Ivy × Shift
Covered Calls on Leveraged RWA Vaults
A brand new animal
Together we’re not just listing assets — we’re building a revenue stream that doesn’t exist anywhere else, for both Shift and its traders:
- Stock holders can’t properly monetise vol
- Traders have no access to options on SpaceX
Three reasons this is interesting for Shift right now:
SpaceX just IPO’d. No one has ever quoted a SpaceX option. We want to be first. So do you.
Leveraged ETFs == legit crypto-level vol TSLL ~97% ATM IV. NVDL ~76%. You can monetise DeFi L2 vol on TradFi L1.
New use case for Shift. The best structured yield in TradFi, but on-chain.
Call agenda
- Intro: Common testnet
- Define Shift’s appetite together: APR floor, tenor window, moneyness, which vaults to launch first
- Pilot $100k–$200k notional to test market appetite
- Co-market: Shift community + Symm ecosystem, then open to Ivy’s MM network
- Scale to TradFi communities – define Shifts size capacity (internal vs community)
Vol in context
| Asset | ATM IV 30d | Reference point |
|---|---|---|
| TSLA | ~42% | High-vol single name |
| ETH | ~53% | Crypto benchmark |
| NVDL (2× NVDA) | ~76% | Leveraged TradFi |
| TSLL (2× TSLA) | ~97% | Crypto on TradFi rails |
| SPCX | ~148% | IPO action |
How we run it on v0
- You set the floor: minimum APR, strike distance, maximum maturity
- Ivy streams calls, traders buy, you get premium upfront. With full transparency on strike, tenor, IV, and net payout.
- Settlement. Netted out physical: \(1-\frac{K}{S}\) fraction of the collateral is paid out to in-the-money call buyers for settlement
To be discussed: settlement (“orcale”) price, eg for SPCX:
- SPCX close price
- NAV/redemption SPCX tokenized stock price (s.t. existing methodology and dispute resolution)
- Leveraged tokens, tbd too
Vaults
Format: IV | net APR (after 20% Ivy fee) | E[assigns/yr]. 30-day tenor.
Each vault runs three conviction tiers. Pick your lane:
| Tier | Strike | Profile |
|---|---|---|
| Conservative | 20% OTM | Low touch risk — yield with headroom |
| Moderate | 10% OTM | Balanced — default ? |
| Aggressive | 5% OTM | Touch premium |
On all tables:
- Implied vol is model-estimate, market appetite will need to be tested
- E[assigns/yr] = risk-neutral p(ITM) × (365/days): how many times a year an LP rolling continuously should expect to touch the strike.
- 20% Ivy fee taken from gross premium – rolled out in figures.
- 30 days indicative. Ivy will pick inside pre-defined range.
SPCX — SpaceX covered calls
*IV ~150% (30d)
| Tier | OTM | IV | Net APR | E[assigns/yr] |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conservative | 20% | 152% | 102% | 3.2× |
| Moderate | 10% | 150% | 130% | 4.0× |
| Aggressive | 5% | 149% | 146% | 4.5× |
TSLA — Tesla covered calls
ATM IV ~42%
| Tier | OTM | IV | Net APR | E[assigns/yr] |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conservative | 20% | 47% | 6% | 0.9× |
| Moderate | 10% | 44% | 16% | 2.5× |
| Aggressive | 5% | 43% | 28% | 3.9× |
- Aggressive at 28% beats most hedge funds.
NVDA — NVIDIA covered calls
ATM IV ~37%
| Tier | OTM | IV | Net APR | E[assigns/yr] |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conservative | 20% | 41% | 3% | 0.6× |
| Moderate | 10% | 37% | 11% | 2.1× |
| Aggressive | 5% | 37% | 22% | 3.7× |
TSLL — 2× leveraged TSLA covered calls
ATM IV ~97%
| Tier | OTM | IV | Net APR | E[assigns/yr] |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conservative | 20% | 95% | 44% | 2.6× |
| Moderate | 10% | 92% | 66% | 3.8× |
| Aggressive | 5% | 95% | 85% | 4.6× |
TSLA->TSLL: yield goes from 18% → 66% at the same 10% OTM strike for the 2x wrapper. To be confirmed with MM appetite
NVDL — 2× leveraged NVDA covered calls
ATM IV ~76%
| Tier | OTM | IV | Net APR | E[assigns/yr] |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conservative | 20% | 77% | 27% | 2.1× |
| Moderate | 10% | 75% | 47% | 3.5× |
| Aggressive | 5% | 76% | 65% | 4.5× |