|
September 17, 2003
Making the Tough Calls:
Analysis of a Deep-In-The-Money Trade
by John Brasher, CallWriter Publisher
| This newsletter
will discuss an actual covered call trade done... how it developed
and why we closed it the way we did. There is no better trading
education than seeing the decisional process for an actual
trade. We knew this trade would be volatile and decided to
write a deep-in-the-money (DITM) call on it to reduce our
trade risk, even though there were at-the-money and out-of-the-money
calls paying more. In retrospect we wish we had written even
further into the money, though the return was far less. We
got out with a very small profit and lived to trade again.
|
|
Do
the right thing...
The purpose of this kind of newsletter is so that
you can learn from our actual trading activity. Here are the trade
details:
| Bought
GNTA shares |
-$16.60 |
| Sold
GNTA Sept. 15 Call |
+$ 3.00 (8.42% return) |
|
Bought back Sept. 15 Call |
-$
0.25 |
| Sold
GNTA shares |
+$13.99 |
| Closing
return |
+$
0.14 (0.84% return) |
This trade was a covered call on biopharmaceutical
company Genta Corp. (GNTA), in which shares of
GNTA were purchased for $16.60 and the GNTA September 15 call option
was sold for a $3 premium. This means the GNTA covered call trade
got filled at a net debit of $13.60 - the amount taken out of a
trader's account. This was a deep-in-the-money (DITM) call, since
the $15 strike price was $1.60 below the stock price. The
$3.00 premium protected traders down to about $13.60,
the breakeven point. The trade wound up technically a $0.14 winner
before trade costs. Well, a trade that ends like this one is a lot
better than a sharp stick in the eye - or in the wallet.
Unfortunately, Genta announced during the position
that its experimental drug (Genasense) only extended the life of
cancer patients in a clinical trial by an average of 1.2 months.
While Genta claims the benefits are much better than the longevity
data indicate, Wall Street saw it differently. Genta dropped below
$15 on Sept. 3rd, recovered, then had a bad day on Sept. 9th and
dropped harder on Sept. 10th and fought for the next few days to
hold price. GNTA steadlily dropped below $15, going as low as $13.76
on Monday. On one dip we got out of the call by repurchasing it
for an average of $0.2423. The reason for buying back the call was
to free up the GNTA stock (you can't sell stock that is covering
a call option) so that it could be sold at a higher price without
the call premium rising along with it and blotting up the price
appreciation. That is, if GNTA had gone back up to, say, $14.50
the Sept. 15 call probably would have gone up with it almost penny
for penny, like a call in the money.
The GNTA Sept. 15 call held its price all during
its drop below $15... it wasn't giving up much of its price as it
fell. Put differently, the market makers were making sure it cost
too much to exit with a decent profit. Why didn't we sell out the
position at $15 or even $14.50? After all, we would have gotten
much more for the stock. True, but we would have paid a lot more
to buy back the Sept. 20 call. For example,when GNTA was $14.50,
the call would have cost $0.65 or $0.70 to buy back. The GNTA call
just didn't lose much value as the stock fell. Besides, with a $13.60
breakeven you shouldn't panic and close the position at $14.50 or
$15, although you might close it if the 15 call had gotten really
cheap to repurchase - but it didn't. So we elected to close the
option leg (the option portion) of the trade as cheaply as possible,
in order to free us up to sell GNTA when the price rocked higher.
Except, hmmm, it didn't go higher. It very briefly
traded at $14.21 on Monday, but not in sufficient volume or for
long enough to get out at that level. We could have waited until
Tuesday in hopes that GNTA's price would recover, but we decided
the better part of valor was to get out of a threatening trade.
Hindsight is always 20/20, but not helpful in the least, and GNTA
is a prime example. Today (Wednesday) GNTA has hit a high of $14.90,
but there was no way at the decisional point to know the price would
recover, especially since a minor support level at $14.50 had been
breached. Even more worrisome, GNTA frequently had been opening
significantly down from the prior day's close since the bad news
came out. So getting out of the trade on Monday was the smart call
to make at the time.
The essence of good trading is to make the right
decision at the time. Nothing is more common in trading than to
make a hard decision to exit a trade only to watch the stock recover.
The problem obviously is that many times they don't recover. Making
the hard decisions are a crucial part of money management and trade
discipline. Had we held GNTA in hopes of a price recovery
and gotten another price fade, how would we have justified our action?
The answer is that we couldn't have... holding it would have been
either betting on the support level or at worst, simply hoping for
the best - - things we don't do. If you consistently hold onto trades
when they go wrong, hoping for a recovery, you are gambling... and
you will lose far more often than you win.
