Iron Condor Strategy: Defined Risk Option Selling Explained

An iron condor sells an out-of-the-money call and put, and buys a further out-of-the-money call and put as protection. It expresses the same view as a short strangle — that the index stays in a range — but with a capped maximum loss instead of an open-ended one.

The four legs

Leg	Action	Strike	Purpose
1	Sell 1 put (PE)	Below the index	Collects premium
2	Buy 1 put (PE)	Further below	Caps the downside loss
3	Sell 1 call (CE)	Above the index	Collects premium
4	Buy 1 call (CE)	Further above	Caps the upside loss

All four share an expiry. Legs 1 and 2 form a put spread; legs 3 and 4 form a call spread. The condor is simply both spreads held together, which is why it is sometimes described as selling a strangle and buying a wider one.

The arithmetic

This is one of the few structures where every number is exact, so it is worth stating precisely.

Let P be the net premium received — the two premiums collected minus the two paid. Let W be the width of the wider spread, measured in points between the sold strike and the bought strike on that side.

Quantity	Formula
Max profit	P, earned anywhere between the two sold strikes
Max loss	W − P
Upside breakeven	Sold call strike + P
Downside breakeven	Sold put strike − P
Risk-reward	(W − P) risked to make P

Why the widths are usually equal

Both spreads are usually set to the same width so that only one side can be fully breached. If the widths differ, the max loss is governed by the wider one, which is why W above is the wider spread rather than either.

A worked example

Illustrative figures, chosen to show the arithmetic rather than to represent current prices.

The index is at 24,000. You sell the 24,300 call and buy the 24,500 call. You sell the 23,700 put and buy the 23,500 put. Both spreads are 200 points wide.

Leg	Action	Premium
Sell 24,300 call	Received	+45
Buy 24,500 call	Paid	−18
Sell 23,700 put	Received	+40
Buy 23,500 put	Paid	−15
Net premium (P)		+52

With a spread width (W) of 200 and net premium of 52: maximum profit is 52 points anywhere between 23,700 and 24,300. Maximum loss is 200 − 52 = 148 points. Breakevens are 24,352 on the upside and 23,648 on the downside.

That arithmetic is why expectancy matters more than win rate on condors, and why the costs of eight legs per round trip are not a detail.

Why the margin is lower

A short strangle is two naked short options and the exchange risk model sizes margin against an open-ended loss. An iron condor's loss is capped by construction, and the margin reflects that.

This is the practical reason many traders move from strangles to condors: the same range-bound view, materially less capital blocked, and a known worst case.

Assembly risk, which is specific to four-leg structures

Four legs means four orders. Several things can go differently from the plan, and the consequences are not symmetric.

What fills	What you are holding	Severity
All four	The condor you designed	None
Sold legs only	A short strangle with uncapped risk	Serious
Bought legs only	A long strangle — paid premium, limited risk	Mild, but not your strategy
One spread complete, other side partial	A naked short on one side	Serious

The second row is the one to design against. A condor whose protective legs failed to fill is not a conservative strategy that went slightly wrong — it is a short strangle you did not intend to be holding, with the open-ended risk you specifically chose to avoid.

How to defend against it

Two defences. First, configure the square-off-all-legs rule so the platform closes the rest when a leg fails. Second, keep margin headroom for the naked intermediate state, because the peak requirement during assembly can exceed the finished position.

When a condor fits and when it does not

It fits when

You want a range-bound view with a known worst case.
You cannot or will not fund the margin for naked short options.
You want to hold across a period you cannot monitor closely.
The account is small enough that one uncapped loss would be serious.

It fits badly when

Liquidity at the outer strikes is thin — four legs means four spreads crossed each way, and the protection costs more than it is worth if the strikes barely trade.
The premium is small relative to the width, making the risk-reward unattractive before costs.
You are trading very short intraday windows, where the extra legs add execution cost for protection you may not need.

Managing a breached side

When the index moves through one of the sold strikes, the decisions are more constrained than on an uncapped structure — which is the point of defined risk.

Response	What it achieves	What it costs
Do nothing	The loss is already capped at W − P	You accept the maximum loss if it stays breached
Close the breached spread	Stops further loss on that side	Realises it, and leaves the other spread open
Close everything	Ends the trade	Gives up the premium still being earned on the untouched side
Roll the breached side further out	Buys room	Costs premium, and extends the risk window

The first row is a genuine option here in a way it is not on a strangle. Because the loss is capped, holding a breached condor to expiry has a known worst case — which means doing nothing is a decision rather than an abdication.

