Cheap options trading 911

Cheap options trading 911 There was very high trading in "put options" on American Airline and United Airlines, immediately before 911. These were effectively gambles that their share prices would fall, which of course is what happened once the attacks took place. This shows the traders must have had advance knowledge of 911. This is a complex story, but the claims don’t always match the reality. "A single U. S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading method that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10. Perhaps the strongest challenge to this conclusion comes from Professor Allen M Poteshman from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He decided to investigate this further, analysing market data statistically to try and assess the trades’ significance. Professor Poteshman points out several reasons to question the foreknowledge argument: Despite the views expressed by the popular media, leading academics, and option market professionals, there is reason to question the decisiveness of the evidence that terrorists traded in the option market ahead of the September 11 attacks. One event that casts doubt on the evidence is the crash of an American Airlines plane in New York City on November 12. According to the OCC Web site, three trading days before, on November 7, the put-call ratio for options on AMR stock was 7.74. On the basis of the statements made about the links between option market activity and terrorism shortly after September 11, it would have been tempting to infer from this put-call ratio that terrorism probably was the cause of the November 12 crash. Subsequently, however, terrorism was all but ruled out. While it might be the case that an abnormally large AMR put-call ratio was observed by chance on November 7, this event certainly raises the question of whether put-call ratios as large as 7.74 are, in fact, unusual. Beyond the November 12 plane crash, an article published in Barron’s on October 8 (Arvedlund 2001) offers several additional grounds for being skeptical about the claims that it is likely that terrorists or their associates traded AMR and UAL options ahead of the September 11 attacks. For starters, the article notes that the heaviest trading in the AMR options did not occur in the cheapest, shortest-dated puts, which would have provided the largest profits to someone who knew of the coming attacks. Furthermore, an analyst had issued a “sell” recommendation on AMR during the previous week, which may have led investors to buy AMR puts. Similarly, the stock price of UAL had recently declined enough to concern technical traders who may have increased their put buying, and UAL options are heavily traded by institutions hedging their stock positions.

Finally, traders making markets in the options did not raise the ask price at the time the orders arrived as they would have if they believed that the orders were based on adverse nonpublic information: the market makers did not appear to find the trading to be out of the ordinary at the time that it occurred. However, he then devises a statistical model, which he suggests is consistent with foreknowledge after all: Options traders, corporate managers, security analysts, exchange officials, regulators, prosecutors, policy makers, and—at times—the public at large have an interest in knowing whether unusual option trading has occurred around certain events. A prime example of such an event is the September 11 terrorist attacks, and there was indeed a great deal of speculation about whether option market activity indicated that the terrorists or their associates had traded in the days leading up to September 11 on advance knowledge of the impending attacks. This speculation, however, took place in the absence of an understanding of the relevant characteristics of option market trading. One issue that troubles us about this is the lack of analysis of the string of bad news delivered by American Airlines on September 7th, the trading day before September 10th, when the most significant trading occurred. Professor Poteshman told us via email: My study does include quantile regressions that account for the market conditions on particular stocks. Hence, there is at least a first order correction for the negative news that was coming out on Sept. 7 on AMR. But can you really treat the news so simply? Professor Paul Zarembka supports the claims, saying: Poteshman finds . these purchases of options on American Airline stock . had only 1 percent probability of occurring simply randomly.

But we’re not saying they were random, rather that they may have been a rational response to significant bad news delivered the day before. Poteshman is essentially saying (with regard to AMR) is that people bought too many puts for that to be explained by the 97 news, therefore another explanation is required, but how can you say that without analysing the news itself? After all, if that news had been “we’ll probably be bankrupt in six months” then the put ratios would probably have been even more significant, and Poteshman’s model given even more confirmation of “unusual option market activity”, but would that have made the idea of foreknowledge more likely? We don’t think so. Obviously the AMR news was less significant, but we would still say that you cannot accurately judge the significance of these trades until you take it into consideration. A single U. S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading method that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10. Similarly, much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American on September 10 was traced to a specific U. S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these trades. The September 6th UAL puts would automatically appear significant, then, even though only one investor was reportedly behind them. But does that really mean you can mathematically indicate it’s likely that investor had foreknowledge of 911, without considering the other market conditions and information available at the time? The Best Cheap Online Stock Brokers. Latest Update October 13, 2017. The best cheap online stock broker offers a variety of investment options at a low cost. We compared fees, account minimums, and other costs of the cheapest brokerage accounts to find which best suits different investing priorities.

While most online brokers have dialed down their costs, we found three that we like more than the competition. For anyone just starting to wade into investing, Ally requires no minimum investment to start an account, and it offers some of the lowest trading fees. Its online-only platform transfers between devices with ease, making it easy and inexpensive for investors to set up an account. The only brokerage of our three top picks that operates brick-and-mortar branches, this financial institution has kept offers plenty of useful tools and platforms while also offering traditional resources for in-person help. This low-cost, high-account value trading platform offers surprisingly low fees if you meet its requirements for account balance and activity. But novice investors won't find the same benefits, or the same simplicity offered by our other picks. The Best Cheap Online Stock Brokers. Best for New Investors. Best for Active Investors. Whether you’re new to the stock market or a seasoned investor, choosing a brokerage with low overhead is a smart financial decision: Spending less money on fees means your investments have more room to grow. And while cheap trading platforms may not offer the same level of counsel or market research as a traditional firm, you can still find plenty of tools to make trading decisions smarter and faster. If you’re a relative newcomer to the stock market, you should look for an account with low costs, plenty of educational resources, and, importantly, a low account minimum. Your best bets are Ally Invest and Charles Schwab. These two brokerages share a lot of price points, and most of the differences between the two are trade-offs.

