from historical volatility because the latter is calculated from known
past returns of a security. .
https://t.co/iC5wVf7kvj (2/n)
IV - A thread
In financial mathematics, implied volatility of an option contract is
that value of the volatility of the underlying instrument which, when
input in an option pricing model ) will return a theoretical value equal to the current market price of the option (1/n)
from historical volatility because the latter is calculated from known
past returns of a security. .
https://t.co/iC5wVf7kvj (2/n)
https://t.co/NFPOidRRcH
https://t.co/qNqinEqaKY
(3/n)
buyers, a low IV environment is best to initiate positions as the
subsequent rise in IV actually helps their positions . Even if the IV
remains flat, the position is not hurt by volatility (4/n)
the subsequent fall in IV ( known a vol crush , most often seen after
earnings/events) helps their positions. Here also, if the IV does not
rise, it does not hurt a seller's positions (5/n)
relative to the last one year OR six months. Based upon IVR/IVP , these
parties initiate their respective strategies. (6/n)
attached chart of SBI with IV ( chart taken from https://t.co/uqGUOSVFb5).
movevnent will be skewed for the next 6 months. Even a normally high IV (
historically) will have a low IVR due to this spike, which basically is an
outlier (7/n)
which that spike day goes out of calculation, the whole IVR scenario
changes. What was a high IV environment can become a very low IV
environment in a single day ( due to dropping off that spike data)
the IVR. But what distinguishes an outlier ? Is there any objective measure
which takes care of this ?
Using Data Science : The #BoxPlot ( 10/n)
https://t.co/O536rZS0AE (12/n)
2. VIX above 17 is wild wild west where anything can happen, both buyers and sellers should be very very careful (13/n)
4. The topmost quartile 14.5-17 is where one can initiate selling strategies, buying strategies obviously will be at a disadvantage
-------------------END -------------------
More from Subhadip Nandy
Rule 4 : If buying a naked option, always ensure that implied volatility is low. This can be understood from the level of IV vis a vis historical IV levels. Use IVR or IVP etc.
For a naked option to make money, it's better if IV rises or at least stays flat.
This is a thread I wrote on IV, IVR etc
For a naked option to make money, it's better if IV rises or at least stays flat.
Rule 3 : DO NOT run or trade everything that moves. Focus on a few stocks and master them. When a move comes, make the max out of that move.
— Subhadip Nandy (@SubhadipNandy16) October 14, 2021
Example : in this crazy mkt, I did not even trade TataMotors this week. Stayed focussed on ITC and it gave good returns https://t.co/41wkugZg1I
This is a thread I wrote on IV, IVR etc
IV - A thread
— Subhadip Nandy (@SubhadipNandy16) September 20, 2018
In financial mathematics, implied volatility of an option contract is
that value of the volatility of the underlying instrument which, when
input in an option pricing model ) will return a theoretical value equal to the current market price of the option (1/n)
The most important question now on the mind of all analysts and traders. Is this a bear market rally or is this the start of a bull move. Retweeting this as I will need a few tweets to explain my view
Everyone knows the HH-HL or LH-LL as per Dow theory. This can be a bit confusing on how one marks the Highs and Lows. Long back, I picked up this trick from one of the neo-Dow theorists on what to do in scenarios like this
Simply plot a 5 period exponential moving average on a different panel. A 5-EMA simply shows you a running weekly perspective and kind of smoothens the price where a single spike high/low is not of that much importance
You will see this 5-ema also making HH.HL.LH.LL. So now, rather than focusing on the highs/lows on the charts, focusing on highs/lows on the 5-ema gives a cleaner perspective
As per this charts, unless the 5-ema now closes above 17540 ( the ema, not Nifty price) I will not play this as a bull market. I will deal with this market as a counter move against the major bear trend
Is Nifty bullish, or bearish?
— AP (@ap_pune) March 19, 2022
Replies MUST be ONLY with charts, not just 'views', no Russia Ukraine, crude, gold etc.
Can be levels....abv/below
Just technicals....maybe with trend lines, indicators or any other study (EW, harmonics etc)
Charts can be daily, weekly or monthly.
Everyone knows the HH-HL or LH-LL as per Dow theory. This can be a bit confusing on how one marks the Highs and Lows. Long back, I picked up this trick from one of the neo-Dow theorists on what to do in scenarios like this
Simply plot a 5 period exponential moving average on a different panel. A 5-EMA simply shows you a running weekly perspective and kind of smoothens the price where a single spike high/low is not of that much importance
You will see this 5-ema also making HH.HL.LH.LL. So now, rather than focusing on the highs/lows on the charts, focusing on highs/lows on the 5-ema gives a cleaner perspective
As per this charts, unless the 5-ema now closes above 17540 ( the ema, not Nifty price) I will not play this as a bull market. I will deal with this market as a counter move against the major bear trend
You May Also Like
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
