In running some numbers yesterday, I randomly stumbled on an intriguing factoid. The one-day move in the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) doesn't tell us all that much in terms of future stock action. It had a correlation of close to 0 (specifically, 0.0249) relative to one-month forward SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY) returns.

But when I isolated the correlation of the VIX action on the first trading day of the year to one-month SPY returns, it showed about a 0.25 correlation. That is, of course, not high on an absolute basis, but it's high enough to suggest there's some value. And interestingly, it had a positive correlation, meaning that the stronger the VIX on Day 1, the better for the market going forward. That's kind of contradictory to the usual mindset that early January market performance gives you a signal on the whole year. Remember, VIX moves in opposition to the market.

Anyway, I was curious whether there's any sort of seasonality to the usefulness of VIX. That is, do we see higher or lower correlations to future returns based on the calendar month?

I separated into calendar month and looked at the correlation of VIX one-day moves vs. SPY performance one month out. And here's how it looks:

January is actually the third most "correlated" month, after December and November. It's important to note, however, that these are all very low numbers:

Still, you can see a seasonality pattern. One day of VIX doesn't tell us all that much, but it tells us the most from October through January. And it's a contra tell, albeit a very small one. Here's another look, this time it's correlation using VIX vs. its 10-day simple moving average:

Again we see that December and November VIX show the highest correlations, followed by January:

And these numbers are bit higher. Also of note, the one big outlier: September.

Is a September VIX pop "not" a contra tell? Perhaps. But I suspect we're talking a sample size of two here. We had big VIX pops in September 2001 and 2008 that did not presage market lifts a month later. Quite the opposite. Still, I wouldn't fade a September VIX pop so quickly.

What's it all mean? It suggests that on the margins, VIX pops from October to January are the best VIX pops to fade, September is the worst, and the rest of the year we don't learn a whole lot. It's important to emphasize that these observations are on the margins.

Disclaimer: Mr. Warner's opinions expressed above do not necessarily represent the views of Schaeffer's Investment Research.

So North Korea is setting off bombs. Is it time to find some duct tape and jump into the bunkers? After all, nuclear war is likely one of only two things that scare even the toughest of investors.

Fear is a choice. So is bidding up options and prompting overbought alarms in CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) indicators. But for whatever reason, we keep falling just short of setting off the bells. We've looked at VIX vs. its own 10-day simple moving average the last couple days. Bloomberg highlights another indicator. VIX vs. the CBOE 3-Month Volatility Index (VXV).

VXV is VIX methodology, but with a 90-day option. The thinking is that as VIX goes above VXV, it indicates we're overbought. Bloomberg notes this:

"Since the beginning of the bull market, the S&P 500 gained an average 0.46 percent in the three sessions following instances when the ratio reached a value of one. That compares with an advance of 0.2 percent on average in a three-day span since March 2009."

Well, we didn't quite get to 1 on a closing basis this go around, though we did as recently as Dec. 11, 2015. Anyway, the data goes back to July 14, 2006, so we're talking 9.5 years. And it includes a quiet stretch, a violent bear move, then a persistent rally. In other words, we've seen just about everything.

There's very small correlation between the VIX/VXV ratio and forward SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY) returns. Here's a scatter plot of the ratio vs. SPY returns two weeks forward:

Kind of an amorphous blob. The correlation is .08741. For one-month returns, it's 0.03579.

But what about the extremes? Specifically, what if the ratio goes over 1?

It's happened 446 times, so its not terribly uncommon (about 25% of the time). But when we cull out one-month "incidents" (and overlaps), we get it down to 61 times.

And the results are decent. If you go long when the ratio gets over 1 and hold for a month, you gain an average of 1.91%, and a median of 2.59%. That's favorable vs. returns of 0.73%/1.46% over all times.

That's the good news. The bad news is, again, we didn't hit the 1 level yet. In fact, we're not quite a month out from the last signal in December, so it wouldn't have "counted" anyway.

Also, it basically has gotten you long for half of the last decade, so it's not the most refined signal. It does suggest, though, that like basically every other overbought vol indicator, it makes sense to fade fear.

Disclaimer: Mr. Warner's opinions expressed above do not necessarily represent the views of Schaeffer's Investment Research.