Example: Ally provides access to nearly twice as many mutual funds (around 10,000 vs. 5,000) and charges a much lower mutual fund commission (around $9 vs. Schwab’s $75). Meanwhile, no brokerage can compare with Charles Schwab for exchange-traded funds (ETFs): Over 200 trade commission-free. Conversely, Ally doesn’t offer any zero-commission ETFs. With those differences in mind, we prefer Ally Invest for new investors due to its $0 minimum to start a brokerage account and because it offers virtual trading. With virtual trading, you can test out strategies before putting your own cash into the mix. Charles Schwab doesn’t offer any equivalent, and has a $1,000 account minimum. Ally also gives you the option to try your hand with individual trades or open a managed portfolio with a little more expert guidance, although managed portfolios require a $2,500 minimum. Charles Schwab has retained more of a classic brokerage feel through its in-person presence (you can schedule a free consultation with a financial advisor) as well as its more traditional account minimums. And while Ally restricts its trading technology to online platforms, Charles Schwab gives clients an advanced desktop option: StreetSmart Edge. StreetSmart’s claim to fame: Making its platform more intuitive and convenient, based on user feedback about clunkier trading tech. For more active trading, a higher account balance is par for the course.

With Interactive Brokers, you’ll need $10,000 to start an account, but once you do, its other financial demands are incredibly small. Take advantage of the super low price per trade ($1) as well as extremely low margin rates (their highest interest bracket still charges less than 3%). It also offers the choice of fixed or tiered pricing, giving investors the opportunity to choose what makes more financial sense for them — tiered structures will typically benefit high-volume traders. How We Found The Best Cheap Online Stock Brokers. Your financial goals and your personal investing style will be the two biggest factors in choosing the right brokerage for you. We set out to find the strengths and weaknesses of the cheapest brokerages we could find, but you’ll still have to decide which offers the right combination of savings and services for your needs. We considered seven brokerages in total: Ally Invest, E*trade, Fidelity, Interactive Brokers, Charles Schwab, Merrill Edge, and T. D. Ameritrade, all major brokerages that have made a name for themselves offering exceptionally low rates. This wasn't a comprehensive list — we focused on major names and newer players that were doing more to disrupt the space. To find the best among them, we investigated their platforms and compared the fine print to see how they stack up in fees, learning resources, and trading technology. We primarily based our selection on the fees and strictures associated with each company’s brokerage account. Some of the most important: account minimum, account minimum fee, broker-assisted trade commission, monthly activity fee, price per trade, and price per share. Though the numerical difference between two brokerages’ fees can appear small — an extra $2 per trade or a 2% bump in margin rates — those dollars and percentages are still eating away at your investment. We looked for brokers that kept those fees and commissions as low as possible. Special offers for opening a brokerage account can include a set number of free trades or even cash bonuses for investing above a certain amount. Read the fine print to be sure that these early benefits outweigh later costs, and whether those new client perks align with your investing practices.

In other words, don’t be enticed into choosing a broker offering deals on investment products you don’t understand or aren’t ready to use. Since special offers are by definition short-term, we focused on set account pricing. In the long run, those are the savings that will impact your financial goals. For the novice investor who wants to start small and spend small, we sought out accounts that have a low minimum balance (the amount you’re required to keep in your account at all times), no minimum activity rules, and as many $0 fees as possible. We also wanted low-cost options for both self-directed trading and investing in a managed portfolio, allowing you to make your first foray into the market as hands-on or hands-off as you like. But we didn't want to neglect experienced investors, either. For investors who've had time to let investments grow, a low minimum balance probably isn’t a top concern. But putting more money in shouldn’t make your fees swell proportionately. We looked for brokerages that kept fees low for larger accounts — or, better yet, offered more discounts for frequent activity. We were also keen to see a full set of asset options, including advanced investment vehicles like forex and futures. For any type of investor, a superior investment platform provides an array of research and learning resources, flexible trading options, and a usable interface compatible with most devices. We found a lot of similarities among the different brokerages: Roughly half had the same $4.95 per-trade fee, with most of the rest charging $6.95. All our top picks charge $4.95 per trade, except for Interactive Brokers' $1 fee. Three of our seven finalists had no account minimum, and Charles Schwab will waive its $1,000 minimum with a monthly direct deposit of $100. Ameritrade and Merrill Edge lost out to Ally for having higher per-trade fees, despite having no account minimums.

Both Charles Schwab and Fidelity charge $4.95 per trade and have physical locations and learning centers for investors. But we gave Schwab the edge for its lower account minimum ($0-$1,000 vs. $2,500) and the reviews of its desktop platform. E*Trade lost points for a high account minimum ($5,000) and high per-trade fees ($6.95), offering the worst of both worlds. For investors who have that much to deposit into an account, we much preferred Interactive Brokers' $1 per trade fee. Even with Interactive Brokers' $0.005 per share fee, a trader would have to buy or sell more than 1,000 shares at a time to exceed E*Trade's fees. Here's how our top picks stacked up in some of these key areas: *Waived with monthly direct deposit of $100. Our Picks for the Best Cheap Online Stock Brokers. Best for New Investors. Ally Invest A clean and accessible online brokerage that provides investing newbies with a simple platform and no investment minimums. Because Ally Invest doesn’t maintain brick-and-mortar branches or run advertising campaigns, it is relatively unknown outside of the trading world. Despite its insider status, Ally does better than most online brokerages at making investing accessible to newcomers.

