TMFC Strangle Strategy
TMFC (Motley Fool 100 Index ETF), in the Financial Services sector, (Asset Management industry), listed on CBOE.
Under normal circumstances, at least 80% of the fund's total assets (exclusive of any collateral held from securities lending) will be invested in the component securities of the index. The index was established by TMF in 2017 and is a proprietary, rules-based index designed to track the performance of the 100 largest, most liquid U.S. companies that have been recommended by TMF’s analysts and newsletters. The fund is non-diversified.
TMFC (Motley Fool 100 Index ETF) trades in the Financial Services sector, specifically Asset Management, with a market capitalization of approximately $2.01B, a beta of 1.10 versus the broader market, a 52-week range of 59.5-77.575, average daily share volume of 102K, a public-listing history dating back to 2018. These structural characteristics shape how TMFC etf options price implied volatility around earnings windows, capital events, and macro-driven sector rotations.
A beta of 1.10 places TMFC roughly in line with broader market moves, so the strategy payoff and realized volatility track the index-equivalent baseline. TMFC pays a dividend, which adjusts put-call parity and shifts the ex-dividend pricing across the listed chain.
What is a strangle on TMFC?
A long strangle buys an OTM call and an OTM put at offset strikes, cheaper than a straddle but requiring a larger underlying move to profit since both wings start out-of-the-money.
Current TMFC snapshot
As of May 15, 2026, spot at $77.30, ATM IV 22.30%, IV rank 35.53%, expected move 6.39%. The strangle on TMFC below is built from the same end-of-day chain, with strikes snapped to listed contracts and premiums pulled from the bid/ask midpoint at a 154-day expiry.
Why this strangle structure on TMFC specifically: TMFC IV at 22.30% is mid-range versus its 1-year history, so strategy selection should anchor more to the directional thesis than to the IV regime, with a market-implied 1-standard-deviation move of approximately 6.39% (roughly $4.94 on the underlying). The 154-day window matched to the front-month expiry keeps theta exposure bounded while still capturing the post-snapshot move; longer-dated TMFC expiries trade a higher absolute premium for lower per-day decay. Position sizing on TMFC should anchor to the underlying notional of $77.30 per share and to the trader's directional view on TMFC etf.
TMFC strangle setup
The TMFC strangle below is built from the end-of-day chain, with each option leg priced at the bid/ask midpoint of its listed strike. With TMFC near $77.30, the first option leg uses a $81.00 strike; additional legs (when the strategy has them) anchor to spot-relative offsets. Premiums come from the bid/ask midpoint on the listed TMFC chain at a 154-day expiry; the cross-strike IV skew is reflected directly in the per-leg values rather than approximated. Quantity sizing assumes one contract per option leg (or 100 TMFC shares for the stock leg in covered calls and collars).
| Action | Type | Strike / Basis | Premium (est) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Buy 1 | Call | $81.00 | $3.50 |
| Buy 1 | Put | $73.00 | $2.70 |
TMFC strangle risk and reward
- Net Premium / Debit
- -$620.00
- Max Profit (per contract)
- Unbounded
- Max Loss (per contract)
- -$620.00
- Breakeven(s)
- $66.80, $87.20
- Risk / Reward Ratio
- Unbounded
Upside max profit is unbounded; downside max profit is bounded at the put strike minus the combined debit (reached at zero). Max loss equals the combined debit times 100 (reached anywhere between the two OTM strikes). Two breakevens at call-strike plus debit and put-strike minus debit.
