Futures

Q&A: Futures Versus Cash

8 comments Written on November 10th, 2011 by
Categories: Futures

Suhail Kazi writes in on the derivatives post with a few questions that I thought belong in a separate post.

a) Is there a T+2 (or other) settlement period for futures similar to stocks?

No; when you buy a future you own it. The “settlement” is only at expiry, and it’s in cash – that is positions are netted out and resulting cash paid.

b) If I buy a one-month future position, then at the end of expiry (24/11) with no further action on my part, will my demat a/c increase to 500? Will I be charged the usual broking/STT charges same as if I’d bought add’l 250 shares at my strike price?

Indian stock futures are cash settled, so there is no conversion of a futures position into shares. You just get charged the difference between your buy price and the market price every day till expiry.

c) If I don’t want (b) to happen, and I don’t want to square off by selling it, how to continue (‘roll-over’ -is that the term used by traders?) the long position into the next month? I don’t see any rollover button/link anywhere on my screen.

Rollover is a process of doing two trades – exiting current month position and entering a new position for the next month. In NSE NOW (one of the software pieces that some brokers use), you can create a “spread” order which tells the exchange to take on both trades simultaneously if the difference between the prices ever comes closer than a number you specify. (Say a spread of 5, and the exchange will try to get both trades with less than 5 rupees paid as the net difference per share)

d) If I sell one lot, and I don’t sq.off, on expiry will my existing 250 shares be deducted? ~ Similarly how to avoid it if I want to continue this short position to next month without affecting my demat holding.

Again, cash settled, so your demat holding is not touched.

e) And if the answer to (d) is Yes, then: In the chart above, at several points (say peak of 2008) the difference between futures and stock pricing is so much that if I simultaneously sell a future lot and buy eqvlnt stocks I stand a guaranteed gain, no matter how the price moves after that. Essentially an arbitrage? Is that correct?

There isn’t much of an arb nowadays between cash and futures unless it’s on the other side (that is, cash is higher than futures, and you can’t take advantage because you can’t have a short position on the stock)

f) Can you add a bit about the brokerage/STT etc behind it? Is it charged daily on M2M basis or lumpsum on initial transaction, squareoff, expiry settlement or some combination? Will help if you continue with yr 1-lot ICICI example to explain it.

There is no brokerage on a daily basis, but M2M is done and cash taken out or added in. STT is one time – on the sell side. There’s a futures tutorial you can look at as well. Hope that helps!

(Thanks Suhail for writing in!)

The Derivative Alternative

3 comments Written on November 9th, 2011 by
Categories: Futures, Options, Yahoo

(From my article at Yahoo)

While derivatives have been called weapons of mass destruction and worse, they can provide alternative methods to participate in the markets. To a bystander, these instruments seem complex — and some indeed are so, with SEBI now requiring brokers to ensure that investors are financially capable of handling themselves before they can trade derivatives.

An alternative way to buying stock is to use a "future". Instead of having to buy equity into a company and paying up the full amount of money, we use a derivative and buy the future instead, paying only a margin amount upfront, and putting the rest of the money as cash, which can earn interest in a liquid mutual fund. I tracked the stock of ICICI Bank, bought directly versus buying with a future, since 2006:

ICICI Bank

I've assumed a single lot of 250 shares, bought for about Rs. 150,000 in 2006, that returns, with dividends. (further assumptions — 30% margins, and the return on cash is 5%)

The futures approach is 10% higher in terms of total return over 5 years! But is it really better?

The correct answer: it depends on who you are. The disadvantages of this system are mainly in the taxes.

a) You get no dividends with futures. While the gains might be baked in somehow, dividends aren't taxed in your hands, so a certain percentage of the dividend gain is lost.

b) You get taxed as business income: Futures trading is considered business income, which is taxable. If you were to lose 30% of your gains to taxes, that negates the entire difference with buying stock. In the example above, the stock gained a total of Rs. 90,000 for which, because of tax rules in India, you pay no tax. (Long Term Capital Gains is nil) But the gain through futures is Rs. 115,000, and a 20% tax will bring it down back to the levels of the stock gain itself.

c) You get no voting rights. Derivatives provide no ownership rights. But hardly any investor votes nowadays, so this is not so much a disadvantage.

d) The process has pain. With a rollover every month, and mark-to-market gains or losses that need a transaction every day, it's a lot more effort for the lay investor.