The real welcome mat in front of Ally’s door: some of the cheapest rates in the industry. With a $0 minimum for independent brokerage accounts, just about anyone can get started investing with Ally. But just because it makes investing approachable for beginners doesn’t mean it isn’t an expansive company there are plenty of tools and opportunities to expand your investment horizons. Ally offers all the same major investment vehicles as other brokerages — stocks, options, ETFs, bonds, mutual funds, forex, futures — as well as a host of accounts that fall under a managed portfolio. These portfolios are comprised exclusively of ETFs — investment bundles that trade on the open market like stocks. They offer similar diversification to mutual funds, but typically carry lower expenses. A small percentage of your total investment is typically held in cash, but the exact amount will vary according to your described risk tolerance. In addition to small fees for holding the ETFs themselves, Ally charges a 0.3% advisory fee. That's a pretty middle-of-the-road percentage in comparison with other full-service brokerages but slightly higher than companies that offer only managed portfolios. We discuss these robo-advisor companies at the end of the review. In the first half of 2017, TradeKing made the move to Ally Financial, officially becoming Ally Invest. The transformation of TradeKing accounts wasn’t totally seamless, but today they’re functioning normally. What’s more, the merger created a stronger trading platform that improved the functionality of the two original systems, beefing up the tools and technology. Ally boasts an aesthetically pleasing and easily navigable site, but buries all the hard data that we were craving.

From the easy-to-reach pages, scout out fine print hyperlinks promising “More Details” to find consolidated information about fees, investment vehicles, and account types. This sparsity of upfront information carries over into their light touch on education and research. While having more in-house resources would improve the overall client experience, plenty of information can be found elsewhere on the internet. A couple good resources? Investopedia and The Simple Dollar. Charles Schwab This old guard brokerage has kept on the breaking wave of trading technology, while providing plenty of support and advising resources. Just about every basic fee charged by Charles Schwab goes toe-to-toe with Ally. The price between the two does jump in certain instances — broker-assisted trades go up by $5 and mutual fund commissions go up nearly $70 — and while Ally lets investors start a brokerage account with any amount, Charles Schwab requires $1,000 to start. However, the breadth of tools and resources available with Charles Schwab does a lot to justify the extra expense. Schwab puts extensive information on their accounts and products front and center. Plus, easily access both product info and wider investment education through the learning center. And while Ally Invest makes it difficult to track down brass tacks in the name of a friendly user-interface, Schwab hits you with its full store of counsel and breaking news. Not only does the firm provide access to independent research, it also publishes relevant in-house research. Research and ratings both live inside Charles Schwab’s desktop trading platform, StreetSmart Edge, the upgrade of Schwab’s flagship platform StreetSmart.

If you need personalized settings and advanced features, StreetSmart Edge provides both in spades. You’ll just have to learn how to use it. For streamlined trading and market insights on the go, there’s also a web-based platform, Trade Source. Investors that are new to the game may find the web-based option more accessible. Like Ally, Charles Schwab offers a managed portfolio option, Intelligent Portfolio, available for a large number of managed account types. Unlike Ally, not to mention every other managed account we looked at, it charges no advising fees. Instead, Schwab makes money by holding some of the underlying assets of the accounts. The only fees associated with the account come from the investments, and while that percentage increases to a substantial amount (from 0.07% to 0.21% as risk builds), it is still lower than most. The $5,000 account minimum for Intelligent Portfolio accounts is, however, higher than Ally’s. Still, if the security of investing with a solid name in finances appeals to you, Charles Schwab offers a lot for your money. And Charles Schwab is finding even more ways to make you feel secure investing your money with them. Automated financial advisors are the wave of the future, but many people don’t feel comfortable putting their life’s savings in the digital hands of a computer.

Charles Schwab has developed a half-and-half solution: A hybrid service, Intelligent Advisory puts both financial professionals and financial algorithms to work. A nice little solution, so long as you have $25,000 to plunk down. Charles Schwab offers a deluxe set of services, but depending on the account you choose, you don’t have to invest a correspondingly huge amount. Opting for an independent brokerage account gives you access to the resources of a traditional, full-service brokerage without putting down a traditional amount. Best for Active Investors. Interactive Brokers A top choice for experienced traders, this brokerage boasts a complete lineup of investment products, plus pro-grade trading tech. Choosing a company with a variety of investment products is important if you plan on trading more than just stocks. All three of our favorite companies offer stocks, bonds, mutual funds, ETFs, and options trading. But if you’re particularly interested in more advanced investing, like options, Interactive Brokers is the way to go. The company also has incredibly low interest rates for margin trading: With an upper limit of 2.66%, IB’s rates are about a third of what’s charged by every other brokerage we looked at. For pure trading and competitive prices, no other brokerage comes close. Interactive Broker’s account structure rewards the active investor. In fact, the two elements that make IB a bit unwieldy for new investors make it a perfect tool for the experienced: Once you meet the hefty minimum account balance — $10,000 — the rest of IB’s demands on your wallet are light.

