Effkay
Yes, you can protect 100% against downside risk, but only at the expense of profit potential. You cannot make a profit unless you take on risk, whether it be directional risk or volatility risk – simple as that. Anyone that tells you otherwise is badly misinformed and destined to lose their shirt, IMHO.
As far as covered calls go, it’s not a strategy I’d entertain. The reason being that you could achieve the same P & L profile by shorting a naked Put. Why pay 2 commissions when you need only pay one ? If you already hold the stock for the long run and are looking to enhance returns then covered calls work fairly well. Anyway, back to answer your questions…
Effkay said:
is it just a balancing act between risk/reward when choosing itm or otm calls?
Yes. When you sell calls against long stock you’re selling off the upside potential in the stock, whilst retaining full downside risk. How much upside you sell depends on which strike you choose – the further OTM calls you sell the more upside you get to keep, but less downside protection (less premium). The nearer to ATM calls you sell the less upside you keep, but you have more downside protection (more premium). So yes, a balancing act is a good description.
Always look at the time value in the call options you’re considering selling – not the intrinsic. TV is what you are selling and are aiming to keep. Maximum time value is found in ATM options. However, it is a balancing act as you say.
P.S. I urge you to look at naked Put writing as a better alternative to Covered Call writing.
P.P.S. I’m a novice too - nothing wrong with that !