Option FanaticOptions, stock, futures, and system trading, backtesting, money management, and much more!

Automated Backtester Research Plan (Appendix A)

I’ve been getting more organized this year by converting incomplete drafts into finished blog posts. I thought I had wrapped up the automated backtester mini-series here, but I was wrong! I have one more draft with research notes on potential future directions. On the off chance someone out there can possibly benefit, from Jan 2019 I present the next two posts.

—————————

With regard to iron condors (split-strike butterflies), maybe we set short strikes at 10-40 delta by increments of 10 and figure out what the wing widths are going to be. Maybe we close an offended vertical if short delta increases by X or if trade gets down 6% when using profit/loss targets of 10%/-15% or so. Maybe we have to calculate max potential profit and look to collect 50-90% of that as early management (or closing at 7-21 DTE by increments of 7).

From the previous post on vertical spreads we could go in a couple different directions. I talked about one specific trading plan called “The Bull.” I would like to backtest a few other particular trades (i.e. Netzero, STT, RC). I could give some particulars about those trades or maybe the backtesting plan just like I did for The Bull.

Finally, and many of these could be posted under “additional considerations” (along with many of my non-automated-backtester backtesting ideas), I have to face the possibility that all of this is done in vein. We’re looking at historical data and possibly setting critical levels that only get breached in 5% of cases. This may make me feel more comfortable when taking action at these points, but it certainly is no guarantee they will be effective in case we are in a longer-term period where distribution on that parameter changes. To that end, it would be nice if I could somehow split the data and do some WFA but I fear the sample size may be too small (see third paragraph here).

This concern even applies to something as general as daily option-price changes. Looking over the whole data span, option prices generally only change by $X/day. When IV picks up and backwardation occurs with huge ATRs, though, those daily price changes are going to be magnified—possibly 5-10X or more. Clearly this indicates a time to step out but what if such volatile activity persists for a periodi of years? This trading approach might be on the sidelines for the duration.

I will conclude next time.

Hot Take: Insurance is Overpriced

I’ve been getting more organized this year by converting incomplete drafts into finished blog posts. Given the stock market crash Q1 of this year, here is a timely piece from October 2019.

—————————

In any industry, insurance is overpriced. How do we know? Because insurance is known as a great business to be in (ask Warren Buffett). Whether or not they realize it, people have difficulty pricing the value of protecting against huge loss. As a result, they tend to overpay. Insurance gets dismissed as just another bill to pay.

With regard to cars, houses, and medical (until recently), insurance is a legal requirement. Such demand probably maintains or drives the price of insurance higher.

What if people were required to buy insurance for their stock investments? Some believe put insurance to be chronically overpriced. If people had to buy then the IV would presumably be even higher, which would be edge to the sellers. Why isn’t this the case? Only people with dispensable income (savings to invest) get involved in the stock market in the first place. This amounts to a relatively small proportion of people compared to the proportion of those with cars, homes, or medical needs.

I assume that the “smart money” such as pension funds, hedge funds, and institutional fund owners are those who predominantly buy put protection to keep the IV inflated. What a boon to business it would be if it ever came to pass that everyone had to buy!

Maybe it’s not such a bad idea to be like the “smart money” and buy the protection anyway.

Some strongly argue for this NOT to be the case. And if you have the extra money to lose, which synthetically takes the form of trading small, having lots of cash on the sidelines, and/or being relatively deleveraged, then it’s probably best not to buy the insurance at all and collect interest on those payments rather than seeing them go down the drain in the first place.

Lead Trader and Research Assistant (Part 2)

I recently wrote about a second job that seemed very appealing as a formal introduction to working in the financial industry. My cover letter is below.

——————————–

To Whom it May Concern,

I am writing to apply for the position of Lead Trader and Research Assistant.

After working as a staff pharmacist and pharmacy manager, I retired at the age of 36 to start a securities trading business. This has been a journey without clients or co-workers that has required extensive self-study, intrinsic motivation, and outside-the-box thinking. I have since learned a great deal about the mechanics of trading and investing. Having risked my own hard-earned capital to learn the craft, I now seek to manage wealth for others.

I feel my experience is something of a contradiction. I have never worked publicly for a financial firm, but I probably have more trading and portfolio management experience than the vast majority of industry participants. Trading has been my sole source of income for the last 12 years.

I have given extensive consideration to a potential career in the financial industry. I have researched the possibility of starting my own hedge fund, working as an IAR, or managing money for a family office.

I suspect the kind of trading I do for myself would not be appropriate for most clients of an IA. Accredited investors aside, I may never trade an option for the firm’s clients due to suitability standards. If options can be used in client portfolios, then I would be very eager to work together in designing viable strategies. This is not my expectation, however.

Regardless of derivative suitability, one topic for discussion is whether my nearly 20-year experience trading stock and derivatives can be marketable for the firm. I want to believe it can and would be very interested in talking this through.