And the relatively high $10 monthly activity fee is charged only if your trades don’t rack up at least $10 in commissions. With the tiny $1 per-trade fee, that means you’ll need to make ten trades every month or pay the difference, e. g. six trades will leave you with a $4 activity fee. If you are savvy investor who also happens to be under 25, you can open an Interactive Broker account with a reduced minimum balance — the required deposit is just $3,000 — and the monthly fee bumps down to $3. For an IRA, the minimum deposit is $5,000. However, we didn’t love everything we saw about Interactive Brokers. Back in 2012-2013, the company was fined for several violations relating to the management of futures market funds. The result was a pair of fines totaling $925,000. Because the fines occurred several years ago, and because futures trading is a fairly niche investment area compared to stocks and funds, we don’t think this is enough to overrule Interactive Brokers’ overall cheap costs. However, if you’re planning on doing a substantial amount of futures trading, be aware of this mark on their record. Interactive Broker’s incredibly rich platform offers trading technology advanced enough for professional day traders. Choose from the web-based trading platform WebTrader and the more advanced, downloadable platform, Trader Workstation. Both are included for Interactive Brokers clients at no additional cost. Serious traders will gravitate to the Trader Workstation’s more in-depth features. Trader Workstation also comes with a steep learning curve.

Navigation is far from intuitive as tools are located in discrete sections. However, it is also customizable, allowing you to group together the resources you make frequent use of and hide the ones you don’t. The interface, like the rest of an IB account, only benefits experienced traders. However, IB has recognized the learning gap. To supplement the educational tools on Traders' University, IB has introduced a layout library (choose from pre-made setups and templates for different trading strategies) as well as an AI assistant. IBot can answer plain-English questions but, like any other voice-activated helper from Siri to Alexa, it has its limits. The landscape of online investing is changing. Financial institutions have gone through a lot of millennial growing pains. The culminating act: Several companies cannibalizing several others in the past year. For everyday investors, these acquisitions have little impact. For instance, T. D. Ameritrade gobbled up Scottrade, but Scottrade accounts are slated to transform painlessly into Ameritrade accounts in Q1 of 2018, to the extent that Scottrade is still enrolling new clients. The more major change is the movement away from traditional brokerages and toward increasingly automated investing options. Enter robo-advisors. There’s an app for that. The inexpensive trading platforms established by the likes of Scottrade and E*trade make it easy to invest by reducing or eliminating fees that make traditional brokerage firms elite.

They also appeal to a younger generation of investors. They are not, however, the newest rich kid on the block. A slew of robo-advisor investment apps have materialized within the last five years, with marketing and functionality geared toward a generation that has a job (yay!) and some money (yay!) but doesn’t know how to “adult.” A notable example, Wealthsimple, has a slogan that says it all: “Investing on autopilot.” Hands-off investing as offered by Wealthsimple (or other robo-advisors like Wealthfront and Betterment) appeal to a demographic used to automated services. Simply plug in your time frame and risk tolerance and an algorithm takes it from there. A nice side effect of AI investing - even lower fees. Wealthsimple and Betterment both allow you to open an account with $0 down Wealthfront asks for $500. Wealthsimple charges an annual 0.5% advising fee Wealthfront and Betterment charge just 0.25%. The Best Cheap Online Stock Brokers, Summed Up. We find the best of everything. How? We start with the world.

We narrow down our list with expert insight and cut anything that doesn't meet our standards. We hand-test the finalists. Then, we name our top picks. Top 10 Mistakes When Trading in Cheap Options. Many traders make the mistake of purchasing cheap options without fully understanding the risks. A cheap option can be defined as “inexpensive” – the absolute price is low – however, the real value is often neglected. These traders are confusing a cheap option with a low-priced option. A “low-priced option” is where the value of the option is trading at a lower price relative to its fundamentals, and is therefore considered undervalued, as is not synonymous with the real value of the underlying stock that is being portrayed. Investing in cheap options is not the same as investing in cheap stocks. The former tends to carry more risk. As Gordon Gecko famously said in the film Wall Street, “Greed, for lack of a better word, is good.” Greed can be a great motivator for profit. However, when it comes to cheap options, greed can tempt even experienced traders to take unwise risks. After all, who does not like a large profit with minimal investment?

Out-of-the-money options combined with short expiration times can look like a good investment. The initial cost is generally lower, which makes the possible profits larger if the option is fulfilled. However, before trading in cheap options, beware of these 10 common mistakes. Top 10 Mistakes when Trading Cheap Options. 1. Ignoring or not understanding the parameters of implied volatility versus historical volatility . Implied volatility is used by options traders to gauge whether an option is expensive or cheap. The future volatility (likely trading range) is shown by using the data points. A high implied volatility normally signifies a bearish market. When there is fear in the marketplace, perceived risks sometimes drive prices higher. This correlates with an expensive option. A low implied volatility often correlates with a bullish market.

