When choosing my best income strategy, I use a simple metric to gage "capital productivity" of a trading account (in addition to other "soup ingredients": gamma, vega, etc.) And that is Theta/Margin ratio. I "guesstimate" it in $1/$1000 units, i.e., in 0.1%. When applied to a single position it looks like this: Road Trip example -- 0.68 units (54 DTE): https://www.screencast.com/t/kXCrHjBgu FruitFly example -- 3.6 units (31 DTE): https://www.screencast.com/t/4pQnYGvBQlQ In these examples, position 2 is 5.3 times more efficient than position 1 (3.6 / 0.68), with everything else being equal. It can be applied in any other situation, e.g., Parking Trade, income trade in PM account, etc. In the same manner, one can estimate capital efficiency of a whole account, by dividing total Theta of all the positions by account balance. * * * * * * * That leads me to the conclusion in "adjustment vs. no-touch" argument. Maintaining "fat" Theta is essential. When Theta is drying up, Matt's FruitFly rules call for a swift re-positioning (after couple of small upside adjustment, though), while RoadTrip butterfly may remain open when the market is far to the right (as in example 1). Or similarly, Rhino can be stuck in a small calendar -- just to have the trade going. All adjustments do is saving on commissions (compared to re-positioning) and passing time so that the position can be booked with a better P/L. Meanwhile, the time is ticking away. With this metric in mind, keeping position going with a low Theta/Margin ratio is a waste of valuable time and capital, IMHO. Saving a few dollars on commissions is not worth it. And on top of that, having no-touch rules is so liberating! No need for OV/ONE to track P/L, no need to babysit the position with pre-programmed exit rules in place, ease of automated back-testing, and other advantages. Just keep Theta going and maintain hedges! Am I simplifying? What do you think?