My journey as a full-time trader has [by necessity] put me on a quant-related path. Over the last two years, I have invested in additional education to better understand and immerse myself in algorithmic strategy development. Overfitting is a nemesis that requires constant surveillance. A curve-fit system will look great and convince casual observers, but performance at the hard-right edge is likely to disappoint.

Aside from developing trading strategies, I hope to soon research potential benefits of combining asset classes. While “diversification” has been a prized industry buzzword, I am not sure it is as simple as being plucked out of thin air. Backtesting can be done with Excel VBA, but I think greater potential exists with Python—–a versatile programming language I have made decent headway getting to know in recent months.

As with options, my foray into algorithmic futures trading may not be suitable for client accounts. The work certainly falls in the realm of both research (backtesting) and trading (“Lead Trader and Research Assistant”). Although not expected, I would jump at the opportunity to work with a team in developing diversified futures portfolios.

I am willing to pursue further credentials that may be valuable to the firm in its dealings with clients. I have passed the Series 65 twice and am no stranger to exam preparation (Pharm.D. graduation and NAPLEX). On my own, pursuit of further credentials (e.g. CFA, MSFE, CFP) has been difficult to justify since I have been able to cover living expenses on trading profits alone. As the most highly regarded sign of success for a retail trader, this achievement makes me both thankful and proud.

I have attached a résumé for a more detailed review of my education and experience. My e-mail is {1}, and my phone is {2}. Thanks for your time and consideration!

Review of Python Courses (Part 2)

In Part 1, I summarized the first two Datacamp courses I took. Today I will continue with the next three.

As a reminder, I introduced you to my recent work learning Python here.

Course #3 was Data Manipulation with pandas. This course started out with:

The course continues on with:

The next course I took was Data Types for Data Science in Python. Concepts covered in this class include:

The next course I took was Python Data Science Toolbox, Part 1. Concepts covered in this class include:

I will continue summarizing classes later.

Rough Notes for Planning the Meetup (Part 2)

Today concludes publication of some rough draft notes I had to complement this blog mini-series.

As I said last time, this may or may not be redundant information. More than anything else, I am trying to get more organized by clearing out my “drafts” folder.

———————————-

One step down from a qualifying interview would be to limit group openings. People sometimes have a fear of missing out. I could say “only 10 spots available.” I think this would likely attract people with a higher level of commitment, but my gut says it wouldn’t be as effective as a qualifying interview (assuming accuracy of screening).

What I don’t want to do is make the admissions criteria so stringent that nobody joins. I think this is also why I need to determine exactly what the group will focus on (i.e. collaborative research/programming/testing or teaching/trader literacy).

If the fees are mainly to establish accountability, then I could make them due up front and progressively refundable. Maybe the first meeting is free to explain objectives, future plans, and to collect money for those interested. I could then issue refunds at every meeting attended or to those who attend all meetings. I could also consider offering a discount to advanced traders with more to contribute.

One final possibility would be to advertise a pay it forward intent to discuss/teach something about which I am passionate rather than selling anything for a profit. This begs the question of if/when should education be free?

I feel strongly that unlike education in other domains, compensation should be given for teaching someone how to make money directly. Aside from how to operationally define “directly,” a big question mark surrounds the material itself. No guarantees can be made, and trading instructors are always potential charlatans presenting bogus information. Who should decide (and how) up front whether someone with something to teach is pure? That is a practical impossibility.

The caveat to my strong feeling, then, is justification because I know myself to be honest. One can never know that about anyone else. I may not even know that for myself because extraordinary future circumstances (Black Swans) can always arise.

Maybe this is why House says “everybody lies.”

The concept of abundance seems to be relevant here. The laws of abundance say “I can give to as many people within my reach; there is enough for everyone.” I’m not sure I buy into this. The likelihood that I and any retail investors with whom I ever associate will be enough to move the needle of the markets is supposedly slim. If word spreads, enough people learn, and everyone starts trading a particular way, though, then could Edge could be offset? There is no right answer.

Maybe I have a block with regard to a willingness to give. Heck, if organizations like TT* are out there disseminating free information to tens upon thousands of viewers then am I really worried about sharing what I know? I would have to believe in getting something out of it myself, too.

Who said I need to be the gatekeeper? Or is it me just trying to capitalize on the value of what I know (which I believe could be significant)?

I really don’t know.

* — Plenty of people are skeptical about TT teachings, however, which renders this comparison moot.

Rough Notes for Planning the Meetup (Part 1)

Over a year ago, I did a blog mini-series on planning a Meetup group. In the next two posts, I just wanted to publish some rough notes to support that.

If you read the full mini-series, then you may find some of what follows to be overlapping and/or duplicate information. I had this saved in my “drafts” folder and in an effort to get more organized, I’m trying to clear those out by straight deletion or publication if I think some of the information might be new/different.

———————————-

Last time I described the Meetup I tried to organize and detailed its rejection. I can think of a few ways to proceed.