I know this will shock you, but the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) has moved to "officially" overbought. And that's probably by any definition of overbought. I use greater than 20% above its 10-day simple moving average. It was about 34% above the trendline, as of Thursday's close, and now also greater than the CBOE 3-Month Volatility Index (VXV).

Generally speaking, it's a good contra tell, though results vary wildly. More on that soon. For now, I wanted to focus again on whether the fact that this is happening early in the year matters.

With one day to go, it's highly likely we will see the biggest percentage surge in VIX for the first week of a year. That's not surprising since Monday was the largest percentage pop for VIX on the first trading day of a year -- and we haven't exactly given up the vol ghost since then. Here's the first-week VIX performance going back to 1994:

It's not so simple to define "first week." If it's a clean calendar week like this year, it's easy. But in years when Jan. 2 is a Wednesday or Thursday, I went with one actual week. Yada yada yada, sometimes it's the first four days, sometimes it's the first five. Regardless, we're clearly off the charts this year.

The good news? It bodes relatively well for the rest of January. Here are January SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust SPY returns (not counting Week 1) vs. first-week VIX action.

OK, not a lot there visually. But there's actually a 0.1127 correlation, so a very slight positive bias to the market. But when we look out to the end of the year, not so great:

If you squint, you'll see a negatively sloped best fit line in there. Specifically, there's a negative 0.1537 correlation. Again, not much, but this time it's negative. And we don't exactly need any negative biases these days.

It feels like we've had cartoonishly bad news to start the year. Nuclear bombs, rising Middle East tensions between the two regional powers, Chinese currency and economic implosion. What's next?

I have no idea if China will right the ship any time soon. I'd suggest that these obsessions run their course and in a couple weeks we'll stop worrying about every Chinese market tick. But clearly, something else will hit our radar.

I'm not sure there's necessarily worse news flow now than at other times in the past. Rather, it's as if Mr. Market looks at everything everywhere and sees the bad in it. Until that mindset changes, it's going to be tough to shake this.

Disclaimer: Mr. Warner's opinions expressed above do not necessarily represent the views of Schaeffer's Investment Research.

We're overbought in the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) again. And not just any kind of overbought -- rather, it's something akin to super, extra special overbought.

On Friday, VIX closed 35.09% above its 10-day simple moving average (SMA). That's not a very common occurrence. In 6,548 trading days, VIX has closed at least 35% above the 10-day only 34 times. That's 0.52%.

It's becoming a bit of a non-rarity, however. You might say we're in a bubble of VIX bubbles. It's happened seven times since August -- and that includes the mother of all (relative) VIX pops. VIX closed a whopping 121.65% above its 10-day SMA on Aug. 24. That broke the record of 81.72% set ... one session earlier. No. 3 on the list happened on Aug. 25.

Before that, you have to go all the way back to August 2011 (OK, that's not so far back). The record then was 74.76%.

I'm not sure why VIX-plosions are getting more common. My best guess is that the way I define this, you need a relatively low VIX to begin with. In 2008, for example, VIX was routinely in the 30s (at least), so the percentage moves on particularly ugly days was not always epic.

But whatever. The big question, of course, is what it means going forward. I culled out incidents so as not to duplicate readings on the same event. They start the first close of VIX 35% above its 20-day SMA. Friday marks the 20th distinct incident.

Anyways, here's how it looks, with one-week, one-month, and three-month returns vs. average and median returns of randomly timed holds. All go back to the start of the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY) in February 1993:

I used a little color coding for when the returns deviated over 100 basis points (BPs) from the random medians. Again, you'll see a bias towards later dates. Three incidents since last August, five back only to October 2014. It only happened four times for the first 14 years of VIX, then 16 times in the last nine years. So maybe it's not a low VIX thing; VIX itself really is getting more volatile.

Fading extreme VIX pops looks OK, but unexceptional. You definitely have an edge in the very short term, though it did not work well the last two times. You did well three months out, also. 2008 was an outlier, all around. One month out is simply mediocre.

And this doesn't factor some ugly "paper" drawdowns. SPY dropped about 8% in three days after the Aug. 20, 2015 signal, then rallied back to make the one-week loss look reasonable.