The "who you are" helps: for many foreign institutional investors, gains or losses may not be subject to Indian tax laws, in which case the above disadvantages are irrelevant. It would help many Indian institutions as well (such as mutual funds or insurance companies, which aren't taxed on gains) but they have strict regulations about how much exposure they can have in derivatives.

Lastly, a trader or a proprietary trading house might benefit from using futures; the taxation disadvantage might be offset by business losses or valid expenses, and will justify the returns.

And there are advantages. For one, you can participate in the downside. Sometimes stocks get overvalued, and it is considered proper trading to short-sell a stock, expecting to profit from a price decline. But in India, you can't short-sell stocks, because there is no liquidity in the "borrow and lend" market.  Futures give you an easier way.

Creeping acquisition rules do not allow individuals to hold stocks without notifying the exchanges and thus, the public — so a large chunk of shares acquired will trigger interest and could take the price high before an organization can finish its buying. Futures, on the other hand, have no disclosure requirements so a buyer could participate in the growth of a stock with no one else ever getting to know.

This lack of disclosure creates many problems as well. In 2008, shares of Volkswagen went up more than three times as Porsche, its owner, declared that it now owned 75% of VW through some derivative instruments. Short sellers — who had a negative view of the stock — had to scramble to buy back shares which were not available (as Porsche had effectively cornered most of the free float), and for a while Volkswagen became the world's most valuable company. The main issue was that Porsche never disclosed the stake, since it wasn't required to report derivative positions. Regulators have realized that derivatives need to be brought into similar disclosure norms that equity shares require.

In India as well, Reliance Industries got into trouble — and still is — for having profited through derivatives in the shares of a subsidiary (RPL) before it sold shares on the market. While creating a hedge, Reliance had used futures to short-sell RPL shares that it eventually sold; but it seems that in the process, it took on greater positions than would be considered a hedge, and therefore is being investigated for insider trading.

It is also quite likely that much of the insider trading market has moved to single-stock futures. Promoters must reveal every single share they buy or sell, but not their futures and options trades. On a piece of news that is known only to a board member, a quick profit can be made through a futures transaction with very little chance of being caught. I would be surprised — given the low level of enforcement or investigation in futures trades — if this is not rampant.

Finally the derivatives bazaar gives you the ability to take more than a "Stock Will Go Up" or "Stock Will Go Down" approach. You might believe that a stock will stay in a range. Or, that the stock will go down, but not too far down. Or that it will go wildly in either direction.  With the use of options, along with a stock, you can create synthetic positions that let you profit from even such imprecise notions. Traders have named them exotically, so you will hear of Strangles, bearish put spreads or straddles — the respective positions you will use to trade the aforementioned beliefs.

It is such synthetic positions that have been used to create "structured products" — where, with options, futures and cash management, a financial product can offer you "complete downside protection with 100% upside" — meaning, you lose no money if the market falls, but you make just as much if it goes up. These products are very useful for a risk averse audience, who might otherwise never even participate in the markets.

Given that we just saw a global crisis because of abuse of derivatives, it is only logical to be afraid of them. But if real estate stocks have fallen 90%, stocks aren't necessarily risk free either. If you consider that we sit in November 2011 at an Index level that is about the same as January 2010, that the US markets are about at the same place they were 11 years ago, or that Japan has fallen 75% from its highs 30 years back, it will seem useful to explore alternative investment strategies that don't require the market to go straight up.

MV Chronicles: Downside Protection and Understanding Margins

No Comments » Written on September 20th, 2011 by
Categories: Futures, MarketVision, Options

The last two MarketVision Chronicles have some awesome (we’re modest) pieces for you. (You’ll need to register, and it’s Free!)

Sep 12: Protecting the Downside

Protecting the downside: Three Option Strategies

When markets go down, it may be useful to protect your downside with a “hedge” of sorts. There are strategies to cover yourself against what might be temporary moves to the downside.

