Despite claiming that "options on futures" are very different from "options on stocks", this book delivers very little added value over and above any decent book about trading options on stocks.
In their introduction, the Authors start strong: (quote) "Many books have been written about options on futures, unfortunately we believe that many of them are either contradictory or just a meandering compilation of exchange-generated research and material. In our opinion, much of the available literature leaves you even more confused than you were before you opened the book. With this book we hope that we have taken a step toward changing what has been the norm in this genre.
The biggest mistake that some authors make is to apply stock option theory to options on futures. It is a misguided perception to believe that an “option is an option.” Although they are spelled the same, they aren’t comparable. The nature of the underlying vehicle differs greatly, causing the options to take on completely different characteristics. After all, everybody agrees that trading stocks is different from trading futures, so why would anybody assume that trading options on stocks is synonymous with trading options on futures? It is our observation that authors of such material may simply be looking to capitalize on book and course sales through the recycling of stock option theory."
Ok so that's a strong start. How dare those hacks just re-package their tired old stock option stuff and put a bit of a "futures sauce" over it and sell it as something useful?!
But if you read on, this is exactly what the current book seems to be doing as well. After a brief, even cursory, discussion about the differences between stocks and futures, the book follows the same old familiar option strategies explanation of any middling run-of-the-mill stock options trading book - only this time with price action charts taken from futures & their options, instead of stocks and their options. How ironic.
The notable differences between options on stock and options on futures are all linked to the differences between the underlying stocks and futures. The option contracts themselves work just the same from a trading point of view. There is a discussion to be had on the proper valuation method for options on futures vs. for options on stock, but this discussion is not had in this book.
Some statements struck me as odd: (quote) "[...] an option on a stock provides traders with a leveraged trading vehicle; an option on a futures contract provides leverage to an already leveraged vehicle. As you can imagine, the combination of the two can be magnificent (if you are on the right side of the trade of course). Unfortunately, leverage is a double-edged sword and can work against the trader just as it works for them at times. [...] Thus, an option on a futures contract with similar positioning and circumstances as an option on a stock will likely be comparatively more expensive. Note that this is based on our personal familiarity and interpretation and would be difficult to prove mathematically. This is because we are, in essence, trying to compare apples to oranges. In fact, many out there may not agree with our conclusions, but you are free to form your own opinion." Indeed. The reason that options on futures tend to be more expensive is because the per unit price volatility of the underlying is amplified by the (larger) amount of units that make up the futures contract. A futures contract concerns multiple units of the underlying, for example 1,000 barrels of oil in a crude oil future, or 5,000 bushels of wheat in a wheat future. So where an option on a stock is priced according to the expected range of price movements of its 100 units of the underlying stock, an option on a crude oil future is priced according to the expected range of price movements of its underlying 1,000 barrels of oil. That, and the fact that commodities typically undergo much larger price swings than most stocks.
Authors are also given to the occasional snide remarks: (quote) "There are only so many new ideas available in the world, so the guys that dream these things up (an attempt at immortality) usually take what is available, change it a little by adding a mathematical formula or some other special flavoring, and then put their name on it. In the 1990s, salesmen were pitching “The Ultimate Oscillator!”; however, since we don’t know anybody who uses it nor do we ever see any reference to it, it apparently didn’t live up to its name."
Now, I am all for sticking it to the Technical Analysis Crowd, even to Larry Williams, but I must caution against doing so in a book where you give ample evidence of your own market numerology ("Slow Stochastic Moving Average") and chartist palmistry ("Fibonacci projection ruler" - because we find the Fibonacci numbers everywhere in nature). Pot & Kettle and all that.
Two stars for this effort by these two "authors of such material [who] may simply be looking to capitalize on book and course sales through the recycling of stock option theory."