From Steady to High-Octane: Poor Man’s Covered Calls at Different Volatility Levels

Poor Man’s Covered Calls: A Capital-Efficient Approach to Monthly Income

If you’ve traded for any length of time, you’ve probably noticed that investors are always chasing the “perfect” income strategy. While no such holy grail exists, selling covered calls, and their lower-cost cousin, the poor man’s covered call, comes as close as anything to a repeatable, probability-driven approach to monthly income.

Today, we’ll focus squarely on the poor man’s covered call (PMCC): how it works, why it’s so capital-efficient, and how to structure it for steady returns. If you’re interested in the traditional covered call side of the equation, that’s a conversation for another day.

What Exactly Is a Poor Man’s Covered Call?

Structurally, a PMCC is a long call diagonal debit spread. In plain English, it’s a way to replicate the payoff profile of a covered call without putting up the full cost of 100 shares. Instead of buying the stock, you buy a deep-in-the-money long-term call option (a LEAPS contract) as a stock substitute, then sell shorter-term calls against it.

The effect? You maintain the core benefits of covered call writing—income from call premium, partial downside cushion, and capped upside—while tying up 65%–85% less capital than the traditional approach. That freed-up capital can be deployed elsewhere, allowing for better diversification and a more efficient portfolio.

Why LEAPS Are the Key

LEAPS (Long-Term Equity Anticipation Securities) are simply options with at least one year until expiration. The long-dated nature of LEAPS keeps time decay (theta) in check, meaning your stock substitute loses value more slowly than a shorter-dated call.

When selecting a LEAPS contract for a PMCC, I target a delta around 0.80, deep enough in the money to behave like stock, but not so deep that extrinsic value disappears completely. This delta sweet spot captures most of the underlying’s price movement while keeping the upfront cost low.

The Selection Process

Before entering a PMCC, I narrow the field with two filters:

1. Implied Volatility (IV) – IV gives us a realistic expectation of potential premium over a 20–45 day window. Higher IV generally means richer premiums, but also greater price swings.

2. Share Price – Even though PMCCs slash the required capital, I still focus on securities priced around $70 to $75 per share to ensure position sizing remains manageable.

Once I’ve chosen the underlying, I match the LEAPS with a short-dated call sale, typically 30–60 days out, with a delta between 0.20 and 0.40. This balance provides a good mix of premium income and probability of profit.

Three Examples Across Different Volatility Levels

Let’s walk through three real-world PMCC setups, low, medium, and high IV, so you can see how the strategy scales.

📚 Low IV (10%–25%): Coca-Cola (KO)

• Underlying: KO at $70.71, IV ~20%, Beta 0.43

• LEAPS: Jan 15, 2027 $60 call, delta 0.79, cost ~$13.20 ($1,320 total), IV 19.3%

• Short Call: Sept $73 call (44 days), delta 0.28, premium $0.59, IV 15.9%

A traditional covered call would tie up $7,071. The PMCC costs $1,320, 81.3% less capital, while generating a 4.5% return on the short call premium over 44 days. In annualized terms, that’s roughly 43.2%, before factoring in gains from the LEAPS if KO rallies.

📚 Medium IV (25%–40%): Nextera Energy (NEE)

• Underlying: NEE at $71.86, IV ~30%, Beta 0.65

• LEAPS: January 15, 2027 $55 call, delta 0.80, cost ~$20.35 ($2,035 total), IV 26.8%

• Short Call: Sept $76 call (44 days), delta 0.28, premium $1.05, IV 27.3%

Capital outlay drops from $7,186 for the stock to $2,035 for the LEAPS, a 71.7% savings. The higher IV produces a slightly higher 5.2% return over 44 days, or about 51.7% annualized.

📚 High IV (40%+): Affirm (AFRM)

• Underlying: AFRM at $76.88, IV ~65%, Beta 3.4

• LEAPS: Jan 15, 2027 $57.50 call, delta 0.80, cost ~$32.20 ($3,220 total), IV 62.8%

• Short Call: Sept $80 call (44 days), delta 0.29, premium $2.70, IV 71.7%

Here, the PMCC replaces a $7,688 stock position with $3,220 in capital, a 58.1% reduction. The short call generates 8.4% in 32 days, or roughly 94% annualized, before any LEAPS appreciation.

🧠 Overview of the Three Trades

You’ve given us three PMCC setups in different implied volatility (IV) environments:

Professional PMCC Perspective - Pros & Cons

Pros

1. Massive Capital Efficiency

   • Instead of tying up $7k–$8k in stock, you’re using $1.3k–$3.2k in LEAPS.

   • That frees capital for other trades and portfolio diversification.

2. Defined Risk on Long Leg

   • LEAPS cap your downside to the cost of the call. You can’t lose more than you paid for the LEAPS, unlike a stock-based covered call.

3. Attractive Annualized Returns

   • Even KO at low IV generates 43% annualized from the short call premium alone.