It's always worth noting that crashes happen off oversold conditions. It's also worth noting that crashes are low-likelihood events, and it's generally not the best idea to overestimate the probability of a huge tail occurrence.

I wish I had a simple answer here, but I don't. I think it's right to fade this action gingerly, knowing that there could be some serious pain first.  

Disclaimer: Mr. Warner's opinions expressed above do not necessarily represent the views of Schaeffer's Investment Research.

They talk a lot about volatility on TV. I joke about it (often) as in "everybody expects higher volatility going forward … always," but I do understand the genesis behind the fixation. Volatility = ratings. The more volatile we get, the more likely we are to tune in to financial TV, read financial websites, log in to our accounts, trade, invest, cry, etc.

It's good for business in every which way. So it pays to sell "volatility" (the concept, not actual options). And when there's no actual volatility, sell the perception of volatility.

Again, I get it. The Weather Channel gets much better ratings when there's a blizzard or a hurricane on tap, CNN does better when there's a big news story, etc.

And hey, it benefits me, since I write about volatility. I don't trade much these days, but it helps that business, too. Volatility is basically the pool of available profits. The more volatile, the more profit opportunity. It doesn't help my investment portfolio in that volatility is generally associated with a downward trajectory in prices, and I'm not exactly loaded up on iPath S&P 500 VIX Short-Term Futures ETN (VXX). So, yay volatility from a media perspective! Keep talking it up, financial bobbleheads!

Just one request: At least talk about it accurately and coherently. For example, the other day, I heard a reporter note that the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) was higher than VIX futures, which is true right now. He took it to mean that "traders" were anticipating higher short-term volatility. Um, no.

VIX itself is a proxy for volatility assumptions going forward. Specifically, it's an estimate of the realized volatility (RV) of the underlying -- the S&P 500 Index (SPX) -- for the next 30 calendar days. If VIX is higher than some measure of backward-looking realized volatility, then it's accurate to say that VIX is pricing in an increase in volatility going forward. And right here, right now, that's the case. Ten-day RV is about 15, VIX is 27, so it's pricing in a substantial increase in volatility.

Now, it's important to note that the 15 RV is a bit misleading. It includes the non-volatile days between Christmas and New Year's. We've obviously seen an uptick in vol since then. VIX at 27 prices in a range of roughly 1.6% or less on two-thirds of days. That's reasonable with what we saw last week. Even amid all the ugliness, there were two low-range days without gaps.

So let me reconcile the TV statement with something more accurate. VIX is at a modestly higher-than-average absolute level. It suggests that the marketplace anticipates that current realized volatility levels will persist over the next month. By "current," I mean levels of the last week or so.

What's more, the CBOE 3-Month Volatility Index (VXV) proxies volatility over the next 90 days. And it's about the same as VIX now. So the marketplace actually anticipates current realized vol will persist for 90 days.

VIX futures? They're a much different animal. Basically, ignore anyone using them as some great volatility anticipation tool. All they do is give you a "snapshot" of VIX on some future date.

But remember, VIX itself looks forward 30 days. So all a future "tells" us is where that market expects future volatility to be on some later date. They provide trading and hedging functions, of course, they just don't lend themselves to analysis via the quick soundbites of television.

Disclaimer: Mr. Warner's opinions expressed above do not necessarily represent the views of Schaeffer's Investment Research.

What if the market threw a sell-off and nobody cared? Or at least cared enough to panic about volatility?

— Dmitry (@forensicinvstor) January 12, 2016

I noted on Friday that the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) had hit historically high levels vs. its 10-day simple moving average. Well, that was so Friday. The market has fluctuated a bit, but nudged higher over the past couple days and volatility has actually drifted.

And what to make of this CBOE VVIX Index (VVIX) he mentions? VVIX is the volatility of VIX options -- the VIX methodology applied to the VIX options board! In the August market melt, VVIX hit the monstrously high level of 212.22 vs. typical readings in the mid-90s. And now? It's about 107-108.

That's slightly elevated, but hardly noteworthy. VVIX isn't even as high as it was in mid-December, even though the market itself acts much worse. What's more, much of the VVIX lift is more statistical than an actual change in demand for upside VIX calls. That's because VIX options are positively skewed, so merely VIX itself moving up gives higher vol VIX options greater weight in the VVIX calculation.

