|
December 12, 2004
Don't Set those
Stops too Tight
by John Brasher, CallWriter Publisher
| You
won't experience consistent success with covered calls if
you set the stops too tight. A surprising number of covered
writes will drop enough before expiration to trigger traditional
stops that a day trader or swing trader might set. This article
will deal with setting covered call stops and will examine
a couple of trades in which the trader was stopped out. |
|
We get a lot of questions from members
about where to set the stop loss (the stock price at which you intend
to close the trade), also simply known as the "stop.".
New traders have to learn to set stops, and even experienced traders
who are new to covered calls have to adjust to a different mindset
for stops, since covered call stops are different than those used
in day or active trading, or even by long-term holders. The covered
call writer buys stocks for the purpose of writing calls on them
in order to generate income (known as "buy-writes"). A
call writer may also have a long-term portfolio on which he or she
writes on, but that is a different kettle of fish, and stop-loss
points on those stocks may be viewed quite differently. Today we
are only considering stops on buy-write trades.
In this article I will examine trades
in ROXI and CYBX actually done by a CallWriter member on December
2nd, look at the stops used and consider some alternatives that
were available. You cannot set stops in a vacuum or merely in relation
to the trade's breakeven. You must consider support levels, which
include traditional price support levels, moving averages and trendlines.
Here are the trades:
| Dec.
2, 2004 |
|
Dec.
2, 2004 |
| ROXIO,
Inc. (ROXI) |
|
Stock Price: |
BO
|
- |
$10.08 |
| DEC
10 Call (RXULB) |
STO
|
+ |
$
0.60 |
| Breakeven
(Cost basis) |
|
|
$
9.48 |
|
Potential Flat Return |
|
|
5.16% |
|
Potential If-Called Return |
|
|
5.16% |
| Stop
Loss |
|
|
$
9.13 |
| Stopped
Out on Dec. 8th |
|
|
$
8.97 |
|
|
| Cyberonics,
Inc.(CYBX) |
|
Stock Price: |
BO |
- |
$21.04 |
| DEC
20 Call (QAJLD) |
STO |
+ |
$
1.90 |
| Breakeven
(Cost basis) |
|
|
$19.14 |
|
Potential Flat Return |
|
|
4.09% |
|
Potential If-Called Return |
|
|
4.09% |
| Stop
Loss |
|
|
$18.95 |
| Stopped
out on Dec. 8th |
|
|
$18.82 |
|
The trader took a small loss on both trades, but
that is not the point, since every one will have occasional losses.
The issue is whether the stops could have been set in a better place.
These trades have not yet reached expiration, so some traders might
still be in these trades. This trader had stops set, which is a
vital part of trading. But were they the best stops?
The trader set his stop at $9.13 and stopped out
at 8.97. ROXI has decent support at $8.00, which is well below the
trade's breakeven point, at least on a percentage basis. Whenever
you write with the breakeven this far above support, this is the
decisional dilemma you must be prepared for: the stock pulls back
below your breakeven point but has not yet tested support. So you
don't know whether to bail out, or hang in the trade and just watch
it closely. This situation illustrates why you must set stops before
running the trade.
Notice something else about this uptrend: on a
daily candlestick chart, whenever ROXI has made a large white (up)
candle - 9/29, 10/21, 10/27, 11/5, 11/10, 11/22 ... until Friday,
December 10th, it had not violated the opening price on any of those
candles - but on the 10th it did, trading as low as 8.10 against
the candle's 8.20 open. However, the price as I write never has
never closed below the 8.20 level, although that could change at
any time. Let's review a daily chart:

ROXI is a somewhat volatile stock. Moreover, it was due
for a pullback, not having pulled back since mid-Oct. No two traders
would necessarily put the stop in the same place or analyze it
the same. However, I think the stop at 9.13 was way too tight.
Why? Because it was set right below the breakeven point, not in
relation to movement ROXI was likely to make. My philosophy is
that when you write stocks like ROXI, you have to be prepared
for this. I would have set the stop at about 7.60. ROXI is very
frequently on our lists, which means that it frequently offers
good premium. I cut such stocks more slack since I know I have
a better chance of writing my way out of a hole.
The trader set his stop at $18.95 and was out at
18.82. There is support at about 18.60, not too terribly far below
the breakeven, and slightly lower support at 17.75. CYBX is testing
the 18.60 level and also testing its 50-day moving average on
a daily chart. So although below the breakeven, it has not broken
either the 18.60 support level - and may be finding support there
- nor the 50-day moving average. The stock went into a terribly
sharp downtrend in June, and then broke out of the trend Sept.
15th and almost immediately dropped into a trading range. I view
the stock as hitting the bottom of its trading range, testing
the highest support level, rather than being in a downtrend. On
a ranging stock, is there a reason to hit the panic button when
the stock hits the range's bottom? Moral: don't write a channeling
stock at the top of its range.

This
trade was written on the day that CYBX was the top of its trading
range - and when trades are written on stocks at resistance, you
have to be ready for a roll back down into the range. Why get
nervous - unless you expected a breakout through resistance, the
downturn was to be expected. Also, CYBX is very volatile - look
at the large trading range June through September and all those
gaps. It is constantly oscillating above and below the 14- and
50-day moving averages. You should be prepared for a lot of movement,
therefore, on this stock. I also note that it's an unprofitable
company (has never made money) with very low volume - two serious
risk factors that we point out in our educational materials. This
one probably was better not written at all.