   • High IV names like AFRM can approach triple-digit annualized yields.

4. Scales Well Across Volatility Regimes

   • PMCCs work in low, medium, and high IV environments, you just adjust expectations and risk.

5. Flexibility

   • You can roll short calls to manage risk, boost yield, or capture additional upside if the underlying trends higher.

Cons

1. IV Sensitivity in High IV Names

   • In AFRM, high IV inflates both long and short option prices.

   • A volatility crush can hurt LEAPS value even if the stock doesn’t move much.

2. Delta Mismatch Risk

   • You’re short a lower delta option (e.g., 0.28) against a higher delta LEAPS (0.80).

   • A strong rally can blow through your short strike quickly, forcing defensive rolls or early assignment.

3. Liquidity Considerations

   • LEAPS aren’t always as liquid as shorter-dated options, so entering/exiting can involve wider bid/ask spreads.

4. Assignment Management

   • Early assignment risk increases in high IV and high dividend stocks (KO has modest dividend risk).

   • You need a plan for rolling before ex-dividend dates in dividend payers.

5. Opportunity Cost in Low IV

   • KO’s yield is respectable, but in a low IV environment the premiums can feel small compared to high IV plays, tempting traders to overreach into riskier names.

What We Can Learn as Options Traders

A. Volatility Dictates Yield - and Risk

• Low IV (KO) - Predictable, steady yield; less whipsaw risk, but premiums are smaller. You’re basically monetizing stability.

• Medium IV (NEE) - Balance between premium income and volatility risk. A sweet spot for many PMCC traders.

• High IV (AFRM) - Big premiums and huge annualized returns, but violent swings can erode LEAPS value quickly.

B. Capital Efficiency is a Double-Edged Sword

• The lower cost of entry means you can hold more positions, but it also means you can overexpose yourself if you don’t size carefully.

• In high IV names, that leverage cuts both ways.

C. LEAPS Delta Matters

• Targeting ~0.80 delta LEAPS keeps behavior close to stock for covered call purposes.

• Go too low and you lose stock-like movement; go too high and you pay more for the LEAPS without a proportionate hedge benefit.

Additional Findings & Observations

1. Annualized Returns Aren’t the Whole Story

   • KO’s ~43% and AFRM’s ~94% look great, but AFRM’s return volatility will be far higher.

   • Smooth, compounding returns in KO/NEE can outperform AFRM over time when adjusted for risk.

2. Beta as a Risk Filter

   • KO’s beta 0.43 = low market correlation, defensive nature.

   • AFRM’s beta 3.4 = highly volatile, moves can be multiples of the market’s daily change.

3. High IV LEAPS Decay Faster in Time Value

   • Even though LEAPS have slow theta, high IV accelerates the dollar decay per day. You need that short call premium to consistently offset it.

4. Dividend Stocks Require Extra Attention

   • KO’s dividend yield isn’t massive, but ex-dividend dates can trigger early call assignment. Planning rolls around those dates is key.

Summary Table - Trader’s Quick Reference

Bottom Line

A professional PMCC trader sees KO as a steady income generator, NEE as the “core portfolio” candidate, and AFRM as a high-volatility, high-maintenance income booster.

The lesson is not to blindly chase the highest annualized yield, it’s to choose the right mix of PMCCs across volatility regimes so you balance steady compounding with selective high-risk, high-reward plays.

These examples make one thing clear: implied volatility is the throttle on your potential income. Low-IV names like KO yield modest but steady returns, while higher-IV stocks like AFRM deliver more premium, alongside more price movement to manage.

I often mix different IV tiers in my portfolio. The goal isn’t chasing the highest number; it’s blending predictable base-hits with higher-octane trades that can juice returns without overexposing the portfolio to volatility spikes.

Poor man’s covered calls let you capture most of the benefits of covered call writing, income, partial downside buffer, disciplined upside, with a fraction of the capital requirement. The freed-up cash can be allocated to other positions, smoothing out returns and improving portfolio resilience.

By pairing sound underlying selection with consistent mechanics, deep ITM LEAPS, short-dated calls in the 0.20–0.40 delta range, you can turn the PMCC into a repeatable monthly income engine. Whether you aim for conservative, medium, or higher-octane setups, the process remains the same: manage probability, control capital risk, and let time decay do the heavy lifting.

Probabilities over predictions,

Andy Crowder

🎯 Ready to Elevate Your Options Trading?
Subscribe to The Option Premium—a free weekly newsletter delivering:
✅ Actionable strategies.
✅ Step-by-step trade breakdowns.
✅ Market insights for all conditions (bullish, bearish, or neutral).

📩 Get smarter, more confident trading insights delivered to your inbox every week.

📺 Follow Me on YouTube:
🎥 Explore in-depth tutorials, trade setups, and exclusive content to sharpen your skills.

📘 Join the conversation on Facebook.