And all this while internals have turned quite ugly. Here's the percentage of S&P 500 Index (SPX) names trading above their respective 200-day moving averages (MA):

              Chart courtesy of StockCharts.com

And above their 50-day MAs:

   Chart courtesy of StockCharts.com     

Both are imploding, and just about at August swoon levels. What's more, they're approaching August 2011 levels of ugliness. Not good. This isn't a great turn, in my humble opinion. I like my sell-offs accompanied by extreme bearishness. I mean, there's this header on MarketWatch:

But that's more anecdotal than an indicator of what someone's actually doing with their money. We shall see.

Disclaimer: Mr. Warner's opinions expressed above do not necessarily represent the views of Schaeffer's Investment Research.

Well, we've officially devolved into The Worst January Ever for the markets. Now, can someone please tell the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX)? 

Yes, I know all of a week ago, I wrote that VIX was at one of its most overbought stages vs. its 10-day simple moving average. That's just not the case anymore, and that's on the heels of an extremely volatile and ugly week. 

Ten-day realized volatility lagged a bit when we last checked in; was in the 15s one week ago. But as I noted, it misled a tad, as end-of-2015 slow days still made the cut. Well, take those out and put last week's roller-coaster ride in, and we now see 10-day historical volatility check in at about 23. It's the highest reading for that number since the August-September market swoon, although it blipped close in December.

VIX did rally, but given the backdrop, a close of 27.02 hardly seems extreme, considering we saw as much as a 60-handle drop on Friday -- and it's an awful lot more likely that traders worried more about a weekend debacle then paying a few extra pennies of time decay thanks to the long weekend. 

But that's a subjective opinion. Objectively it's now 15% above the 10-day. That's historically high, but in this backdrop sure suggests an orderly sell-off and nothing close to panic. I mean, we got 120% above the 10-day in August, for example. And it's barely above CBOE 3-Month Volatility Index (VXV), which closed at 26.88, though I suppose another way to look at that is the market is pricing in some permanence to the volatility lift. 

Except the market's really not pricing in permanence just yet, if you look at VIX futures: 

Chart courtesy of VIXcentral.com

Remember, VXV prices in volatility between now and April. An April future prices VIX going forward from April expiration. And that's saying by then we'll have settled down. In fact, it's saying we'll have settled down even sooner, more like February.

I'm not saying any of these prices are right or wrong, just that generally speaking, the market is acting as volatility is going to drift lower soon, not keep accelerating. That, of course, makes sense in that you rarely go broke anticipating mean reversion.

But in this backdrop? It just feels like we remain under-worried. It's sort of cliché that we need a flush-out. Maybe we don't; I’m sure it sometimes bottoms on medium emotion. I just don't feel like that's a high-probability play, though. I'd really like to see some more signs of panic.

Disclaimer: Mr. Warner's opinions expressed above do not necessarily represent the views of Schaeffer's Investment Research.

As I try to get back in the volatility flow, I notice something a bit odd on the surface. The CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) has trended less sensitive to SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY) moves in recent days.

Volatility overall has picked up, of course. But intuitively I'd expect VIX to accelerate on a relative basis as the market gets scarier. Yet, that's not what we've seen.

I measure this by taking a lagging 20-day "best fit" line estimate of the relationship of one-day SPY moves to one-day VIX moves. I then multiply it by negative 1, since VIX and SPY have a negative relationship and I'm really looking for magnitude. And more importantly, I want "up" on the chart to mean "more sensitive."

My theory is the higher the number -- I'll call it "VIX Sensitivity" -- the more panic in the air, and the more likely it's a contra tell. The reality? Well, here's how it looks over time:

Over the course of SPY history, the 20-day "best fit" line averages 5.10. Right now it sits at 6.08. So it's historically high. But as you can see, the relationship has trended generally higher over time. In the last decade, it averages 6.25. Thus, VIX is slightly non-sensitive to SPY in the here and now. That wouldn't be noteworthy, except for the fact that we're in a generally ugly market.

Where's the fear? And should we worry about the lack of worry in this backdrop?

Over forever? No. There's a tiny correlation of 0.0213 between "VIX Sensitivity" and one-month forward returns in SPY.