The one response to avoid

What you should not do is close only the protective leg on the breached side. That removes the cap and converts the position into a naked short at the worst possible moment.

Choosing the strikes

Two decisions: where to place the sold strikes, and how wide to make the spreads.

Sold strikes set the profitable range and the premium. Further out means a wider range, a higher win rate and less premium. Premium-based selection adapts this to volatility automatically, where a fixed offset does not.

Spread width sets the maximum loss. Wider spreads mean more premium retained — the protection is cheaper further out — but a larger worst case. Narrower spreads cap the loss tightly at the cost of giving away more premium to the bought legs.

Two dials, set separately

A useful way to think about it: the sold strikes decide how often you win, and the width decides how much a loss costs. Those are separate dials and it is worth setting them deliberately rather than by habit.

Automating it

Create four legs

Sell put, buy put further out, sell call, buy call further out — all the same expiry.

Set strike rules, not numbers

Premium-based or offset-based for the sold legs; a fixed offset from the sold strike for the bought ones keeps the width consistent.

Set entry and exit times

An exit time before the close removes overnight gap risk.

Set the square-off-all-legs rule

Essential here. A partially filled condor can be a naked short.

Set the strategy-wide max loss

Even though loss is capped by construction, this protects against the assembly failure case.

Backtest and check the worst day

Not the worst month. A defined-risk structure is characterised by how often it hits that cap.

All of this is configured in the Option Strategy Builder without code.

Reading a condor backtest

Condors produce a characteristic report shape: a high win rate, small consistent gains, and occasional losses that are a multiple of a typical win.

What is the win rate, and what is the average loss as a multiple of the average win?
How many times did the strategy hit the maximum loss?
What is the longest losing streak, and would you have kept going?
Does the test period contain a sharp move, or only quiet conditions?
After costs on eight legs per round trip, is the expectancy still positive?

That last question eliminates more condor strategies than any other. Reading the report from the risk end makes it harder to be charmed by the win rate.

The short version

Four legs: sell a strangle, buy a wider one as protection
Max profit is the net premium; max loss is the spread width minus that premium
You risk a multiple of the premium to earn it — the high win rate is structural
Margin is lower than a strangle because the loss is capped
A partially filled condor can be a naked short — set the square-off-all rule

If you want the same defined-risk idea with the sold strikes together rather than apart, an iron butterfly collects more premium over a narrower range.

Frequently asked questions

Typically you risk several times the premium to earn it — the spread width minus the premium, against the premium. The high win rate is the structure compensating for that ratio, not an edge on top of it.

Many traders do, because the last portion of the premium takes the longest to earn and carries the same risk throughout. Whether it suits you is a question to settle in backtesting rather than in the moment.

Close the protective leg on that side. It removes the cap and turns a defined-risk position into a naked short exactly when the index has shown it can move.

Yes, built separately for each. Liquidity at the outer strikes differs between them, and that matters more for a four-leg structure than for a two-leg one.

The width of the wider spread minus the net premium received. Unlike a strangle, it is capped by construction.

The net premium received, earned anywhere between the two sold strikes. It is a range rather than a single point.

Because the bought legs cap the loss, so the exchange risk model sizes margin against a known worst case rather than an open-ended one.

It is defined risk, which is not the same thing. You typically risk several times the premium to earn it, so the high win rate comes with losses that are a multiple of a typical gain.

You are holding a short strangle with uncapped risk — the exact thing the structure was meant to avoid. Set the square-off-all-legs rule so this does not persist.

Wider spreads keep more premium but raise the maximum loss. Narrower spreads cap the loss tightly but give away more premium. Set it deliberately against the loss you would accept.

Yes. Four legs means brokerage, exchange charges and spread on each, on entry and exit. That is eight sets of costs per round trip, which can consume a thin edge entirely.

Further out widens the range and raises the win rate while collecting less. Premium-based selection adapts this to volatility, which a fixed offset does not.

You can, though the execution cost of four legs is harder to justify over a short window. Condors are more commonly held across a longer period where the protection earns its cost.

Start with a free 3-day trial

Build a strategy, backtest it and run it on paper — no broker, no IP and no money needed to try it.

Create a free account

All articles More in Option Strategies