Buying Puts

Concept: Buy Put Options to hedge against downside risk

Put options are available on the NSE, both on individual stocks and on the index. If I thought that the Nifty was going down below the 5,000 levels then I might choose to buy a 5000 put. For a portfolio of Rs. 10 lakhs, the Nifty needed to cover it is around 200 options (Nifty options trade in a lot size of 50).

But the premium matters – in disturbed times, put options cost a lot of money. A Nifty 5,000 put cost Rs. 156 today with the Nifty at 4947. That means the Nifty put doesn’t protect you till Nifty reaches (5000 minus the premium of 156)  or 4844, which is 100 points below today’s close.

That means you will not be covered for the first 100 points of any subsequent fall, since that is the cost of the “insurance”.  This is equivalent to about 2% of your portfolio; which is the “cost of insurance”.

Look at the payoff curve (Option plus long position together):
Nifty Strategy

(Do read: The MarketVision Chronicle, Protecting the Downside)

Sep 19: Understanding F&O Margins

Understanding F&O Margins

When you trade the futures market, you get charged a margin for each trade. (For more information on what they are, read Futures and Options: an Introduction) If you were to buy a Reliance future, the lot size is 250 shares – at a price of Rs. 820 per share, your future should cost you Rs. 205,000.

But you don’t get charged Rs. 205,000. You get charged a percentage of it; this amount is called a “margin”. The margin you get charged depends on the “underlying” security on which the futures is based and the volatility at the time. Why? Because if you don’t pay the full cash at the time, the exchange has to protect itself from your running away in case the trade doesn’t work out for you – the margin is your skin in the game.

Let’s illustrate with an example. Take the Reliance future. If I try to buy a single lot – 250 shares - at Rs. 800 – I placed a dummy order, the stock’s at 820 – the exchange demands a margin of approximately Rs. 35,000. What’s in it?

There is an upfront initial margin which is applicable at the time of the trade. The actual number is calculated using technology called SPAN (Standard Portfolio Analysis of Risk) which was developed by the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME). The idea is that a lot of complex (and shady) mathematics happens behind the scenes to tell you, for an F&O portfolio, what the total margin should be. SPAN generates the number using the price and volatility of the underlying security – In the Reliance case above, the margin determined was around 17% of the stock price. Additional to the SPAN margin is an exposure margin – about 3% of total value of the position. (5% for stock futures)

Example

Let’s say I buy at Rs. 800, and the stock goes to Rs.750 on some bad news. I now have to pay two elements of charges.

One: a mark-to-market amount, which is the difference from my buy price. This is calculated constantly, but charged only at the end of the day. So if Reliance fell to 750, my mark-to-market loss would be Rs. 50 (difference from buy price) x 250 (lot size) = Rs. 12,500. That’s a lot of money (compared to the initial margin of Rs. 35,000, it’s 30%+!)

(Read: The MarketVision Chronicle, Understanding F&O Margins)

You Can Trade 91-day T-Bills Soon

2 comments Written on March 9th, 2011 by
Categories: Futures

Every regulatory body in the Indian market woke up recently and decided to allow Interest rate futures on treasury bills. SEBI said ok, and RBI said ok.

What does this mean? The Indian government keeps borrowing short term money as "Treasury-Bills". The 91-day T-bill sold on 09 Mar 2011 was at 98.25, where the yield was an annualized 7.1443%. The T-Bill is bought at a discount (say 98.5 or something) and on maturity (91 days later) you get the full Rs. 100. The difference is the interest you expect, and it's multiplied by 4 to get an annual yield.

The idea now is to buy (or sell) a futures contract that trades on the "yield" piece - that is, you trade on the direction of this yield. But it's a little complex: What you'll see on the screen is something like 95 (which indicates a 5% yield - the distance from 100 being the yield).

Each contract is for 2000 bills, cash-settled. Let me construct an example - this is how I imagine it working:

1. You buy a contract - 2000 lot size at 95 (5% implied yield)

2. Since it's a 91 day t-bill, you get only 1/4th the interest for the year. So your contract value is actually (100- yield/4), and since yield = 5%, you will end up with a per-t-bill contract value of Rs. 98.75. The lot size is 2000, so your contract value is 1,97,500.