I probably would have set the stop at 18.20, a skosh
below the highest support level, because in breaking that level
it would also be breaking the 50-day moving average. An even more
aggressive trader might set the stop below the lower 17.75 level,
the bottom of the trading range.
Both charts courtesy of Qcharts.com.
Setting stops too tight will result in stopping
you out of a lot of trades that ultimately work fine. You really
can't write covered calls with stops too tight. I once looked
at a group of stocks that had been on various of our Real Time
Lists™ - seeing how they had done from first list appearance
through expiration. A surprising number of them had dropped enough
before expiration that they would have triggered the traditional
stops that a day trader or swing trader might have set. Stocks
can oscillate quite a bit, particularly NASDAQ and technology
stocks.
It takes good nerves to deal with a stop well below
breakeven, but with practice it gets easier. Pick good stocks
and you won't have to worry so much about pullbacks. And remember
that stocks in the process of testing a support level frequently
will pierce it, perhaps several times, before finding support.
This illustrates the great importance of discipline in picking
trades, and why I have developed a set of trade-picking guidelines
taught to CallWriter members. Pick lousy trades, and you will
be fretting about the stop loss point in most of them.
Setting a stop in regard to a previous closing price,
as do day and swing traders, makes no sense for covered call writers,
partly because covered writers get additional protection in the
form of the call premium, and partly because we have to allow
for a stock's normal price oscillation. There is no substitute
for looking at a stock's trading history and seeing how it moves.
The stop ideally should be set slightly below a key support level.
How much below? Again, look at how the stock trades. Some are
more elastic than others. Some will violate support more than
.60 before recovering. But generally, allow at least .35 to .40
of room below support for the stop.
Here are some thoughts on setting a stop loss, things
that I use:
|
These are the key to covered call writing. If
the dropping stock has not reached support, it usually is
too early to bail on the trade. It might not be too early
to roll down to a lower-strike call. I typically will set
the stop .35 to .50 below this support. Yet not all support
levels are created equal; some are stronger than others. The
more times the support level was tested, and the more volume
on the tests, the better.
|
|
Sometimes a moving average might make sense as a stop point.
Assuming at trade entry that the stock is above its 50-day
moving average, never set the stop right above the 50-MA.
Stocks frequently will test the 50-MA, and you should allow
for that. Some traders set the stop a bit below the 50-MA.
However, look at how the stock trades. Some stocks frequently
test the 50-MA, but will usually hold the 200-MA.
|
|
It is a good habit to draw upper and lower trendlines on
a stock that is trending, since upper and lower trendlines
tend to act as support and resistance levels. When the stock
breaks down out of the trend below the lower trendline, that
is a very bad technical sign. Right below a lower trendline
is another place to set a stop price.
|
Unlike price support levels, which
are usually pretty clear, it is difficult at trade inception to
know where a support level based on a moving average or lower
trendline will be at a specific point in the future, say, a week
or two. This is one reason to watch open trades - keep an eye
on the stock's movement in relation to the key moving average
you use and the trendline you draw.
Notice that I really have not even
talked about the breakeven point. The breakeven
is an artifact of which strike you wrote and how fat the premium
was; it also dictates how much downside protection you created.
However, it DOES NOT serve as a stop loss point. The breakeven
point is the price at which you COULD BE in trouble if the stock
continues to decline; the stop loss should be the point at which
the trade IS in trouble and it's time to get out. A stop set right
below breakeven is suspect in my view, unless a logical stop just
happens to be right under breakeven.
If you set stops below support levels
and not in relation to breakevens, will you have bigger losses?
The answer is that you will occasionally have a bigger loss when
a stock breaks support - assuming support was below the breakeven,
as in the trades above. Every trader gets bitten sometime. But
you will have many fewer losses. That is, if you are picking trades
properly as CallWriter teaches, you should have very few losing
covered call trades. Setting stops too tight for stocks' natural
tendency to move, on the other hand, is asking for a string of
losses.
In fact, it has been my experience
that setting stops in the wrong place, along with poor trade-picking,
are the two major reasons that people try call writing and then
quit. They get burned on the first few trades (beginner's bad
luck) and decide call writing does not work. But set them right,
and your trading will go right.
Besides standing pat and closing the trade,
there is a third option. You can roll the calls down
by repurchasing the short calls and selling new calls with a lower
strike. It is a protective measure that you should consider only
when the stock is showing real technical weakness. A roll down
is viable if the buyback on the short calls is cheap and there
is enough premium in the next strike down to make the roll worthwhile.
And it is worthwhile ONLY if it improves your position. That is,
if you are looking at a loss of $1.00 without the roll, and rolling
down still leaves you with a loss of $1.00 or even .80, the roll
is not worth it. But, if the roll puts you in a profit position
(which sometimes it will) or gets you flat or close to flat, it
is worthwhile. But you have to roll well before the stock price
gets close to the target strike to which you would like to roll,
otherwise you won't get enough premium to make the roll work for
you.
Question: What
if a trader were to select trades in which, unlike the trades
just discussed, the breakeven was BELOW the support level? The
trader would have the luxury of knowing whether the stock was
holding support or not before price ever got to the breakeven
point. Ah, but that is a subject for another newsletter...
|