Historical volatility, which can be plotted on a chart, should also be studied closely so as to make a comparison to the current implied volatility measures being calculated. 2. Ignoring the odds and probabilities associated with options trading . The market will not always perform according to the trends displayed by the history of the underlying stock. A belief that leveraging capital, by buying cheap options, helps alleviate a loss due to an expected major move by a stock, can certainly be overrated by traders not adhering to the rules of odds and probabilities where the risk becomes underestimated which, in the end, could cause a major loss. Odds is simply describing the likelihood that an event will or will not occur. Whereas, probability is a ratio based on the likelihood that an event or an outcome will, or will not, occur. Investors should remember that cheap options are often cheap for a reason. The option is priced according to the statistical expectation of its underlying stock’s potential. Therefore to trade outside this option strike price, which is based around a time frame, requires cautious consideration. 3. N eglecting a cheap option’s delta by ignoring its intrinsic value at expiration time. A delta refers to the ratio comparing the change in the price of the underlying asset to the corresponding change in the price of a derivative. If the delta is close to 1.00, a call option would be appropriate. If the delta is closer to negative 1.00, then a put option is the play.

It is more opportunistic to select higher-delta options as they are more in line with (have a similar behavior with) the underlying stock. This in turn means that there is a possibility of quicker gain in value as the stock starts to move. (related: Risk Management Techniques for Selling Covered Calls.) 4. Not selecting appropriate time frames or expiration dates . An option with a longer time frame will cost more than one with a shorter time frame – due to the fact that there is more time available allowing for the stock to move in the anticipated direction. The lure of a cheap front-month contract can, at times, be irresistible, but at the same time it can be disastrous if the movement of the shares do not accommodate the expectation for the option purchased. Another consideration is that it is also difficult for some options traders to psychologically handle the stock movement over a longer period of time -- as stock movement will go through a series of ups and downs, consolidation periods, etc. – causing the value of the option change accordingly. 5. Sentiment analysis , another overlooked area, helps determine if there will be a continuation of the current trend of a stock. Observing short interest, analyst ratings and put activity is a definite step in the right direction in being able to better judge a future stock movement. 6. Guess work in regard to a stock movement, either up, down or sideways, when purchasing options, and totally ignoring the underlying stock analysis and the technical indicators available makes for a big error of judgment. Easy profits have usually been accounted for by the market – major traders and banks – therefore, it is a necessary exercise to use technical indicators and analyze the underlying stock so that the timing of the options trade is appropriate to the situation. 7. Another area often overlooked by traders when buying cheap options is the extrinsic valueintrinsic value of an option.

Greatly overlooked when trading options is that extrinsic value, rather than intrinsic value, is the true determinant of the cost of an options contract. As the expiration of the option approaches, the extrinsic value will diminish and eventually reach zero. 8. Commissions can get out-of-hand, and brokers are keen to have clients who wish to buy cheap options – the more cheap options that are bought the more commission the broker will make. 9. Protective stop losses not being placed can be detrimental to capital preservation, and many traders of cheap options forego this facility, and instead prefer to hold the option until it either comes to fruition or let it go until it reaches zero. Usually this type of pattern relates to laziness or an acute fear of risk – and with this mindset, the trader really should not be trading options at all – let alone cheap options. Traders that take this approach are the ones that avoid proactive trading, and instead, allow the market to consistently make their decisions for them by taking them out of the trade at the time of expiration. This pattern of behavior frequently leads to a downward spiral of increasing losses, which the trader may seek to ignore by dodging phone calls and discarding unread statements. All of this clearly equates to a highly detrimental perspective on trading options. 10. A sound method is often overlooked, particularly by novice options traders, whose tendency is to initiate their trading on the wrong side of the spectrum, due to the lack of knowledge, insight andor sound strategies as they are aiming for pie-in-the-sky profits while lacking a clear comprehension of the realities of the trade they are undertaking. Both novice and experienced options traders can make costly mistakes when trading in cheap options.

Do not assume that cheap options offer the same value as undervalued or low‑priced options. Of all options, cheap options can have the greatest risk of a 100 percent loss as the cheaper the option, the lower the likelihood is that it will reach expiration in the money. Before taking risks on cheap options, do your research and avoid the most common mistakes. Insider Trading. Pre-911 Put Options on Companies Hurt by Attack Indicates Foreknowledge. Financial transactions in the days before the attack suggest that certain individuals used foreknowledge of the attack to reap huge profits. 1 The evidence of insider trading includes: Huge surges in purchases of put options on stocks of the two airlines used in the attack -- United Airlines and American Airlines Surges in purchases of put options on stocks of reinsurance companies expected to pay out billions to cover losses from the attack -- Munich Re and the AXA Group Surges in purchases of put options on stocks of financial services companies hurt by the attack -- Merrill Lynch & Co., and Morgan Stanley and Bank of America Huge surge in purchases of call options of stock of a weapons manufacturer expected to gain from the attack -- Raytheon Huge surges in purchases of 5-Year US Treasury Notes. In each case, the anomalous purchases translated into large profits as soon as the stock market opened a week after the attack: put options were used on stocks that would be hurt by the attack, and call options were used on stocks that would benefit. Put and call options are contracts that allow their holders to sell and buy assets, respectively, at specified prices by a certain date. Put options allow their holders to profit from declines in stock values because they allow stocks to be bought at market price and sold for the higher option price.

