- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
TigahsOnTop
| Favorite team: | |
| Location: | |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 188 |
| Registered on: | 11/11/2022 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
re: CFA vs CFP
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 3/2/26 at 5:36 pm to Shepherd88
quote:
You think BlackRock is going to keep CFA’s around when Alladin & Gemini can do all of that work at a cheaper rate?
You are speaking to a much broader issue. Investment banking analysts, accountants, etc. will all be getting cut down a bit.
And no, CFP’s won’t be exempt from that either, so I’m not sure what you are getting at.
The great accountants and I-bankers will actually become even more of a commodity, because to control the tech you must first understand the concepts you are making the tech do. I’m sure the same can be said for a CFA (once again, depends on the job).
0
re: CFA vs CFP
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 3/2/26 at 3:45 pm to Shepherd88
quote:
If they’re employed by a wirehouse then yes ultimately it is true. The CFA will earn a salary and bonuses based on their “picks” but the main revenue source of the firm is a CFP. So the CFP keeps the back office employed.
Yeah, I guess if you cherry pick the shittiest job that a CFA can have. I tend to think of a CFA as typically working at a large asset manager (e.g., BlackRock) or at an independent RIA.
re: CFA vs CFP
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 3/2/26 at 2:14 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:
Eh, that's probably not the best way to look at what is "better". The designations relate to different practices and it would depend on what you need. By the same logic, you'd be arguing that a CFA is "better" than a CPA, but at no point would anyone defer to a CFA over a CPA for their taxes.
CFA is certainly a harder designation to earn than CFP, but it is also just a much narrower focused one. They do certainly usually earn more as they will generally be managing much larger investment portfolios than your typical CFP would be. I agree though, I don't know how often I'd say the CFA is working for the CFP, sure it definitely happens, I just don't know if i'd say it was the norm or not.
Sorry, I wasn't clear. I was not trying to say CFA is "better" (poor word choice by me), was just refuting the point that they work for CFPs.
Thanks for the breakdown, I totally agree.
re: CFA vs CFP
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 3/2/26 at 1:27 pm to Shepherd88
quote:
CFA is harder to obtain but ultimately CFA’s end up working for CFP’s
Not sure that is true... I looked up average salaries for each (which imo usually indicates which is better), and CFA seems to completely clear CFP.
I could be wrong though
CFA vs CFP
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 3/2/26 at 12:37 pm
Curious everyone's opinion on professional credentials. CFA is obviously known to be the "most prestigious", but does anyone really care these days?
re: Options premiums plays
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 2/27/26 at 4:38 pm to Jjdoc
quote:
You keep using his example and what you are using is wrong.
Also, I was just using his “stock XYZ” example. Reading comprehension obviously isn’t your strength, I was never speaking to AMZN specifically.
It working out for one security proves nothing to me. I’m not saying the strategy is always a loser.
Mathematically doing this 1,000 times with 1,000 different stocks would underperform just holding those 1,000 stocks. I speak in generalities, not a random specific example.
Look at the performance of covered call index funds vs their underlying equities.
re: Options premiums plays
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 2/27/26 at 4:18 pm to Jjdoc
quote:
It all goes back to you insisting that stocks never will drop below the assigned price.
Of course they do sometimes do. I could play 50 blackjack hands and win 30. The EXPECTED RETURN of a covered call strategy underperforms the underlying equity in the LONG RUN.
Please provide any substantive research that claims otherwise.
Everyone so caught up in this bullshite example.
re: Options premiums plays
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 2/27/26 at 2:59 pm to Jjdoc
quote:
See your own words? "And stays there"???
My goodness man. Think. No stock "stays there". He asked you to name one that does only goes up. You couldn't.
Like Creed stated, your hypothetical relies strictly upon a stock moving past a strike price and never ever in history dips.
Name a stock that has done what you have suggested.
Option bros out in full force. Strike price is 110, stock goes to 120. Falls back down to 115. Guess what, the stock went down, but stayed above the strike price. The math doesn't imply the stock can't ever go up and down you bimbo.
Pretty sad I have to spell this out for you. The "Black-Scholes formula" won a Nobel prize for laying out the exact way in which options are priced. I could give you about 50 academic papers all coming to the same conclusion that covered calls have a lower expected value than the underlying equities.
This is not exactly a controversial take for anyone who has made their living working in high-finance
re: Options premiums plays
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 2/27/26 at 12:41 pm to BCreed1
Dude, the math is not reliant on the stock only going up lmao. I don't know why you are so fixated on that. Every time the stock goes above the strike price (and stays there!), you lose upside. Plain and simple. Yes, stocks go up and down, I'm not retarded.
read up: LINK
read up: LINK
re: Options premiums plays
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 2/27/26 at 11:37 am to TigahsOnTop
quote:This is 1000% correct. You explained it simpler than I could!