3. Effectively each basis point move (that is, a move from 5% to 5.01%) will increase or decrease your profit by Rs. 5. Remember when you bet  on yields, the buyer of the contract LOSES if the yield goes up. Yields are inversely proportional to prices.

4. Margins are approximately 0.1% of contract - about Rs. 200 or so. I would expect to see them charge about Rs. 500 anyhow.

5. On expiry day (last wednesday of the month), the future expires. There's daily mark to market with the closing price of the futures yield , so if yield jumps from 5 ->5.05%->5.1%->4.9%, you will end up having mark-to-market of 0, - 25, -25, +100 respectively.

6. There's daily volatility calculations that will impact the margin.

There is no "interest" and all that - you're just hoping the yield will go up or down (if you're selling or buying, respectively).

At least this is what I think. Let's see how it actually turns out.

Overall, the concept is good and since it's cash settled, there's no worry of "delivery" of such securities. (the 10 year interest rate future is settled by giving securities).

But remember, you're not buying a 91-day t-bill. You're betting on the direction of the yield. You could take a calendar spread - buy one month, sell the next, where you pay a very small margin (only Rs. 100 for a one month spread) and perhaps net out the difference. You can't hold the future for 91 days (even if you buy a 3-month future) and lock in some interest - there is no interest to be paid, and at the end of 3 months, you'll only get the price according to the yield on the last t-bill sale *then*.

FIIs have limits on what they can buy in debt in the country in general, so they'll find it difficult to participate here.

Interest rate futures have been a disaster till now on the NSE, so let's see how the 91-day t-bill futures go.

Going Down in Flames: The 200 DMA Trade

No Comments » Written on February 5th, 2011 by
Categories: Futures, Nifty

Warning: Technical post (Repeated from the MarketVision blog)

The 200-DMA setup went seriously against me - there was a slight attempt to take the 200 DMA again, in the morning, but the Nifty completely destroyed itself.

Nifty Intraday

I exited around 5480, it didn't look very good. 

Where then are the longer term supports?

Nifty Long Term Chart

There's some at 5200, and some more around the 5000/4900 levels. There is absolutely no reason to work

You can see that a head and shoulders pattern is emerging in the 1 year timeframe. It looks like we'll go further down.

The Nifty ended below 5400 which is useful for the shorts. But what I might actually do is a strangle (5200 put-5400 call) because of a theory that regardless of what happens, we're not staying here. That is of course just a theory, and you could offset the high premiums by writing, say, a 5000-5600 outer strangle and make this a Reverse Iron Condor. You might want to check your commissions before you do something of this sort. It might be useful to do this on individual stocks as well.

Indicators

The MACD turned negative in early Jan. Negative meaning red line crosses below the blue line (above the 0 level).

MACD hasn't been a great indicator on the Nifty - backtests show that there are too many head-fakes, too much lag and in general unreliable on it's own. But in combination with other indicators, it adds value - sorta like saying if all the planets are aligned we get a worthwhile setup. (Don't take that as a thumbs up for astrology - I think that art is a great entertainer but nothing else.)

MACD

The RSI shows that we haven't spent too much time being "oversold". I don't believe in trading relative strength back to the other side - what is oversold can remain oversold for a long time in trending times. The only thing I can read here is that that downmove isn't "overdone" by any means.

RSI

Indicators are only useful for so much - you can't take many decisions purely on them.

Going forward, there seem to be much happening in individual stocks. More on them in separate posts.

Rupee Dollar Exchange Rate Woes

No Comments » Written on December 3rd, 2010 by
Categories: Futures, RupeeFutures

A reader mails in:

While reading thru the financial page of a newspaper I read this -

"The rupee surged to a six-month high against the dollar on Thursday & closed at 44.20, up from a low of 52.06, 18 months back. With the dollar likely to fall furthur against the rupee, IT firms will be hit hard as their products will become costlier."

Can you explain - in layman terms - the head-and-tail of this financial phenomenon?
I mean how can 52.06 be considered "low" against 44.20?
How can IT products become costlier because of this?

The exchange rate quoted is Dollar/Rupee – that is, how many rupees does it take to buy one dollar?

