Last week we stated that market makers don't fully account for weekend decay in equity options. Today we show specific results.
Christopher Jones and Joshua Shemesh studied this issue and
presented the findings in a paper that they presented to the 2010 American
Finance Association meeting. They looked at the returns of long
option portfolios on U.S. equities from 1996 to 2007 and found the average
return over the weekend was negative (0.62% of the portfolio value) while the
returns for all other days were slightly positive (0.18% a day). It is
important to be clear what these numbers mean. The 0.62% number means the
average option (averaged over puts, calls, and all strikes and maturities)
declines in value by this amount over the weekend. This is not the return on
equity of a trader holding a short position. This position would need to be
secured by an amount of margin that is appreciably greater than the option
premium.
Having established that weekend returns are significantly
lower than those of other days, the authors went on to study other holidays,
including long weekends. Their hypothesis was the effect was directly related
to non-trading, which would imply lower returns would also be associated with
other holidays, and the effect would be stronger over long weekends. This all
seems to be true: Returns on equity options are negative whenever the market is
closed. It seems the effect exists because market makers are not correctly
adjusting the implied volatilities on Fridays to account for the upcoming
weekend.
Although the size of this effect in dollar terms might seem
minimal, it is significant for several reasons. First, there is no general edge
in selling stock options (unlike index options, where being short is normally
the way to lean), so it represents a totally new effect, rather than a matter
of timing an entry. The dollar amount of the effect grows with volatility, and
the strategy-based margin actually decreases slightly, so returns will be
better in high-volatility environments. This behavior was consistent across
years and was robust with respect to exactly how the portfolios were
constructed.
The researchers didn’t find a similar effect in index
options but next week I will show how something similar can be done in the
index space.
Thank you for interesting explanation of the paper, again. There is also a paper that describes difference between "day/night" returns by looking at OC and CO prices, for index options. Ref.: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2820264
ReplyDeleteI was going to write about that in a few weeks. it is interesting.
ReplyDeleteLooks Interesting. Does this take into account transaction costs and commissions too?
ReplyDeleteNo. They say that the effect might not be tradeable.
ReplyDeleteBut I'm ok with academic work doing this. the estimation of costs and trading impact is a whole other game. I just want them to point out the raw phenomenon.