Cited by 16Financial Markets and Investment StrategiesStochastic processes and financial applicationsFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling

Losing is Optional: Retail Option Trading and Earnings Announcement Volatility

Open access
de Silva, Tim, Smith, Kevin, So, Eric C.·2022·SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract

We document the growth of retail options trading and provide evidence that retail investors are drawn to options by anticipated spikes in volatility. Retail investors purchase options in a concentrated fashion before earnings announcements, particularly those with greater expected abnormal volatility. In doing so, retail investors display a trio of wealth-depleting behaviors: they overpay for options relative to realized volatility, incur enormous bid-ask spreads, and sluggishly respond to announcements. These translate to retail losses of 5-to-9% on average, and 10-to-14% for high expected volatility announcements. Market makers are the primary beneficiaries, particularly in recent years coinciding with the COVID pandemic.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2139/ssrn.4050165

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The aggregate trading performance of retail option traders is poor, particularly around earnings announcements, in short-term options, and when using complex option strategies.

    “These concerns seem justified in light of recent academic papers which have shown that the aggregate trading performance of retail option traders is poor, particularly around earnings announcements (de Silva, Smith, and So, 2022), in shortterm options (Beckmeyer, Branger, and Gayda, 2023), and when using complex option strategies (Naranjo, Nimalendran, and Wu, 2022).”

    From Striking Out: Biases and Losses of Retail Option Traders (2024) · cites this paper as de Silva, Smith, and So, 2022

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
de Silva, T., Smith, K., & So, E. C.
Affiliations
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
Venue
SSRN Electronic Journal
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022
ISSN
1556-5068 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4225965695
Cited by
16
References
3
Citations by year
2025: 7 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
SSRN Electronic Journal (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Financial Markets and Investment Strategies
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Stochastic processes and financial applications
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Financial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Keywords
earnings announcements, abnormal volatility, retail investor behavior, option pricing, bid-ask spread, market makers, COVID-19 pandemic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review