But in specific situations, we see some interesting results. In 2007, the relative calm before the Bear Stearns-Lehman storm, the correlation of "VIX Sensitivity" to one-month forward returns hit 0.29. That's not gigantic, but it's something. And it's intuitive. Sensitivity spikes were relatively good times to get long.

That was not the case in 2000, however. The correlation was 0.04. So no real warning whatsoever.

And now? From the start of 2015 to the end of last week, the correlation was negative 0.49.  

Yes, it's a relatively strong relationship and it's a negative one. The more panic-driven the VIX gets, the worse the market does. VIX has actually become "smart!" By that I mean, in this relatively narrow window, it has become a leading tell, not a contra tell.

I'm not saying VIX will stay this way. In fact, it goes against much of what I believe in. But I have to acknowledge that right here, right now, VIX is "smart." And in that context, the relatively unfearful VIX we see is actually a positive for the markets.

Disclaimer: Mr. Warner's opinions expressed above do not necessarily represent the views of Schaeffer's Investment Research.

Bad news for SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY) bulls -- the broad-market exchange-traded fund (ETF) is down 1.7% at $184.78. Worse yet, the SPY has taken out a crucial technical level en route to a new annual low of $181.02. Not surprisingly, this has the ETF's options pits running in overdrive.

By the numbers, over 4.5 million SPY contracts have been exchanged so far -- two times the expected intraday rate. In the lead is the March 175 put, with nearly 132,000 contracts on the tape. According to data from the International Securities Exchange (ISE), a significant number have been bought to open as speculators wager on (or hedge against) a sharper pullback.

Amid the broad-market bloodbath, volatility is spiking, as evidenced by sharp gains on the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) and iPath S&P 500 Short-Term Futures ETN (VXX). VIX was last seen over 10% higher at 28.67, on track for its highest finish since Sept. 1. In options land, one trader may be initiating a long call spread at the "fear gauge's" February 35 and 40 calls (per Trade-Alert), betting on higher volatility in the month ahead.

Meanwhile, the VXX has tacked on 5.7% at $28.23, also putting it on pace for its highest settlement in over four months. Digging deeper, calls outweigh puts, with significant action transpiring at the weekly 1/22 series. In particular, buy-to-open activity is detected at the weekly 1/22 29-strike call, suggesting traders foresee VXX toppling $29 by this Friday's close, when the series expires.

One of the biggest reasons to panic right now remains the utter lack of panic. Yes, the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) has lifted lately, but not nearly to to extent one might expect given the very ugly market backdrop. We noted this the other day, though more that VIX was simply rising in line with the market declines.

Well, maybe volatility is downright underperforming. This, from Steven Sears in Barron's (subscription required):

"Some investors are using options to hedge their portfolios, of course, and some are selling puts to buy stocks at lower prices, and others are buying calls on stocks they have sold. But nothing in the options market clearly suggests stock investors have decided they cannot take it anymore.

"The Credit Suisse Fear Barometer, in fact, is at [a] level that suggests investors are still relatively calm about the future of the stock market. The barometer, which measures index options volatility to indicate investor sentiment over the following three months, just set an annual low of 26%. This suggests investors who are active in options on the Standard & Poor's 500 Index are not concerned that the market will be sharply lower over the next three months."

Options have been "smarter" lately, as I noted. But like everyone else, I don't expect this move to end on anything less than a serious fear spike.

We do have some "good" news to report on that front. The CNN Fear & Greed Index has flipped to "Extreme Fear."

What's more, all but one of their components is in "Extreme Fear." And that one component? Put and call options, of course:

"During the last five trading days, volume in put options has lagged volume in call options by 18.34% as investors make bullish bets in their portfolios. However, this is still among the highest levels of put buying seen during the last two years, indicating fear on the part of investors."

That qualifies as simply "Fear", though frankly that hardly sounds exceptional. Rather, that feels like investors want to fade this with call purchases. ISEE, which measures public opening trades only, is low -- but again, not terrible:

It's a call/put index, so lower means relatively fewer calls purchased. We've dropped, but considerably less than in the fall, and less than other assorted drops in the last two years. It all does suggest there's fear around, just not a crescendo of fear.  

Disclaimer: Mr. Warner's opinions expressed above do not necessarily represent the views of Schaeffer's Investment Research.

