Does streak allow option selling based on underlying

@Streak @Krishnendu suppose in a bullish scenario I want to sell banknifty ATM puts only by checking the underlying banknifty index price and as the trade goes in my favour I need to keep on shifting the puts up every time banknifty goes up 150-170 pts. For selling options only the underlying is useful for me

Is streak advanced enough to do this

Indeed. I have similar thoughts…

Also, Bactesting like this
If certain conditions are met in the underlying, find strike price that has premium around 1% and sell it for nearest expiry that is atleast 15+ days away.

Would make option backtesting interesting and more meaningful.

1 Like

Sure, so you can do the following things in Streak

  1. Sell based on underlying (Symbol function)
  2. Whether trade is in favor or not can be judged manually by the user, Streak will monitor your TP or SL.
  3. If TP SL is hit and you exit your trade, you will again get a trigger based on the condition and this time again it will be on ATM. So if the underlying has moved, the strike that will get selected by Dynamic Contract will change accordingly. The change frequency needs to be Candle for this. Refer (

150-170 point is a relative measure, if you can set the initial level, this too can work.

There is a lot of decision-making involved here which the user needs to do, for example, selecting strike where the premium is around 1%, how would define the logic?

Selection of nearest expiry can be done using Dynamic Contract but when you say 15+ days away, it comes a variable. So setting this condition is not possible as of now.

With Streak you can only test certain kinds of option strategies currently. And am sure, this list will increase with the upcoming features.

1 Like

thanks…thats cool. i’ll check that out

There is a lot of decision-making involved here which the user needs to do, for example, selecting strike where the premium is around 1%, how would define the logic?

I’m assuming full historical option data is available for all dates and strike prices that captures all eod premiums. If yes, this should be programmatically possible I would think.

I know this suggestion is lil tricky.
I like what you guys have currently. No doubts on that :slight_smile:

We are working on providing historical backtesting for NFO(on old expired contracts), so stay tuned for our updates on it on our twitter :slight_smile:


@Streak what is the timeline we are looking at? one week, month or?

Also, while dynamic contract selection is a very good feature, is there an option to design a strategy with dynamic contract which runs based on chart of dynamic contract itself and not the underlying asset… The issue being faced is that underlying asset and the dynamic contract selected meet the entry and exit criteria at different timeframes and hence running a backtest on option vs using dynamic contract selection feature gives two different results…

Cannot discuss a timeline, you can write to [email protected].

You can use the Symbol function for checking condition on Underlying and taking Entry in FnO.

@Krishnendu, What if I would like to check condition of FnO only and not the underlying asset. Right now I select the exact monthly future or the exact strike price option in the entry and exit condition…Is there anyway to check condition on FnO and take position on the same but still be able to design the strategy dynamically so that I dont have to check strike price or monthly option on every change…

Yes, if you just create a condition without the Symbol function and select any strike in the Scrip box, it will check the condition on the FnO instrument itself.

Yes, that is what I do currently but is there anyway for the strike or the weekly contract or the monthly future to be dynamically set so that I dont have to change it every time and also, backtesting every week or every month requires readjustment of strategy everytime

Got it…figured out finally what you were trying to convey…thanks! selecting dynamic contract in scripbox and creating condition without the symbol…