Derivatives Are Evil And Must Be Destroyed

Recently I had the opportunity to meet with one of the most excitable options traders and educators in Las Vegas...his name is Mark Longo and he's the founder and main options guy at I was able to spend about 45 minutes just chatting with him about what's going on in the options world, what's new with his site, and everything he said about options made perfect sense. Almost as if he actually knew what he was talking about! Come to find out later in the conversation he knew what he was talking about, and he's an authority on options...egg on my face! is a great FREE resource for all things options and with Mark at the helm you won't be led astray. Please enjoy the article (as I read it twice), comment below, and visit today!


We are seeing a familiar refrain in the financial world these days. Regulators, politicians and even the financial media are jumping back aboard the "derivatives are evil" bandwagon.

Derivatives are a popular scapegoat for the ills of modern society. When commodity prices surged last year, the finger of blame immediately pointed at rampant speculation in the derivatives markets (see It's Time To Ban CEOs & Senators From The Derivatives Markets and The Rage Against Derivatives Speculators Is Unfounded for more information).

But the true backlash came later when the financial crisis paralyzed the global economy. Not surprisingly, the outrage once again turned toward derivatives. But this time the response was different. It wasn't isolated to a handful of grandstanding politicians and CEOs arguing about inflated commodity prices. It poured in from all segments of the marketplace as institution after institution collapsed under the weight of their own greed.

With oversight in shambles and risk management nonexistent, investors focused their frustration on the instruments that wreaked so much havoc on their portfolios. As their 401Ks melted away, even the investing public began howling for the blood of derivatives traders.

In the past, the attacks focused primarily on the derivatives sector as a whole. But this time the ire was directed at a lesser-known segment of the derivatives world - credit default swaps. What had been an arcane and little-known product was suddenly transformed into a synonym for corporate greed and recklessness. The OTC marketplace quickly found itself in the same regulatory crosshairs that had long targeted its listed counterparts.

Exposing The Cracks In The Dam
When a derivatives backlash erupts, it is typically short-lived. No matter what triggers the backlash (e.g., the Barings implosion, the backdating wave, the Crash of 1987, etc) another scandal inevitably steals the headlines and gives the derivatives market a welcome reprieve.

But the financial crisis was no mere blip on the radar. Its impact is still reverberating throughout all sectors of the financial world. Although the collapse of AIG and other institutions cast an unwelcome spotlight on the derivatives market, the outcome wasn't entirely negative. The attention awakened regulators, politicians and investors to one inescapable fact:
•    The U.S. Derivatives Market Is Fundamentally Broken

An Antiquated System
Attempting to explain the inner workings of the U.S. derivatives market is akin to trying to explain a complicated mosaic from only a few feet away. The closer you get, the less sense it makes. The regulatory structure of the U.S. derivatives market stems from legislation that was written when our grandparents were in diapers. The enduring legacy of this antiquated legislation is an oversight system that is woefully inadequate for today's complicated marketplace.

One obvious example of this inadequacy is the great schism that still divides the U.S. derivatives market. Options traders currently languish under the absentee rule of the SEC. At the same time, futures traders enjoy the comparatively streamlined management of the CFTC. In an era when most modern economies have unified their regulatory regimes to foster global competition, the U.S. markets are hamstrung with a bifurcated regulatory scheme from the last century.

Regulator vs. Regulator
Although it has responsibility for most equity and index options, the primary regulatory mandate of the SEC is the securities market. As we have all witnessed in recent months, this bloated mandate is well beyond the scope of the SEC's limited staff and budget. Expecting such an overstretched bureaucracy to also regulate the intricate world of equity and index options is beyond the point of reason.

Options traders have complained about the failings of the SEC for decades. They argue that the options market is too critical, and too complicated, for its oversight to be a mere afterthought. Many believe that the lack of a specialized options/derivatives regulator has hampered innovation and crippled competition in the marketplace. As a result, more than few options traders have cast longing glances toward the futures pits.

When compared to the SEC, the CFTC is a relatively efficient and streamlined organization. They have a straightforward mandate and are responsible for a single marketplace. While options traders are envious of this simplicity, futures traders are understandably protective of their autonomy within the derivatives world. The last thing they want is to be brought under the control of a bloated bureaucracy like the SEC. Thus the great schism persists.

Falling Through The Cracks
This bifurcated regulatory regime has lead to a host of problems. We've seen a number of promising products (e.g., single stock futures, listed credit derivatives, etc) simply fall through the cracks or end up crippled by the demands of dual regulation.

The problems become even worse when the oversight function falls victim to our antiquated system. The world witnessed this firsthand when AIG imploded under the weight of poor derivatives risk management. AIG fell into the same premium writing trap that destroyed Barings PLC and caused many other infamous derivatives disasters. The steady stream of income generated by repeatedly selling derivatives contracts (in this case credit default contracts) quickly overcame any sense of proper risk management.

In a perfect world, AIG would never have been allowed to risk so much on one roll of the dice. But the critical function of oversight fell through the cracks of the great schism, this time with disastrous consequences.

Healing The Schism...?
The current regulatory proposals on the table attempt to address the numerous problems plaguing the U.S. derivatives market. However, many feel that these proposals do not go far enough. The administration's current proposal continues to split derivatives oversight between the SEC and the CFTC, despite numerous calls to merge the two entities into a single derivatives regulator (see the International Securities Exchange's Regulatory Reform Proposal for one example of how the SEC & CFTC could be merged).