If I organize another Meetup group then I could charge a reasonable annual fee plus a fee per meeting. “Stiff,” not “reasonable,” may be a better description of $300 because I have never seen a Meetup charge $300 to join. Most groups don’t charge an annual fee at all and if they do, something like $10 seems more common. With regard to the meetings, $10 – $15 is about the maximum although I have seen some meetings packaged as educational programs that charge more.

Another possibility would be to charge the $300 annual fee while changing the group description. Previously, I said “the fee will be $300 for 12 group sessions.” I can see how that sounds like I am trying to market a service or product, which is why Meetup rejected it last time. Instead, I could still try $300 as the group fee and really emphasize the actionable material and potential value this group will provide in the group description. For example:

     > Learning to trade has allowed me to feed myself for the last 10+ years,
     > which is worth more than any educational content I have ever purchased.

I could state that while people of all levels are welcome, I seek commitment and emphasize a focus on accountability. Members can be held accountable for coming to sessions. Members can also be held accountable for participation although this may deter potential members who don’t feel confident in their knowledge and/or are scared to present for others. A softer requirement would be holding members accountable for making the effort to learn (operational definition?).

With all this focus on accountability, I probably don’t need to explicitly justify the annual fee. For people who trade, accountability is really important and very few roads lead there. I like this idea.

Especially in lieu of a stiff annual fee, I could require a qualifying interview to make the group more marketable. People are sometimes more motivated by a perceived barrier to entry—particularly if clearing the barrier results in an ego boost, which would be the case for more experienced traders. This would also raise the perceived competency level of the group. The downside would be losing potential members who know they are beginners and not yet ready.

Interviewing would also help me because I want people who will put in time and honor a commitment to the group.

I will conclude next time.

General Theories on System Development (Appendix)

In January, I did a twopart blog post with this same title. I also had some additional notes that got saved into a draft and were never published. These additional notes follow for organizational purposes and in the longshot case that someone out there could possibly benefit from any of this (originally from Dec 2012).

———————————-

I make this claim because some people do believe certain characteristics apply to one ticker and not another.  If the tickers are indices then it should be more robust since these are averages of many tickers.

At this point in my young system development career, I’m just not convinced about patterns applying to one ticker and not another.  I really want in the case then certainly they should be able to apply to one index and not another–and it should… If I’m not convinced about the pattern then I should evaluate long and short trades together and if performance is not satisfactory then it’s time to junk this system and move onto the next one. [1]

Furthermore, the more conditions I have to add to a system to get it to backtest well, the less likely it is to perform well in live trading.  This is curve fitting. Since I am so new to system development it might still be worthwhile to go ahead and add additional conditions because only in doing so will I truly develop a feel for the range of performance to be seen.

If I were to add another condition then I would consider a filter to take long (short) trades only when the market is in an uptrend (downtrend).

Alternatively, I could proceed to do maximum adverse (favorable) excursion analysis to see if adding stops and/or profit targets might improve performance.

Should I choose to do neither, then I will table this system for the time being and move onto something else.

Finally, some things to look for when trying to test trading strategies include:


———————————-

Lord help anyone spending a lot of time trying to understand [1]!

Lead Trader and Research Assistant (Part 1)

I recently thought I found my “dream job” but, as described here and here, that did not work out. Today I want to discuss another job opportunity that just made it to my inbox.

Here’s a job description for Lead Trader and Research Assistant:
——————————–
The trader/research assistant position focuses on… trading funds in our client accounts and researching for our investment committee as directed by our CIO. We are specifically looking for a tech savvy candidate who has extreme focus and attention to detail but is ready and able to work under pressure. It is also essential that this person can work independently, meaning they can be trusted to focus on work during work hours (putting the cell phone aside) without having to be supervised. As a company we strongly believe the best team members do not need to be managed, they simply need to be supported. We expect out of the box thinking and problem solving, this team member will always have the benefit of a team but should be able to work through issues independently as well.

Duties include but not limited to:

Qualifications:

——————————–
Unlike the last job, I think I meet all the qualifications for this one:

Although job applications are no longer being accepted, I will continue next time with the sort of cover letter I would submit.

Review of Python Courses (Part 1)

In this post, I introduced you to my recent work learning Python. Although I’ve done all the exercises and taken lots of notes, I have zipped through tens of Python classes in less than four hours each (on average). For this reason, I certainly would not claim to be a Pythonista or a programming expert.

It’s a start, though, and as a way to help solidify my knowledge a bit, I’m going to go through the courses I have taken and provide brief summaries of them all. In doing this, I will go through my notes to aid with my own learning.

My first class was Introduction to Python. This starts by describing a brief history of Python and the DataCamp setup for programming and console (technical term) usage. The section continues with:

The course continues on with:

Class #2 for me was Intermediate Python. Concepts covered in this class include:

Really good introductory stuff, here!