The Put-Call Ratio: Viewing Market Sentiment Through Options Activity

During periods of fear or euphoria, the CBOE equity put-call ratio can inform your judgment by showing where sentiment may have gone too far.

Wayne Thorp leads a class in AAII's new Essential Investing Video Course. Go to https://www.aaii.com/ves for more information and to subscribe.

  • Explains how the put-call ratio reflects investor sentiment and emotion more than market fundamentals
  • Shows how extreme ratio levels often signal potential market reversals using historical and behavioral patterns
  • Teaches how to interpret the ratio in context and use it as part of a broader investment strategy

The stock market responds to a blend of fundamentals, technicals and emotion. But investor psychology—fear, greed, overconfidence and panic—often plays a more powerful role in short-term price movement than earnings or economic data. The Chicago Board Options Exchange’s (CBOE) equity put-call ratio is one of the most direct ways to measure that sentiment in real time.

The put-call ratio is calculated by dividing the daily volume of put options traded by the daily volume of call options traded:

Put-Call Ratio = Total Put Option Volume ÷ Total Call Option Volume

Put options are contracts that give the owner the right, but not the obligation, to sell an underlying asset—such as a stock or exchange-traded fund (ETF)—at a predetermined price (the strike price) before a set expiration date. Investors use puts in two main ways: as insurance to protect long positions against losses or to speculate that a security’s price will fall.

Conversely, call options grant the right—but not the obligation—to buy a security at a specific price before expiration. Calls are typically used to profit from rising prices or to gain leveraged upside exposure with limited capital. Professional traders often use call options for hedging and income strategies. Individual investors tend to use call options to profit from upward market moves or to earn extra income on stocks held in their portfolios (a practice known as writing covered calls).

Because put options are associated with bearish positioning and call options with bullish enthusiasm, changes in the relative volume between the two offer a window into the market’s emotional climate. A rising put-call ratio implies growing concern or pessimism. A falling put-call ratio reflects increasing bullishness or even complacency.

However, the put-call ratio is not a precision instrument for forecasting exact market turns. It does not predict exact market turns or function as a precise timing tool. It works best as a contrarian sentiment indicator. Opportunities for gains may lie ahead when sentiment becomes extremely pessimistic (a high ratio). When optimism is rampant (a low ratio), risks may be building under the surface.

How the Put-Call Ratio Evolved Over Time

The CBOE opened in 1973, listing standardized call options on a small number of stocks. That year, the exchange handled just over one million contracts. In 2024, options volume on the CBOE averaged nearly four million contracts per day.

In the early years, the put-call ratio was a basic volume measure. But as technical analysts and behavioral finance researchers studied market structure, they began to observe recurring patterns. By the 1990s, traders noticed that put-call ratio spikes often coincided with market bottoms and extreme lows for the ratio frequently came near market tops.

During the dot-com bubble of the late 1990s, the put-call ratio remained stubbornly low as investors poured money into technology stocks. After the crash, rising readings signaled fear and hedging behavior. The same pattern emerged during the Great Recession when a surge in put activity accompanied market capitulation in late 2008 and early 2009.

The coronavirus pandemic crash in March 2020 reinforced the ratio’s usefulness: Readings spiked to historical extremes as markets bottomed. These examples helped solidify the ratio’s reputation as a valuable, if imprecise, barometer of emotional extremes.

Equity Versus Index Put-Call Ratios

There are different versions of the put-call ratio. The CBOE equity-only put-call ratio is the most commonly cited, as it tracks individual stock options. The ratio excludes index and ETF options, which are often used for portfolio hedging.

The index put-call ratio includes broad market instruments like S&P 500 or Nasdaq index options. While valuable in macroeconomic analysis, the index put-call ratio can be distorted by institutional hedging, which does not necessarily reflect directional sentiment.

The equity-only put-call ratio tends to reflect pure sentiment for individual investors. This version is typically favored when using the ratio as a contrarian signal.