The ratio of the volume of put option contracts to call option contracts is called the putcall ratio. The ratio is usually less than one, with a value of around 0.8 considered normal. 2. American Airlines and United Airlines, and several insurance companies and banks posted huge loses in stock values when the markets opened on September 17. Put options -- financial instruments which allow investors to profit from the decline in value of stocks -- were purchased on the stocks of these companies in great volume in the week before the attack. United Airlines and American Airlines. Two of the corporations most damaged by the attack were American Airlines (AMR), the operator of Flight 11 and Flight 77, and United Airlines (UAL), the operator of Flight 175 and Flight 93. According to CBS News , in the week before the attack, the putcall ratio for American Airlines was four. 3 The putcall ratio for United Airlines was 25 times above normal on September 6. 4. The spikes in put options occurred on days that were uneventful for the airlines and their stock prices. The Bloomberg News reported that put options on the airlines surged to the phenomenal high of 285 times their average. When the market reopened after the attack, United Airlines stock fell 42 percent from $30.82 to $17.50 per share, and American Airlines stock fell 39 percent, from $29.70 to $18.00 per share. 7. Reinsurance Companies. Several companies in the reinsurance business were expected to suffer huge losses from the attack: Munich Re of Germany and Swiss Re of Switzerland -- the world's two biggest reinsurers, and the AXA Group of France. In September, 2001, the San Francisco Chronicle estimated liabilities of $1.5 billion for Munich Re and $0.55 bilion for the AXA Group and telegraph. co. uk estimated liabilities of Ј1.2 billion for Munich Re and Ј0.83 billion for Swiss Re. 8 9. Trading in shares of Munich Re was almost double its normal level on September 6, and 7, and trading in shares of Swiss Re was more than double its normal level on September 7. 10. Financial Services Companies. Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co. and Merrill Lynch & Co. were both headquartered in lower Manhattan at the time of the attack. Morgan Stanley occupied 22 floors of the North Tower and Merrill Lynch had headquarters near the Twin Towers.

Morgan Stanley, which saw an average of 27 put options on its stock bought per day before September 6, saw 2,157 put options bought in the three trading days before the attack. Merrill Lynch, which saw an average of 252 put options on its stock bought per day before September 5, saw 12,215 put options bought in the four trading days before the attack. Morgan Stanley's stock dropped 13% and Merrill Lynch's stock dropped 11.5% when the market reopened. 11. Bank of America showed a fivefold increase in put option trading on the Thursday and Friday before the attack. While most companies would see their stock valuations decline in the wake of the attack, those in the business of supplying the military would see dramatic increases, reflecting the new business they were poised to receive. Raytheon, maker of Patriot and Tomahawk missiles, saw its stock soar immediately after the attack. Purchases of call options on Raytheon stock increased sixfold on the day before the attack. Raytheon has been fined millions of dollars inflating the costs of equipment it sells the US military. Raytheon has a secretive subsidiary, E-Systems, whose clients have included the CIA and NSA. 14. Five-year US Treasury notes were purchased in abnormally high volumes before the attack, and their buyers were rewarded with sharp increases in their value following the attack. The SEC's Investigation.

Shortly after the attack the SEC circulated a list of stocks to securities firms around the world seeking information. 16 A widely circulated article states that the stocks flagged by the SEC included those of the following corporations: American Airlines, United Airlines, Continental Airlines, Northwest Airlines, Southwest Airlines, US Airways airlines, Martin, Boeing, Lockheed Martin Corp., AIG, American Express Corp, American International Group, AMR Corporation, AXA SA, Bank of America Corp, Bank of New York Corp, Bank One Corp, Cigna Group, CNA Financial, Carnival Corp, Chubb Group, John Hancock Financial Services, Hercules Inc., L-3 Communications Holdings, Inc., LTV Corporation, Marsh & McLennan Cos. Inc., MetLife, Progressive Corp., General Motors, Raytheon, W. R. Grace, Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd., Lone Star Technologies, American Express, the Citigroup Inc., Royal & Sun Alliance, Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc., Vornado Reality Trust, Morgan Stanley, Dean Witter & Co., XL Capital Ltd., and Bear Stearns. An October 19 article in the San Francisco Chronicle reported that the SEC, after a period of silence, had undertaken the unprecedented action of deputizing hundreds of private officials in its investigation: In a two-page statement issued to "all securities-related entities" nationwide, the SEC asked companies to designate senior personnel who appreciate "the sensitive nature" of the case and can be relied upon to "exercise appropriate discretion" as "point" people linking government investigators and the industry. 17. Michael Ruppert, a former LAPD officer, explains the consequences of this action: Interpreting and Reinterpreting the Data.

An analysis of the press reports on the subject of apparent insider trading related to the attack shows a trend, with early reports highlighting the anomalies, and later reports excusing them. In his book Crossing the Rubicon Michael C. Ruppert illustrates this point by first excerpting a number of reports published shortly after the attack: A jump in UAL (United Airlines) put options 90 times (not 90 percent) above normal between September 6 and September 10, and 285 times higher than average on the Thursday before the attack. -- CBS News, September 26 A jump in American Airlines put options 60 times (not 60 percent) above normal on the day before the attacks. -- CBS News, September 26 No similar trading occurred on any other airlines. -- Bloomberg Business Report, the Institute for Counterterrorism (ICT), Herzliyya, Israel citing data from the CBOE 3 Morgan Stanley saw, between September 7 and September 10, an increase of 27 times (not 27 percent) in the purchase of put options on its shares. 4. 3. "Mechanics of Possible Bin Laden Insider Trading Scam," Herzlyya International Policy Institute for Counter Terrorism (ICT), September 22, 2001. Michael C. Ruppert, "The Case for Bush Administration Advance Knowledge of 9-11 Attacks," From the Wilderness April 22, 2002. Posted at Centre for Research and Globalization < globalresearch. caarticlesRUP203A. html>. 4. ICT, op. cit, citing data from the Chicago Board of Options Exchange (CBOE). . "Terrorists trained at CBPE." Chicago Sun-Times , September 20, 2001, < suntimes.

