Monthly Call Buying Investigation

Question: Was buying one 25% OTM TSLA call each month profitable by itself?

This deliberately ignores portfolio sizing, margin, and reinvestment. Each cycle buys exactly one listed call from the real historical chain, choosing the strike nearest 125% of TSLA close, holds it to expiry, and records terminal payoff minus premium paid.

Question: Does the 10% NAV options-only call strategy work versus TSLA hold, and is the result robust across calendar timing?

This section restarts every line at $100,000 on 2019-01-03 and compares TSLA hold, four monthly week-of-month 10% NAV call rolls, and the weekly 2.5% NAV stagger. Testing the monthly rule across four timing slots answers whether one entry week got unusually lucky. Monthly buckets choose the first available expiry in the selected Monday-Sunday calendar week of the target month. Contract count is floored to stay at or below the target budget, with no margin and no negative cash.

Question: How much of the weekly call strategy depends on the best historical call winners?

This is an oracle stress test, not a tradable rule. It first ranks the baseline weekly call entries by return on premium, then re-runs the strategy from the beginning while skipping the best 1%, 5%, 10%, and 20% of those historical ROI winners. Skipped entries keep cash in the account, and every later entry sizes from the lower path-aware NAV.

Question: Does the weekly call strategy work across many different start dates, or mostly because the full-window test includes a few great bursts?

This section restarts both strategies at $100,000 inside each window. The call strategy uses the same staggered weekly 2.5% NAV / roughly 30D / 25% OTM rule, and the comparison line buys and holds TSLA from the same first valid date. Calendar years answer the lived question of how often the strategy had a good year; curated periods answer which market regimes it likes or hates.

Question: How does the staggered weekly call strategy change when the monthly spend target is 20%, 15%, 10%, or 5% of NAV?

Each line starts at $100,000 on 2019-01-02. The monthly budget is split across four weekly entries, so the weekly spend targets are 5.00%, 3.75%, 2.50%, and 1.25% of current marked NAV. The 10% monthly row is the same 2.50% weekly rule used in the existing staggered weekly section.

Question: Should the weekly 2.5% call buy be sized from total marked NAV, or only from cash?

Why this test matters: NAV-based sizing can pyramid unrealized option gains during sharp TSLA rallies, causing larger buys near temporarily inflated NAV. If TSLA then reverses, both the appreciated existing options and the larger new buys can disappear. Cash-based sizing tests whether limiting buys to realized cash produces a better risk/return tradeoff.

Each option line starts at $100,000 on 2019-01-02 and buys weekly calls using the same real historical option mids, roughly 30D expiries, and the listed call strike nearest 125% of TSLA close. The cash-based line sizes after same-day expiries/payoffs settle, so realized option payoffs can fund the next buy but open option marks cannot.