Tackling The OTC Beast
Under the current proposal, the bifurcated regulatory system would be expanded to include additional enforcement powers for the Federal Reserve to assist in the regulation of OTC derivatives, particularly credit default swaps.

The administration's proposal would also force all "standardized" OTC derivatives volume onto exchanges and into clearing houses. "Specialized" bilateral contracts would remain off exchange, but they would incur significant financial costs for this privilege.

While this proposal attempts to eliminate the counterparty risk frequently associated with OTC contracts, the efficacy of these solutions is highly debatable. For example, the definition of "standardized" OTC contracts is intentionally left vague in the current proposal. The SEC & CFTC would have an additional six months after the enactment of the proposal to clarify the definition of  a "standardized' contract. With the letter of the law so unclear, and the financial ramifications so steep, regulators can expect an onslaught of regulatory arbitrage (a.k.a, gaming) to exploit the differences between "standardized" and "specialized" contracts.

It is also unclear whether forcing centralized clearing on the OTC market is even viable. While single name CDS contracts are relatively simple to aggregate and clear, many other OTC contracts do not easily fit into the current clearing models. Will clearing houses be forced to accept risky contracts that could jeopardize their traditional members? If so, will they enforce draconian margin requirements that would render much of the OTC market cost prohibitive? While many derivatives opponents would cheer such a prospect, destroying a vibrant source of risk management solely for the sake of rushed reform is hardly in the best interest of the marketplace.

The Future?
With competing regulatory proposals on the table, there is precious little certainty in the derivatives world right now. Unfortunately, this uncertainty has allowed more than a few critics to fall back on the old "derivatives are evil" refrain that has haunted this marketplace since its inception.

There are still a surprising number of opponents who deride the natural function that speculation plays in the derivatives market. Still others believe that certain products should be abolished altogether, despite their primary function as risk management tools. Even George Soros, himself no stranger to the world of derivatives, infamously referred to credit default swaps in the following terms:
•    "It's like buying life insurance on someone else's life and owning a license to kill."
With so much hyperbole and emotion at play, accomplishing actual reform in the derivatives market is a difficult task. It is encouraging that the administration is looking to repair this broken marketplace rather than destroy it in the name of a quick public relations coup.

Regardless of your views on derivatives, one thing is apparent to all sides in this debate. The derivatives market of tomorrow is likely to be a very different place from the one we know today.

Mark S. Longo

Mark S. Longo is an options trader and former member of the Chicago Board Options Exchange. Over the years, his articles on options and derivatives have appeared in a wide variety of domestic and international publications. He is currently the Founder of

8 thoughts on “Derivatives Are Evil And Must Be Destroyed

  1. If left uncheck, the derivatives will implode in due time and wipe out the whole financial world. The recent financial tsunami is just the tip of an iceberg. It's a ticking time bomb waiting to blow unless it's fuse is cut. However, right now, the authorities seem to be just lengthening the fuse...

    1. Norman, I agree that derivatives are a time bomb but I think that they can only "wipe out the whole financial world" if government tries to bail out the purveyors of these instruments. You say if "left unchecked" they are a problem. Remember anytime a rule or law is written there is someone (many someones) that will always find a way around it. In the current case of this "problem" the bank's lobbyist wrote the rules that congress passed. Just like the ACORN people are writing the current health care laws for their favorite Congressmen and Senators.

      Congress could cut the fuse by telling the derivatives purveyors that they are on there own; but they won't. The only way it will happen would be if "we the people" could get our government back from the special interests and professional congressmen.

  2. be careful what you wish for with regulation, as an example, in Australia it costs AUS $ 45$ to buy an option, 45$ to sell an option and 115$ in settlement fees, that is $205 just to trade! For me it is much cheaper to trade in the US options market at around $35 all up.

    1. Go to an online broker such as Options House and the complete round trip is $9.95; any number of shares, no charge per share.

    2. maxe, I forgot to mention that I agree regulation just increases taxes and the cost of doing business. Regulations never protect the public they just limit what you can sue the perpetrator for. What is the SEC doing for Bernie's investors?

  3. Reforming the "derivitives market" is an effort in futility if not an impossible task and we should not waste tax dollars trying to do so. The free market is the only thing that is intelligent enough to control such a gangly beast. Trading derivatives is a choice not a requirement. IE let the "buyer beware". Greedy people should not be protected, and especially not with tax dollars. Perhaps if it were required to trade derivatives to survive then "maybe" the government could try to control it, but it still would not be successful. But lest we forget that all government agencies are setup to protect the purveyors and not the public. The SEC is set up to protect the brokers from the public therefore they can never protect the public.

    I couldn't tell if you were talking about all derivatives or just the current ones that have caused the problems. As a newbie I define derivatives as all non-equity instruments IE stock options, forex etc. I am in that group that believes "all derivatives are evil" even though that is all I trade (stock options and forex). I also believe that there is absolutely no way that any government can control nor should they attempt to control this market. At the same time the government should not bailout any entity that has lost money trading derivatives (AIG, GS etc.) There is no such thing as a company that is "too big to fail"

Comments are closed.