IF you are willing to part with a stock at a set price, there is nothing wrong with selling a covered call. You do give up further gains, but IF you have reasons to sell at that price, that is fine. Selling a put can be used to enter a position. It could go lower. I’ve done options at times. Most contracts expire worthless so being on the sell side tends to work better. I agree that buying and holding works best. Mostly bc of time and decreased transaction costs.
re: Options premiums plays
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 2/27/26 at 11:35 am to BCreed1
quote:
You are full of shite! Dude I own both of those and SNDK which has been on a hard run!
I can do the math however way you want to cut it. You are part of a larger issue, options bros that think they know something, but in reality don’t understand the financial instrument.
There are some great academic papers released on the concept, I’d advise you to read them. As someone who looks at private funds for UHNW clients for a living, I’ve seen hedge funds get smoked for trying to replicate similar strategies to the one you are outlying at scale. Why I largely don’t play in the public markets outside of indexing/ direct indexing for tax loss harvesting.
re: Options premiums plays
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 2/27/26 at 7:28 am to CecilShortsHisPants
No. This is just payoff math.
Using your own example:
Buy at $100.
Sell the $110 call (.15 delta).
Stock goes to $111 and you’re assigned.
You made $10 + premium. Great.
But if the stock keeps running to $130, $150 … you’re out at $110. That upside is gone. Selling a $109 put after doesn’t “undo” that. That’s a brand new trade with new risk. If it never comes back to $109, you just permanently underperformed buy-and-hold.
Same with the AMZN example. If you sold calls at $245 and it rips $20 past your strike, that $20 belongs to the call buyer. Rolling means you’re buying back intrinsic value at a loss and pushing risk out in time. That’s not free upside — that’s damage control.
And this absolutely would have crushed you during real secular runs. Try systematically selling calls during the massive multi-year runs in Amazon or Nvidia. You’d have been consistently called away and repeatedly chasing higher. That’s textbook underperformance in strong bull trends.
“I’ve traded for 20 years” doesn’t change the payoff diagram. If you could truly capture unlimited upside and premium at scale with no tradeoff, you wouldn’t be arguing on a message board (you’d be a PM at a top hedge fund).
Using your own example:
Buy at $100.
Sell the $110 call (.15 delta).
Stock goes to $111 and you’re assigned.
You made $10 + premium. Great.
But if the stock keeps running to $130, $150 … you’re out at $110. That upside is gone. Selling a $109 put after doesn’t “undo” that. That’s a brand new trade with new risk. If it never comes back to $109, you just permanently underperformed buy-and-hold.
Same with the AMZN example. If you sold calls at $245 and it rips $20 past your strike, that $20 belongs to the call buyer. Rolling means you’re buying back intrinsic value at a loss and pushing risk out in time. That’s not free upside — that’s damage control.
And this absolutely would have crushed you during real secular runs. Try systematically selling calls during the massive multi-year runs in Amazon or Nvidia. You’d have been consistently called away and repeatedly chasing higher. That’s textbook underperformance in strong bull trends.
“I’ve traded for 20 years” doesn’t change the payoff diagram. If you could truly capture unlimited upside and premium at scale with no tradeoff, you wouldn’t be arguing on a message board (you’d be a PM at a top hedge fund).
re: Anyone else wondering if they make it to retirement b/c of AI?
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 2/26/26 at 9:08 pm to BCvol
quote:Not to be a Debbie downer, but this sounds like a horrific idea. There is no AI tool available to any retail investor that will allow you to outperform the market (you are just making riskier trades and don’t realize it)
AI is what really tipped the scales in favor of retirement allowing me to more actively manage my retirement accounts.
re: what have you done with AI today?
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 2/26/26 at 4:34 pm to BR Tiger
Curious if anyone else has used openclaw. I’ve been playing around with it but it hasn’t been very useful for most tasks. It can barely open a chrome browser to search the web and parse through. I also communicate via telegram which is cool, but I don’t really see the point.
re: Options premiums plays
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 2/26/26 at 2:27 pm to BCreed1
Thunderbird's strategy makes sense to me. Still hate the framing of a savings account, but he at least understands he is capping upside (which he has since explained is intentional). Totally understand the logic. Interesting strategy, but as he mentioned, it only works if you stop trading during downturns (assuming you are good enough at guessing downturns). And he has done it for 6 years, which doesn't include any true sell-offs (with the exception of covid, which is still not extreme).