Support. To be sure, GNTA
had some support in the $14.50 range, which was a prior resistance
level overcome, and more recent support in the $12.00 - $12.50 range.
It was a somewhat safe bet - though no sure thing - that it would
hit the $12-12.50 level and recover. But at the level we closed
the GNTA position, GNTA had already fallen below the $14.50 support
and was touching the 50-day moving average (MA) on a daily chart,
and on a 60-minute chart had already broken far below the 50-MA
and was at the 200-MA, which are not reassuring signs. Trading our
own money, we would have been tempted to bet on support holding
and a price recovery back well into the $14 or $15 range - which
has now happened. GNTA found support at the $13.85 level, it has
held the 50-MA and seems to have recovered. But you can't know that
in advance.
The Roll. We considered an attempt
to buy back the Sept. 15 call and sell the Oct. 12.50 call, which
was paying $2.10 at one point on Mondaycfdx. This action (known
as rolling down and out, since you sell a call that is
a further expiration month out and that has a lower strike price)
would have yielded a net return on the entire trade of 4.5% for
nearly two months of holding time, so a return of roughly 2.25%
per month, assuming no further hard drops for GNTA. Not too exciting.
The problem, however, is that there was hardly any volume in the
GNTA Oct. 12.50, thus no way to sell the number of contracts that
would have been necessary.
This brings up a good point: why didn't we write
the Sept. 12.50 call in the first place, instead of the Sept. 15?
The answer is that the return on it was much lower than the 15 call,
and we figured that $3 in premium would be enough protection. However,
GNTA dropped too far and the 15 call held too much value even into
expiration week. But trading is a series of calculated risks. If
you always pick the very most conservative strategy you will win
more often, but not make as much money as a less conservative trader
who maximizes premium return and looks for smart support levels.
Trade lessons? There are several
here for you, and we learn something as well from every trade.
First, GNTA was at
the top of our $15 and Up, Deep-in-the-Money and Deep-out-of-the-Money
lists, so it was volatile. Stocks with high covered call returns
have those high returns for a reason - always keep that in mind.
The safer plays pay a half or third as much, but can be much safer.
It is hard, though, to get 5% a month with hammer-safe trades.
But we are fairly cautious, and we liked GNTA enough to do the
trade.
Second, our breakeven
point in GNTA (stock cost less premium received) was
slightly below a support level at $14 but well above the more
recent $12-12.50 support level. While some traders differ on this
point, we think that you ideally want a breakeven point at or
below support. Why? It is very comforting to us to have the support
level below the breakeven point (which really is your decisional
point for exiting the trade), so you know whether the stock has
held support or not by the time the price gets close to breakeven.
That is, if it hasn't held support, you get out fast. Also, stocks
more often than not will hold support (that's why the concept
of support levels exists in the first place), so a breakeven below
support gives the stock a chance for support to hold and the price
to recover. A breakeven above support means that you have to make
the decision to get out before knowing if support will hold. You
can't always manage to write a breakeven below support, but month
in and month out your trading will do better if you can. And GNTA
is a prime example of how even a huge call premium does not guarantee
safety. We ultimately chose not to take the chance on the stock
falling to the lower support level.
Third, when in doubt
about a stock, either leave it alone or write a deep-in-the-money
call. Novice traders might wonder how GNTA could drop $2.60 and
not hand them a loss. That is a big drop! The reason simply is
that the $3 premium received cushioned the fall and lowered the
breakeven point to $13.60. That is the magic of DITM calls and
puts.
If you like a stock carrying a high premium, but
worry about a price drop, then the safer strategy is to write DITM
to get the cushion. The only problem with DITM calls is that the
premium evaporates seriously a couple of weeks before expiration.
This means you should write it with 3 or 4 weeks remaining until
expiration. But a shorter trade is fine if the premium makes it
worth the risk; only you can decide.
Here's an example: if a stock is $18 and volatile,
you might consider writing the $15 call for protection. A month
out from expiration that call might pay $4.50, a nice $1.50 return
(you can't count the $3 of intrinsic value received). But three
weeks later with a week remaining to expiration the stock still
is about $18 and the 15 call is now going for $3.40, a $0.40 return.
What changed? It lost time value, that's all. But the risk of the
stock may still be just as high as it was earlier (if the volatility
event causing the high premium has not yet resolved itself), except
you got $1.10 less in premium. Sure, you'll only be in the trade
for a week instead of a month so the return is good, but risk is
risk, and your cushion is not as good at $3.40 as with $4.50. Some
traders would disagree, but $1.10 can make the difference between
a nice, fat trade and a loser. |