The variance risk premium
The volatility the options market charges systematically exceeds the one that actually happens — and not only in crypto.
The question: Do people overpay for protection? And is it a crypto phenomenon or a general one?
What was found
Across 1,963 days, Deribit's implied volatility exceeded subsequent realized by 9.96 points on average, positive 73.8% of the time, with a 90% block-bootstrap confidence interval of [+7.59, +12.90] — which excludes zero. And it holds in the holdout: +6.55 points, positive 72% of the time. This isn't an odd crypto anomaly: the S&P 500, Nasdaq and crude oil also pay for selling volatility. Gold doesn't. It has an ordinary, well-known economic explanation: whoever sells insurance charges more than its expected cost, because the risk they take on isn't symmetric.
Try it yourself
Why a positive premium in almost every month isn't enough: one bad month eats the year. Drag the three pieces.
How many good months just to cover the bad one:
With the unfiltered book's real numbers — +2.39 a month and a worst month of −55 — it takes 23 good months to cover one bad one. That is exactly the problem the filter on the previous page tries to solve.
Illustrative example numbers for practice — not real data.
How it was tested, step by step
- For each day, the 30-day implied volatility quoted by the options market is taken (the DVOL index in Bitcoin's case).
- Those 30 days are allowed to pass and the volatility that actually occurred is computed.
- The premium is the subtraction. Its mean, its share of positive days and a BLOCK bootstrap confidence interval are measured — not single days, because consecutive days share information and resampling them separately would understate uncertainty.
- It's repeated in markets with decades of history and a quoted implied-volatility index, each with its own data, to see whether the phenomenon is general.
Tracking
This finding does have a real number that gets published and kept updated.
Data last updated on 2026-09-09.