Derivatives · Portfolio Research

LEAPS as stock substitutes, treated as an empirical question.

Can long/short equity keep its risk profile when the stock legs are replaced with LEAPS? A full daily-accounting backtest with validation gates, frictions, and no-lookahead audits. Public data only.

Substitution, not approximation.

  • Deep in-the-money LEAPS promise stock-like exposure with built-in leverage; the backtest asks what that actually costs in tracking, friction, and tail behavior.
  • The engine reprices every position daily: early exercise, put-parity reopens, expiry settlement, and ruin/write-off reconciliation are explicit events, not approximations.
  • Dollar frictions are split-scaled, and momentum signals are audited for dollar-neutrality and look-ahead bias via signal-shift checks.

Gated pipeline, staged evidence.

  • Download → pricing validation (gates V1–V4) → single-instrument lanes → V0–V3 long/short portfolios → sensitivity grid → assembled report.
  • V1–V4 validation gates reject data before it can contaminate the engine: bad ticks, stale quotes, and mispriced rolls fail loudly.
  • Offline deterministic tests: daily NAV reconciliation for every variant, exercise and settlement mechanics, and synthetic-engine accounting on known inputs.

Options as portfolio construction inputs.

  • Most factor research assumes frictionless stock legs; this measures what changes when leverage and asymmetry come from contracts rather than borrowing.
  • The sensitivity grid maps results across moneyness, tenor, and rebalancing choices: a substitution claim reported over the full grid, not a single point.
  • Foundation work for the Factor Investing with Options line: the same discipline, applied to full factor portfolios.