If you invert the rates – how many dollars are needed to buy one rupee, then

(1) 52.06 translates to 0.0192

and

(2) 44.20 translates to 0.0226

that means the rupee in (1) above buys far lesser dollars than (2). Also the second figure is higher, so you can see why “44.2” is a high for the rupee, versus 52.06.

Why do IT Products become costlier when the rupee’s at a high?

That’s assuming they bill in rupees, then people abroad have to pay more dollars to give them the same number of rupees. Not entirely true, because companies usually bill in dollars.

Even then, it hurts. The conversion of the same dollars returns a lower number of rupees; and since salaries tend to remain constant, the costs are in the same as rupees. Do the math – a lower rupee revenue, similar rupee cost = lower margins.

Again, not entirely true. Companies use forex “hedges” to counter this. They sell dollars “forward” meaning they will settle at a later date, and thus “lock-in” the exchange rate. (Read: Futures and Options: An Introduction)

But that can screw things up in sharp upmoves. From MTM overruns….Okay, I’ll stop here. :)

This forex business is not simple. But it’s not supposed to be.

NSE changes Lot Sizes for F&O, Finally

1 Comment » Written on April 7th, 2010 by
Categories: Futures, Options

After SEBI standardised lot sizes, the National Stock Exchange has not acted to change the lot sizes, resulting in the unhappy situation of my not being able to take on a Tata Motors contract because it violates my position size limits. (Tata Motors is at 797, and the lot size is 850, a contract size of 6.7 lakhs, which is way above comparable F&O contracts which are 2-3 lakhs each)

Luckily, the NSE has now decided to bite the bullet and changed contract sizes to bring them in line with the SEBI notification. For the following stocks, lot size downgrades happen on April 30 (after the current contract expires):

image

As you can see, the contract sizes are divisible so if you own a May contract today, you’ll own two (or three in some cases) contracts on May 30.

In a wider move, 111 contracts are being changed where there is no divisibility; for example Tata Motors’ Lot size changes to 500 instead. Some 59 others are being revised upwards, to reflect a fall in the stock price. For example, Bajaj Hindustan goes from 1425 to 2000 (the stock’s at 136).

These changes will only be on contracts starting July 2010. April, May and June contracts will continue to have the current sizes.

Index contracts have changed too. Bank Nifty goes from 50 to 25, CNX IT goes from 100 to 50 and Nifty Midcap 50 goes from 300 to 75.

This is good news for F&O traders.

Are Futures Simply Better?

6 comments Written on March 31st, 2010 by
Categories: Futures, Stocks

I’ve been railing about the cash volumes in the market recently. With volumes reaching 12,000 cr. – lesser than most of 2007 – and as I recently tweeted, less than the daily volume of one share, Apple, in the US market. Our market has obviously seen very low participation levels since the crisis; volumes in the cash market are lower today than in 2007!

But the F&O volumes are much higher. So is there some other explanation?

Some structural issues exist in the cash markets. And the derivatives bazaar, specifically stock futures, solve these issues.

1. If you buy in cash, you have to put the full money down. So buying a 100 shares of Reliance costs you Rs. 100,000 out of your bank account.

2. You get the settlement after two days. Cash flows out of your account tomorrow, if you purchase today; you get the shares in your account in two days. If the seller did not own the shares, there is then an auction – you get the shares in your account five to six days after your purchase. The interim period is weird – if your stock hits a stop loss then, you can’t even exit.

3. Institutions like mutual funds are not allowed to do margin trading in stocks. So switches are a mess. A purchase has to go into the demat first before it can be sold, and full money has to be available before a purchase. Why is this painful? Imagine you are a mutual fund manager who has 10 crores worth stock which you decide to sell and buy something else. What do you need to do?

  • Sell today. The money will reach your account after two days (T+2), the stock leaves your account tomorrow. 
  • Once you receive the money, place the buy order (on T+2). You can’t place it earlier – the broker and exchange needs the money upfront and if you’re a mutual fund you gotta wait till the money comes in.
  • On T+3, the money goes out, and on T+4 you get the stocks in your account

It takes four days to sell and then buy. Meanwhile, whatever you wanted to buy could have run away!