comterrorstoriescst-nws-trade20.html>. "Probe of options trading link to attacks confirmed," . Chicago Sun-Times , September 21, 2001, < suntimes. comterrorstoriescst-fin-trade21.html>. Ruppert then illustrates an apparent attempt to bury the story by explaining it away as nothing unusual. A September 30 New York Times article claims that "benign explanations are turning up" in the SEC's investigation. 20 The article blames the activity in put options, which it doesn't quantify, on "market pessimism," but fails to explain why the price of the stocks in the airlines doesn't reflect the same market pessimism. The fact that $2.5 million of the put options remained unclaimed is not explained at all by market pessimism, and is evidence that the put option purchasers were part of a criminal conspiracy. 21. Best Options Trading Brokers and Platforms. NerdWallet offers financial tools and advice to help people understand their options and make the best possible decisions. The guidance we offer and info we provide are deeply researched, objective and independent. We spent over 300 hours reviewing the top online brokers before selecting the best for our readers.

And to help you find the one that’s best for you, we’ve highlighted their pros, cons and current offers. Who is the best options broker today? The answer depends on whom you ask and what they value. For some investors, the best broker for trading options is the one with the cheapest commissions. Others prioritize trading tools, platform design, research, customer service or all of the above. While most of the brokers on our best-of list below would be a good, all-encompassing choice for many investors, we’ve also highlighted the standout candidates in specific areas that matter most to options traders. Unsure what you’re looking for? See how to choose an options broker for more on what can make or break an options trading experience. Summary: Best online stock brokers for options trading. Best for low-cost. Best options trading platform. Best for research and education.

Best overall for options trading. Our top picks cover all the option trader needs — access to high-quality research, analytical tools, a user-friendly platform — at reasonable prices. TD Ameritrade and Interactive Brokers earn high marks for options investors for their advanced trading platforms, deep bench of research and tools, plus their high-caliber options trading capabilities. TD Ameritrade handily serves option traders no matter where they are on the learning curve. The broker’s thinkorswim platform offers a robust options trading experience for active investors seeking professional-grade tools to identify trading opportunities, analyze potential risks and rewards, test trade strategies and quickly place even the most complex options trades. The broker’s web-based Trade Architect platform is for investors just getting into options or those who don’t require a high-octane platform. Its stripped-down, easy-to-use interface won’t overwhelm newbies. And although Trade Architect isn’t as fully stocked with tools and data as thinkorswim, it’s no slouch, either. Intermediate investors will find advanced features like a marketoptions heat map, screening and tradefinder tools, and streaming news. Get details in our TD Ameritrade review. For cost-conscious, active options traders looking for low costs and a platform with a lot more meat on its bones, Interactive Brokers may be more your style. Interactive Brokers charges just 70 cents per contract with no base fee ($1 minimum order), plus discounts for larger volumes, if you can manage the $10,000 account minimum. Its Trader Workstation platform (with an options method lab) is considered one of the best and most sophisticated around. But watch other fees to ensure that the lower commissions pay off.

Both brokers allow prospective clients to test-drive the goods without putting any real money on the line. TD Ameritrade offers a paperMoney virtual trading account to test out the thinkorswim platform. At Interactive Brokers, once customers open a real account (which has a $10,000 minimum funding requirement), they can set up a paper trading account that offers them hands-on practice using IB’s Trader Workstation platform and tools. Best brokers for low-cost options trading. These brokers offer competitively priced options trading commissions and have eliminated or dramatically capped minimum trading fees. In early 2017 most of the mainstream online brokers slashed commissions to levels once reserved for their deep-discount peers. That doesn’t mean that they’re the best deal in town for every investor. For active options traders, eOption earns five stars from NerdWallet for its low options trade commissions. The company charges a fixed $3 base plus 15 cents per contract. Another plus: eOption is known for having some of the lowest margin rates available.

Although eOption charges a $50 annual inactivity fee on accounts that have placed fewer than two trades in the past 12 months or have less than $10,000 in credit or debit balances, the minimum trade workaround isn’t onerous, even for infrequent traders. Charles Schwab’s trade commission of $4.95 base rate plus 65 cents per contract puts it within spitting distance of deep-discount peers. Schwab recently fully took over the old OptionsXpress and incorporated that broker’s options experience into its own platform, with both web-based and mobile functionality. Commissions aren’t the only costs associated with trading options. Platform, data and other fees can quickly cancel out what you save on commissions. See our full reviews of Charles Schwab and eOption for details on what they offer. For those simply looking for a cheap way to execute options trades, Charles Schwab and eOption get the job done. Best options trading platforms. These brokers offer some of the most powerful trading platforms available for a reasonable price. Judging a broker’s trading platform by the number of features it offers is like buying a car based solely on what you read in the dealer brochure. While all investors have their must-have features, what’s more important is how the platform feels when it’s in their hands. The trading platforms at Ally Invest and TradeStation offer a wide variety of analytical tools, provide stable and speedy trade execution, and allow investors to customize the tools and design to best suit their needs. Unlike TradeStation, Ally Invest (formerly TradeKing) is technically a deep discount broker as reflected in its commissions (options traders pay a $4.95 base plus 65 cents per contract with only one base charge per spread), $0 account minimum and free access to research and data. Frequent traders (those who place 30 or more trades per quarter or who carry a balance of $100,000 or more) pay a discounted $3.95 base and 50 cents per contract.

