This is an amalgam of a lot of reading, so it isn’t attributable to a single source. This functions as the framework for my trading.
Some definitions:
2/
A trade succeeds or fails if it works as it is designed. Success and failure isn't winning or losing. You can lose but have a successful trade.
Return to Risk (R/R) = (Probability of success * reward)/(Probability of failure * risk). Should be >1 every trade
3/ Your trade thesis is what about the market your trade is trying to capitalize in your favor.
The natural flow of a trade is: edge -> setup -> trade plan -> execution. If any of them are lacking, your trade’s success chance plummets, but they can inform each other.
4/ Every time your trade fails, it fails at one of those areas. Let’s take a dive into each of these concepts, but backwards, because that’s how each of these are recognized in your trading.
First, Execution.
5/ Execution is the implementation of your trade plan. When you have a deficiency in execution (e.g. you hold past a stop, you do not take profits when you initially planned to, you enter a trade despite no setup due to a feeling), you implicitly rely on your gut to plan.
6/ You can also have an excess of execution, where you follow your initial trade plan exactly. This ignores that the thesis can change from the time you put the trade on. As a result, you may not trade optimally. An example in $AAPL
7/ I believe iPhone sales will 4x in 1 yr, and result in a 25% rise in $AAPL. Earnings reveal Airpod sales shoot up, and $AAPL is +25% and I sell despite no fundamental change in iPhone sales. iPhone sales 4x in one year and $AAPL is +55% since the buy. oops.
8/ Execution is the part of the trade that algorithms try to solve. The goal is to take the emotion out of the trading, but to use AI to try to keep the logic in the trade. Most algos I have seen (not all) I feel are an excess in execution.
9/ They attempt to balance a portfolio perfectly, execute on exact terms, or use machine learning to trade on previous conditions. However, portfolios and terms should change with market conditions, and machines can learn a lot but their edge needs to be confirmed. Most are not.
10/
Ideal execution is data-backed, consistent with your thesis, and extracts your edge. Money is involved so emotion plays a part. If sizing your trade appropriately doesn't help, I recommend reading "The Psychology of Trading" by Brett Steenbarger.
Tomorrow: Trade Plans
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Good Morning! VIX doing its usual Monday thing, slight overvixing, creating a VIX up/SPX up dynamic. The odd thing is, the normal undervixing wasn't done last Friday, suggesting further hedging for FOMC. It also suggests more liquidity injection, since we are still melting up.
Since these are ad hoc CMBs, there is no way of knowing how much are going to be issued, or how much there is left to be issued. So I maintain an slight positive delta, gamma negative trade that is hedged. Looking forward...
We recently had a debt ceiling scare. We are looking at almost the exact same scenario as 2 months ago wrt market action. So it is time to start planning accordingly.
This is a thread about one of the market correlations that has been consistent over the past decade+, although I will be focusing on 2018-current. The SPX/VIX relationship everyone *knows* exists, but only assumes the correlation and its meaning. 1/13
$VIX is many things, but at its core it is a measure of implied volatility (IV) on $SPX. This represents the supply and demand in $SPX options. The demand comes from customers while the supply primarily comes from centralized market makers (MMs). 2/13
Because the MMs have more uniform goals (to isolate and collect premium on their options), the supply side is much easier to analyze. When you look at the SPX/VIX graph, you can’t help but notice how correlated it is. 3/13
Good morning! Options still slightly overpriced despite the overnight rally. There was a slight vol crunch up near the close yesterday, so while the VIX/SPX relationship is still favoring more upside, it will be limited.
I gave a target of 4400 a couple of days ago, and that seems easily attainable, might reach 4420. This rally will likely end by early next week. A lot of puts were purchased this month, and the gamma unwind will be rocky. Also, MMs are still component gamma positive until 4400.
As a side note, McConnell did us a favor. By kicking the can down the road, he gave a template of exactly what the market looks like with the threat of debt ceiling issues. so in late Nov, we can use early Oct as the template for a trade. Thanks Mitch!
Morning all! Shocker, 1% down after 1% up. VIX overstating again, some customers out there are getting whipsawed. My guess is that what is being hedged is the debt ceiling, since the intensity of the whipsaw has gained, and that is the only known item that has systemic impact...
So let's chat a little about it. First, the impacts of a default are so catastrophic that it would never happen willingly. This is a willed struggle, it can be prevented with the stroke of a pen. However, right now the assumption in finance is the chance of default is zero.
That means even the slight chance of default will cause shockwaves. That's likely what we are seeing now. The market is only hedged down to 4225, so it is clearly not expecting a default. So will a default happen?
GM all. Options overpriced since yesterday $VIX overstated the drop. With the added premium, MMs have a lot of short futes to unwind. MMs are component gamma positive, which means 1% moves can be frequent to both sides.
When I say options are overpriced, that means that MMs are short a lot of puts. That means customers are hedging their positions, and MMs sell to hedge them. They both reach critical mass, where all are hedged to where they want to be. Yesterday's lows are very near that point
The only way we go down further is if more people hedge (VIX overstates more). So that is what I'm keeping an eye on. Since there is excessive premium to decay on both sides of the hedging spectrum, upside is expected, but lower than ATHs.