4. Stocks have low liquidity. Of the top 50 stocks in India – the Nifty 50 – the least liquid trades just 8 crores in the cash market, per day. A 1000 cr. fund, if it chose to allocate just 1% of its portfolio per stock, can’t even buy 10 crores worth of that stock – it will move the market so much that the impact cost can be 4-5%! And buying it slowly, piece by piece, is not fun at all; you never know what price you will get in future days.

5. Regulation does not allow funds to own than x% of a certain stock, or require disclosure if the percentages go greater than 1%. Some stocks have a market cap of just 1000 cr. and funds or HNIs like to expose themselves to beyond 10 cr. but don’t want to report.

6. Can’t go short a stock. The SLBS is dead.

If you buy a future instead of a stock, you pay only 50-60% as margin – the remaining money can sit in your account and earn interest; in fact, even the margin money can be given as a fixed deposit which earns interest. There is no settlement wait period – you buy a future, it is immediately in your account. No problem in intraday switching – you can sell one future and buy another right away, margins are released immediately on selling and is available to buy something else. Futures markets are a lot more liquid: for example today, the notional value of cash market trades was 13,000 cr. versus 66,000 cr. in F&O. Individual stocks too show 2x to 3x more volume in their futures trades than in the cash market. Regulation only provides for an upper limit of all F&O on each stock, but there are no disclosure requirements. And of course, you can go short as easily as you can go long.

Still, the futures markets have challenges.

  • Futures earn no dividend.This would be an issue if the average Indian large cap stock was yielding higher than the ridiculously low 2.5% per year they currently do.
  • Rollovers could be a problem.Since futures expire often – typically the most liquid expire each month – the rolling over of a position may involve a cost. For example, on March 25, the recent expiry, HDFC’s March future closed at Rs. 2586 while the April future closed at 2601. If you were long March, you had to sell March and buy April to stay long. The process would cost you Rs. 15, a 0.57% “cost”. If you incurred that every month, you pay about 6.85% a year to use the futures market.
  • Sometimes rollovers work in your favour. For example, on 26 Nov 2009, HDFC’s Nov future closed at 2756 while the December future was at 2748; a long rollover would be Rs. 8 profitable! In the last two years, average rollover costs of HDFC have been Rs. 1.3 – an insignificant number. And NSE has introduced a feature in NEAT
  • Both the above costs have to be made up by interest that is received on the margined amount + whatever else is in the bank. Funds can’t lever portfolios so whatever is not margined stays in cash. And the interest seems to do it. Let’s say they get something like 7% on a fixed deposit – it needs to cover the loss of dividend (2.5%) and the average rollover cost (say 4%), which it just about does.
  • Futures have a daily mark-to-market potential outflow. If you buy a future worth 2 lakhs, you may only need to give Rs. 50,000 as margin. But let’s say the stock falls 20% – you then need to put Rs. 40,000 (20% of the 2 lakhs) as mark-to-market loss, which is paid to the exchange and won’t earn you any interest. But then, if your shares go up, you receive cash instead.
  • Not every stock is listed in the F&O segment, which has only 250 stocks or so, versus a few thousand stocks overall.
  • Market Wide Position Limits curtail F&O use.The MWPL on a stock is 20% of the free float, which tends to create crazy short squeezes like in Akruti.
  • Mutual funds, Pensions and Insurance corpuses can’t currently only trade derivatives. They need an equity component in their portfolio, and derivatives can only be a small percentage of that. No such restrictions on Portfolio Management Services (PMS) or FIIs or proprietary accounts, which continue to participate through futures.

The cost differential, if you test back the last two years, is very little for the benefits one gets. And in the two years, we have fallen a lot and risen a lot and futures have been a better way to invest. Prior to 2007 liquidity wasn’t all that great in the futures market (for individual stocks) so it’s difficult to test and conclude.

Net of the above, if markets remain volatile a long-only kind of fund is likely to see substantial  benefits using futures instead of buying in the cash markets. For going short, F&O is the only choice. It may just be that the smartest money is moving into the futures markets and cash markets are following through largely because of arbitrageurs.