifying adjustment guidelines to trade with ONE or TOS, but I wasn't successful. The reason was the differences are inconsistent. You can't just say instead of -100, I'll adjust when it's -50. It depends on where the market is relative to the tent, depends on DTE, depends on IV skew, etc... the tweak has to be different. In my view, trying to be successful in trading options is already hard enough, it makes no sense to make it even tougher.

    So... enough said. I think it's really your personal choice Marcas.
     
    Last edited: Aug 22, 2016
    vega4mike, Gabor Maly and Paul Demers like this.
  16. Marcas

    Marcas Well-Known Member

    Kevin I can not agree with your point of view that choice between one program that brings you profit versus other that does not (or leads to smaller profit) is a matter of personal choice – it is plain common sense.

    Thanks for telling me why you choose OV, I'd like to hear more details – maybe sometime in future. Thanks Scott for providing evidence that smth is wrong with ONE. I appreciate it, it was kind of post I was looking for but still… I'm not totally convinced, I have to check it myself.

    I just can not see that difference is that big between OV or ONE. I listened to other arguments showing that ONE is better overall to manging trade. I guess I have to do what I didn't want to do: try both programs (as Scott suggested). It just can not be at the same time, I have limits… So, I will try both.

    One thing I'm sure now is that if one is serious about trading he shouldn't relay on single piece of softwarealone. JL is good example here. He mentioned that he lost his trades when OV changed model. I don't want my trades to be so dependent on whims or OV or ONE. That is why I plan use OV/ONE as testin tool and to trade my trades with OV/ONE along with TOS. Future observations are definitely needed. I statr with ONE as this has more features appealing to me than I mentioned before.

    Thanks everybody for words of advice
    and special thanks to Tom for very useful descriptions of TrGroup2 meetings.
     
  17. Marcas

    Marcas Well-Known Member

    Hi, Just quick follow-up.

    I was playing with ONE a little. Not everything is as I expected. Oh, well…

    Testing and checking.
    I put the same trade as Scott in one of previous posts (see pics there
    ) with the same results.
    Risk graph in ONE is different than in OV but ONE's graph is correct and OV graph is wrong.

    I understand that for M3 trader there is nothing wrong with OV's picture as it shows what is in traders head when he thinks “M3”, he get used to it and that's ok, especially if he exits way before expiration, but nevertheless graph is wrong.
    You can see what OV shows on second pic from Scott's post. At expiration of BWB (51 days) graph shows already expired Call that should not be. New trader may get hit by bigger than expected loss or greater returns in that matter if he follows trade by OV's graph only.

    I wonder how calendar's graph looks in OV at long option expiration?

    Not correct Scott,
    unless I'm missing something.
     
  18. Scott Slivnik

    Scott Slivnik Well-Known Member

    Marcus,
    An accurate expiration graph is a visual representation of what a trade's P&L would be as the underlying moves up and down and includes the P&L of past legs and what the P&L of present (open) legs will be at expiration.

    I will provide an example which hopefully will clear things up. I am using the trade I posted for this example and using the option prices in the OV screenshot.

    Lets assume the trade was executed at the prices in the OV screenshot and SPX settles at 2300 for the Sept 24 expiration and stays around 2300 for the remainder of the trade's duration.

    The four 2075/2150/2225 butterflies were opened for a 17.95 debit. The four 2075/2150/2200 butterflies were opened for a 4.30 debit. The total cost of the butterflies is $8,900. and is the maximum loss possible for the butterflies on the upside. The 2025 call is bought in a prior expiration to reduce the cost of the call. The 2025 call is bought for 162.20 debit or for $16,220.

    The call expires at a 275.00 credit (all intrinsic value). The call expires with a $11,280 profit. The call option disappears but the profit is realized and does not disappear. When the call expires, the shape of OV's graph changes to match the shape of ONE's graph but with the correct P&L.

    Two weeks later the butterflies expire for a $-8,900 loss.

    The net profit of the trade is $2,380, excluding commissions.

    ONE is not even close. The OV graph matches my manual calculations.
     
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2016
  19. Marcas

    Marcas Well-Known Member

    Scott,
    this is all nice and true and beautiful.
    The caveat is that SPX stays at the same price at _both_ expirations.
    Do your manual calculations with SPX at 2100 at Call expiration and at 2300 at BFly expiration (or opposite).
    How does your expiration graph p/l look now? How does it much your calculations?
    That is what I'm taking about. OV's graph is ok ONLY if underlaying freezes at first expiration date.
     
  20. Scott Slivnik

    Scott Slivnik Well-Known Member

    Excellent question. Lets calculate the P&L.

    The call would expire at 75.00 credit. The call expires for a $8,720 loss with SPX at 2100.

    The butterflies would expire for a $-8,900 loss with SPX at 2300.

    The net loss would be $-17,620, excluding commissions.

    Remember, the graphs change as options are open, close and expire. I get the impression that you believe that the expiration graphs must remain unchanged. I used 7-14 DTE calls in my M3 Butterflies and rolled them each week for quite some time, and I can assure you that OV's graph accurately reflected the trades. OV would show the $17,620 as expected.

     

Share This Page