This, on the other hand, is just a fundamental misunderstanding of what you are doing. Yes it is capping upside.
When you sell a call, you’re literally selling someone else the right to your stock above the strike. If AMZN rips $20 past your strike, you don’t get that move (the call buyer does). The premium doesn’t change that.
“Just selling puts to get it back” doesn’t undo the missed upside. You already gave it up.
Covered calls = long stock minus upside convexity, plus small income. That’s fine, but it is a cap by definition. Extensive research to back this
quote:
No. It's just wrong. I own many stocks that I sell options on every week and have for well over a decade.
One is AMZN purchased at $104. I sell calls weekly and have from the start. I still own it. So, no it's not capping anything. On the few times I have been assigned, I simply sold puts with the idea of purchasing at the assigned price.
This, on the other hand, is just a fundamental misunderstanding of what you are doing. Yes it is capping upside.
When you sell a call, you’re literally selling someone else the right to your stock above the strike. If AMZN rips $20 past your strike, you don’t get that move (the call buyer does). The premium doesn’t change that.
“Just selling puts to get it back” doesn’t undo the missed upside. You already gave it up.
Covered calls = long stock minus upside convexity, plus small income. That’s fine, but it is a cap by definition. Extensive research to back this
re: Options premiums plays
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 2/26/26 at 10:06 am to thunderbird1100
quote:
Whole point is keeping it all liquid and limiting any real long term downside.
During a real sell-off, you would get completely wiped out. Luckily we haven't seen one since you started using this strategy, but don't mistake that for "limiting downside risk".
re: Anyone else wondering if they make it to retirement b/c of AI?
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 2/26/26 at 10:01 am to The Torch
Yes, some jobs will get displaced. Banks used to have employees manually logging debits and credits on paper. Obviously computers wiped those jobs out.
People need to relax with the doom and gloom. Yes, jobs will get wacked. New jobs will be created, and those are who are able to use AI tools to make themselves 100% more efficient will win out in this.
Just like every other innovation, the ones who are able to adapt and use the tools to make them better will come out ahead. If you are an accountant, learn the best models to make you do your job faster, etc.
People need to relax with the doom and gloom. Yes, jobs will get wacked. New jobs will be created, and those are who are able to use AI tools to make themselves 100% more efficient will win out in this.
Just like every other innovation, the ones who are able to adapt and use the tools to make them better will come out ahead. If you are an accountant, learn the best models to make you do your job faster, etc.
re: Options premiums plays
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 2/25/26 at 4:38 pm to thunderbird1100
quote:
You forgot to mention im capping my downside as well, which is the main point on something like liquid savings money you typically want to have.
Maybe this is the point I’m fundamentally misunderstanding. Isn’t the entire point of selling a put that you agree to absorb the downside (aka, you are insurance for the market tanking). This seems like the exact opposite of what you’d want from “savings”.
re: Options premiums plays
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 2/25/26 at 12:33 pm to thunderbird1100
quote:
It all comes out to about a 10% rate of return annualized which I can live with on our savings
You’re not running a “supercharged savings account.” You’re running a short-vol strategy.
A 97–98% win rate is exactly what short 0DTE puts should look like. Small steady wins, occasional large loss. That’s the design.
And it’s actually worse than just owning the S&P 500. If you own the index, you get unlimited upside and can ride out drawdowns over time. If you sell 0DTE puts, your upside is capped at the tiny premium, but your downside is real and can be realized in a single session. You give up the big rally days and fully eat the sharp down days.
It’s fine if you understand that. Just call it what it is, short volatility income with tail risk
re: Options premiums plays
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 2/25/26 at 12:17 pm to bobaftt1212
This is all just gambling. "I asked chatgpt if I should pick red or black on roulette".
For all of you options bros, compare your performance selling covered calls to the performance of the underlying equities if you bought and hold. You'll quickly realize this "income" you are generating is just capping your upside.
For all of you options bros, compare your performance selling covered calls to the performance of the underlying equities if you bought and hold. You'll quickly realize this "income" you are generating is just capping your upside.
re: AI tools for stock picking
Posted by TigahsOnTop on 2/23/26 at 12:04 pm to TigahsOnTop
The same is true for stocks. There are several sophisticated hedge funds that have successfully created algos that have proved to create true alpha, but the average Joe Schmo with their AI stock picker is not coming close to that. They may be "outperforming", but they are unknowingly just taking more risk. This was pretty much confirmed when the OP said that the outsized returns came from Nvidia... shocker
Popular
17