But don’t be fooled by the lower prices: Customers get a lot of platform power for free. Ally is suitable for newer options investors. The browser-based platform resembles the offerings of its pricier competitors and comes with free options trading tools for screening and advanced charting. Navigation is easy and streamlined. Customers can create a custom dashboard with movable modules with the data and features they want to use. The setup extends to what users see across all devices, including mobile and tablet. TradeStation is best left to more experienced, tech-savvy investors who want to experience options trading using the same tools as pro traders. The broker provides all the tools needed to design, test-drive, monitor, automate and speedily execute the most complex trades via direct-market access (no pesky middleman to slow down the process). Its OptionsStation Pro platform is fully integrated into TradeStation’s regular trading platform. An added bonus is the broker’s active investor forums, where traders discuss ideas, ask questions and get help. Access to all of TradeStation’s bells and whistles used to come at a steep $99.95 monthly platform fee for those who didn’t meet account balance or trading activity minimums.

But in March 2017 TradeStation eliminated the service fee, lowered its trade commissions for stocks and options and tossed in free real-time market data and free access to its market-monitoring and portfolio-level back-testing tools. Educational tools and platform tutorials are plentiful, which is a plus: Because of the sophisticated nature of the platform, it may require some time to become familiar with all that it offers. See more in our TradeStation review. Best research and options trading education. Both offer extensive research and data for free, as well as live classes and webinars for beginning and advanced options traders. If you’re new to options trading or want to expand your trading strategies, a broker that devotes its resources to research and customer education is a must. Because Schwab and Fidelity each have offices across the country in addition to their online options education libraries, they’re able to offer in-person guidance and free seminars on how to trade options, as well as one-on-one guidance on using the tools each platform offers. Fidelity’s constantly refreshed library draws from more than 20 providers, including Recognia, Ned Davis, S&P Capital IQ and McLean Capital Management. The full suite is available to customers when they sign into the broker’s web-based platform. And you don’t have to stop digging when you’re away from your computer: Fidelity has a strong mobile app that lets customers access the company’s full suite of research through a mobile browser. Charles Schwab’s options trading capabilities and lineup of trading data and research got a big boost as the company integrated its purchase of OptionsXpress. In October Schwab re-launched its online platform under the StreetSmart name, with both web-based and mobile functionality, though for now only former OptionsXpress clients have access to the new platform.

In the first quarter of 2018, Schwab will begin rolling out the new platform to all clients. While the platform name is changing, Schwab still provides a fully realized suite of offerings for options traders, including trade assessment tools, customizable screeners, access to Schwab analyst options-market commentary, live online webinars and pre-recorded seminars. Best brokers for beginner options investors. These brokers provide ideal conditions (educational resources, user-friendly platforms, customer support and low minimums) for investors just learning the options trading ropes. TD Ameritrade — one of our top overall brokers — ranked highest in this category, too. But since there are many types of beginners with many different preferences, instead of highlighting the category champions we’ve focused on brokers that are excellent candidates in three key areas: Low minimum opening balance requirements. Ally Invest, TD Ameritrade, Merrill Edge: If you’re not yet ready to devote a lot of your capital to options trading, you don’t want to tie up much in an account to meet the minimum. Many of the brokers on our list require no money to open an account. However, industry regulations require that traders maintain a $2,000 minimum to trade options. Strong customer support. Scottrade and TD Ameritrade: On-call help is particularly handy when starting out.

One way to test a broker’s level of service is to contact the company with any questions you have about its option trading offerings before you even open an account. Scottrade is known for its standout customer service and huge physical presence of 500 branches. So is TD Ameritrade, with around-the-clock phone and email support and 100 branches where clients can attend seminars and meet with investment associates. At the end of 2017, TD’s acquisition of Scottrade will be complete, increasing each broker’s ability to serve clients. User-friendly platforms. Ally, Charles Schwab and TD Ameritrade: There’s nothing better than test-driving a broker’s platform before you commit. Check to see if the broker you’re considering offers paper trading (virtual trading on a platform that mimics the real deal) or contact customer service to see if they will set you up with a demo account. As for brokers discussed in this review, Ally Invest’s browser-based platform is intuitive and easy to customize. And both Charles Schwab and TD Ameritrade have multiple platforms customers can use to start learning the ropes, then graduate to more sophisticated tools and trades if desired. Best options trading brokers: summary. Updated June 30, 2017. Disclaimer: NerdWallet has entered into referral and advertising arrangements with certain broker-dealers under which we receive compensation (in the form of flat fees per qualifying action) when you click on links to our partner broker-dealers andor submit an application or get approved for a brokerage account.

At times, we may receive incentives (such as an increase in the flat fee) depending on how many users click on links to the broker-dealer and complete a qualifying action.