Remember those worries about the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) underperforming in sell-offs last week? Multiply them by 10 after Friday's action. The market recovered nicely, so we would expect to see some sort of negative action in VIX. But not an absolute tanking. Yet here we are.

VIX closed Friday at 22.34. That's unexceptional on an absolute basis, and very cheap vs. even its own recently mediocre self. Thanks to Friday's implosion, VIX is now 11.4% below its 10-day simple moving average (SMA). That's not unusual around something like a holiday or a massive rally off an extended oversold market. But it's not a holiday and it wasn't the biggest dead cat bounce I've ever seen (to say the least).

No, it's odd. So what's going on? Here's some of what has buzzed around:

"It is not entirely clear why fear indicators have not spiked, but investors point to a mix of factors. Hedge funds have been cutting their exposure to the stock market in recent months, reducing their need to protect against losses. New, external shocks have not materialized in this sell-off, which is more driven by well-established worries over oil, China's faltering growth and weak corporate results.

"… overall, the use of options to bet on volatility and the market's direction has declined in recent months.

"'Hedging instruments are not being used as aggressively as you would think,' said Nick Colas, chief market strategist at the ConvergEx Group in New York.

"There are about 6.5 million open VIX options contracts, as of Wednesday. That is about 10 percent lower than when the market bottomed in August and September, and 30 percent below the October 2014 selloff."

I've also seen thoughts that hedgies played for this move ahead of time and are thus sellers of vol into the pop. There's probably a little truth in everything. The net effect is a rather orderly drop minus the fear explosion. That's not intuitively the greatest backdrop if you're rooting for the ugliness to end for real. VIX futures aren't telling us a whole lot right now:

It's more or less pricing in VIX around here for the foreseeable future. The term structure is a bit flatter than another recent date with similar spot VIX:

It's not enough to call it "Big Fear" though. Color me a bit worried about the ease with which VIX dropped on the first sign of strength.

Disclaimer: Mr. Warner's opinions expressed above do not necessarily represent the views of Schaeffer's Investment Research

I've long thought that the mega hype around all things Fed is wildly overblown. I mean, we heard about a future hike off of ZIRP for what seemed like forever. It happened and we moved on.

But, of course, we didn't really move on. World markets have gone nuts since then. Currencies moving around, commodities tanking, junk spreads popping, Patriots losing, etc. So did the Fed beget all that? Greg Ip in The Wall Street Journal says "yes" (subscription required):

"Short-term rates and short-term bond yields don't capture how much the Fed has actually tightened. Since the end of 2014 the trade-weighted dollar has risen more than 20%, spreads between yields on junk-rated bonds and Treasurys have widened three percentage points, and the S&P 500 index has dropped 7%. Even the confusion and capital flight triggered by China's devaluation carry the Fed's fingerprints. The yuan was dragged higher as the greenback, to which it was pegged, rose on expectations of Fed policy normalization. This imparted deflationary pressure that Chinese authorities found intolerable.

"While a quarter-point rise in interest rates wouldn't tip the U.S. into recession, an across-the-board tightening of financial conditions is a closer call. J.P. Morgan economist Jesse Edgerton reckons recent real economic indicators such as business sentiment and building permits imply a 21% probability of recession in the next 12 months, marginally above the 18% average of any given year. But financial indicators such as stocks and corporate bonds put the probability at between 30% and 40%."

Well, at least the Fed can ease short-term rates now! OK, I'm kidding. Sort of.

I guess this isn't really an argument that the rate hike itself did much, but rather, that the switch-flip to tightening led to all these ancillary effects. And, honestly, that makes a lot more sense than the rate hike itself doing much.

So is this all impacting our friend the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX)? Is this why VIX isn't lifting all that much? I'd have to stretch to make the connection. In fact, it almost makes the reverse argument. Volatility is clearly sloshing across asset classes. That usually washes onto Wall Street. And thus players usually react with more panic in equity options. Yet they're just not.

Perhaps we need another leg down and a violation of the recent lows? We've pretty much made a double bottom for the moment. I hope that's it, but if not, I'm guessing that's when we see the next wave of VIX panic.

Disclaimer: Mr. Warner's opinions expressed above do not necessarily represent the views of Schaeffer's Investment Research