3 ms·

Personally I find the reporting of underlying value more useful than the price paid in puts, since it reflects the asset itself rather than an arbitrary price f

by jb1991 1y ago

Personally I find the reporting of underlying value more useful than the price paid in puts, since it reflects the asset itself rather than an arbitrary price for an option that could be any of many different strikes or expirations. The option price itself is not that meaningful.

weird-eye-issue 1y ago
> The option price itself is not that meaningful. Except it's literally what determines how much money is at risk in the trade. If you buy puts the actual underlying asset value doesn't matter as much as the value of the option itself (which is based on several factors such as time, strike price, etc)
- jb1991 1y ago
  The amount of money that is at risk with options is irrelevant because two different option positions with the same overall cost can have completely different risk profiles, which makes the actual value of those options not so interesting. In the absence of all the other details about the options trades, the actual amount paid for them is without much meaning.
chollida1 1y ago
> Personally I find the reporting of underlying value more useful than the price paid in puts How so? If I buy TSLA puts at a $10 strike or a $500 strike they show up the exact same on the 13F as both have to be reported as if they are delta 1 when showing a share count. One is a very meaningful bet and one is throwing money away.
- jb1991 1y ago
  That’s exactly correct, which is why I find the actual option price not so relevant. Presumably that’s why it’s also reported in the way that it is.
  - geor9e 1y ago
    I find this comment non-sequitur. We may have a mismatched understanding of how options work.
    - jb1991 1y ago
      More likely, it’s just a misunderstanding of what’s being communicated in this thread. Options are quite complicated and these comments here are rather brief so there’s probably a lot getting lost in the discussion.
geor9e 1y ago
>The option price itself is not that meaningful. It is the most meaningful thing. It's the exact amount of money you are risking. It's the exact amount you lose if it doesn't strike. If I buy a put for $2, the most I can lose is $2. It's meaningful even with no other information. 13F notional value, on the other hand, is meaningless without more info.
- jb1991 1y ago
  I disagree quite a bit, and in fact the notional value is exactly what you want to measure this, without more information about the trades. The amount of money that is at risk with options is irrelevant because two different option positions with the same overall cost can have completely different risk profiles, which makes the actual value of those options not so interesting. In the absence of all the other details about the options trades, the actual amount paid for them is without much meaning.

by jb1991 1y ago

weird-eye-issue 1y ago

> The option price itself is not that meaningful. Except it's literally what determines how much money is at risk in the trade. If you buy puts the actual underlying asset value doesn't matter as much as the value of the option itself (which is based on several factors such as time, strike price, etc)

jb1991 1y ago
The amount of money that is at risk with options is irrelevant because two different option positions with the same overall cost can have completely different risk profiles, which makes the actual value of those options not so interesting. In the absence of all the other details about the options trades, the actual amount paid for them is without much meaning.

chollida1 1y ago

> Personally I find the reporting of underlying value more useful than the price paid in puts How so? If I buy TSLA puts at a $10 strike or a $500 strike they show up the exact same on the 13F as both have to be reported as if they are delta 1 when showing a share count. One is a very meaningful bet and one is throwing money away.

jb1991 1y ago
That’s exactly correct, which is why I find the actual option price not so relevant. Presumably that’s why it’s also reported in the way that it is.
- geor9e 1y ago
  I find this comment non-sequitur. We may have a mismatched understanding of how options work.
  - jb1991 1y ago
    More likely, it’s just a misunderstanding of what’s being communicated in this thread. Options are quite complicated and these comments here are rather brief so there’s probably a lot getting lost in the discussion.

geor9e 1y ago

>The option price itself is not that meaningful. It is the most meaningful thing. It's the exact amount of money you are risking. It's the exact amount you lose if it doesn't strike. If I buy a put for $2, the most I can lose is $2. It's meaningful even with no other information. 13F notional value, on the other hand, is meaningless without more info.

jb1991 1y ago
I disagree quite a bit, and in fact the notional value is exactly what you want to measure this, without more information about the trades. The amount of money that is at risk with options is irrelevant because two different option positions with the same overall cost can have completely different risk profiles, which makes the actual value of those options not so interesting. In the absence of all the other details about the options trades, the actual amount paid for them is without much meaning.