TMFC strangle payoff curve
Modeled P&L at expiration across a range of underlying prices for the strangle on TMFC. Each row is one sampled price point from the computed payoff curve; the full curve uses 200 price points internally before being summarized into 10 rows here.
| Underlying Price | % From Spot | P&L at Expiration |
|---|---|---|
| $0.01 | -100.0% | +$6,679.00 |
| $17.10 | -77.9% | +$4,969.96 |
| $34.19 | -55.8% | +$3,260.93 |
| $51.28 | -33.7% | +$1,551.89 |
| $68.37 | -11.6% | -$157.14 |
| $85.46 | +10.6% | -$173.82 |
| $102.55 | +32.7% | +$1,535.21 |
| $119.64 | +54.8% | +$3,244.25 |
| $136.73 | +76.9% | +$4,953.28 |
| $153.82 | +99.0% | +$6,662.32 |
When traders use strangle on TMFC
Strangles on TMFC are the cheaper cousin of the straddle - traders use them when they want a large directional move but are willing to give up the inner-strike sensitivity in exchange for a lower up-front debit on the TMFC chain.
TMFC thesis for this strangle
The market-implied 1-standard-deviation range for TMFC extends from approximately $72.36 on the downside to $82.24 on the upside. A TMFC long strangle is the OTM cousin of the straddle: lower up-front cost but the underlying has to travel further past either OTM strike before the position turns profitable at expiration. Current TMFC IV rank near 35.53% is mid-range against its 1-year distribution, so the IV signal is neutral; the strangle thesis on TMFC should anchor more to the directional view and the expected-move geometry. As a Financial Services name, TMFC options can move on sector-level news flow (peer earnings, regulatory updates, industry-specific macro data) in addition to TMFC-specific events.
TMFC strangle positions are structurally neutral / high-volatility (long premium, OTM); the modeled P&L assumes European-style exercise at expiration and ignores early assignment, transaction costs, dividends paid before expiry on the stock leg (when present), and the bid-ask spread on the listed chain. TMFC positions also carry Financial Services sector concentration risk; news flow inside the sector (peer earnings, regulatory shifts, supply-chain headlines) can move TMFC alongside the broader basket even when TMFC-specific fundamentals are unchanged. Always rebuild the position from current TMFC chain quotes before placing a trade.
Frequently asked questions
- What is a strangle on TMFC?
- A strangle on TMFC is the strangle strategy applied to TMFC (etf). The strategy is structurally neutral / high-volatility (long premium, OTM): A long strangle buys an OTM call and an OTM put at offset strikes, cheaper than a straddle but requiring a larger underlying move to profit since both wings start out-of-the-money. With TMFC etf trading near $77.30, the strikes shown on this page are snapped to the nearest listed TMFC chain strike and the premiums come straight from the end-of-day bid/ask midpoint.
- How are TMFC strangle max profit and max loss calculated?
- Upside max profit is unbounded; downside max profit is bounded at the put strike minus the combined debit (reached at zero). Max loss equals the combined debit times 100 (reached anywhere between the two OTM strikes). Two breakevens at call-strike plus debit and put-strike minus debit. For the TMFC strangle priced from the end-of-day chain at a 30-day expiry (ATM IV 22.30%), the computed maximum profit is unbounded per contract and the computed maximum loss is -$620.00 per contract. Live intraday quotes will differ as the chain moves through the trading session.
- What is the breakeven for a TMFC strangle?
- The breakeven for the TMFC strangle priced on this page is roughly $66.80 and $87.20 at expiration, derived from end-of-day chain premiums. Breakeven is the underlying price at which the strategy's P&L crosses zero ignoring transaction costs and assignment risk. The current TMFC market-implied 1-standard-deviation expected move is approximately 6.39%; if the move sits well outside the breakeven distance, the structure's risk-reward becomes correspondingly tighter.
- When should you consider a strangle on TMFC?
- Strangles on TMFC are the cheaper cousin of the straddle - traders use them when they want a large directional move but are willing to give up the inner-strike sensitivity in exchange for a lower up-front debit on the TMFC chain.
- How does current TMFC implied volatility affect this strangle?
- TMFC ATM IV is at 22.30% with IV rank near 35.53%, which is mid-range against its 1-year history. Strategy selection depends more on directional thesis and expected move than on a strong IV signal.