What Is Considered “Extreme”?

Based on CBOE data since 2007, the average daily equity-only put-call ratio is approximately 0.94. This reflects the natural bullish bias in equity markets: Over time, more calls than puts are generally traded.

Table 1 Key Put-Call Ratio Ranges Note that these are general patterns, not market timing signals.

While historical observations suggest general thresholds, it’s essential to interpret them in context. A reading of 1.2 might indicate elevated fear during one regime but could appear less extreme during periods of systemic stress or high-volatility environments. These thresholds are better viewed as tendencies than hard signals (Table 1).

  • Above 1.2: Elevated pessimism, possibly a contrarian bullish signal
  • Below 0.7: High optimism, often preceding corrections
  • Around 1.0: Neutral sentiment, no clear signal

To avoid overreacting to noise, most analysts prefer to track moving averages—like the 10- or 21-day average of the put-call ratio (Figure 1). These smooth out anomalies and better reflect sustained sentiment trends.

Figure 1 Equity-Only CBOE Put-Call Ratio (10-Day Moving Average) Versus the S&P 500  Peaks in the put-call ratio often coincide with market bottoms, while low readings tend to appear near market tops.

Additionally, percentile-based analysis can improve interpretation. According to research from SentimenTrader, readings in the top 5% of put-call ratio values historically tend to align with higher-than-average forward returns over 30 to 60 days. Conversely, the bottom 5% often precede flat or negative returns. That said, these are tendencies—not guarantees.

Behavioral Finance and the Ratio’s Contrarian Logic

The put-call ratio reflects actual trading of options, making it a real-money measure of sentiment. It captures the behavior—not the opinion—of investors under stress.

This makes it especially relevant to behavioral finance theory. Several cognitive biases influence how investors use options and, in turn, shape the put-call ratio. These psychological drivers push the put-call ratio to extremes, creating potential opportunities.

  • Loss Aversion: People fear losses more than they value equivalent gains, leading to panic buying of puts during declines.
  • Herding Behavior: Investors imitate others, especially under uncertainty, fueling waves of either call or put buying.
  • Recency Bias: Traders overemphasize recent events and project them into the future, often resulting in trend-chasing.
  • Overconfidence: In bull markets, call buying often accelerates as traders assume recent gains will continue indefinitely.

What the Academic Research Shows

While widely used by market professionals and technical analysts, the put-call ratio has received limited attention in formal academic literature. Still, there is evidence, primarily from industry research and select academic studies, that option-based sentiment indicators offer forward-looking insight when interpreted with care.

The most frequently cited academic study is by Jun Pan and Allen M. Poteshman, who analyzed over 100 million options trades to examine the informational content of option volume. Their 2006 paper “The Information in Option Volume for Future Stock Prices,” published in the Journal of Finance, found that abnormal buyer-initiated volume—particularly in puts—contains statistically significant predictive power for subsequent equity returns. While their research focuses on directional options flow rather than aggregate put-call ratios, it strengthens the broader claim that options activity reflects investor expectations and sentiment.

Beyond peer-reviewed studies, real-world data supports the contrarian use of the CBOE equity-only put-call ratio. CBOE researchers showed that elevated put-call readings (above 1.0), particularly when paired with high implied volatility or weak market breadth, often precede stronger-than-average 10- to 30-day returns in the S&P 500.

Similarly, SentimenTrader documented that put-call values in the top decile—signaling fear or hedging excess—tend to precede short-term outperformance, especially when multiple sentiment indicators confirm the signal.

Larry McMillan, founder of McMillan Analysis Corp. and author of “Options as a Strategic Investment” (Prentice Hall Press, 2012), has long used the 21-day moving average of the equity-only put-call ratio as a contrarian tool in his firm’s market models. His application emphasizes that extremes in sentiment tend to precede reversals, especially when confirmed by technical divergences.

That said, the statistical power of the put-call ratio alone is modest. Its effectiveness improves substantially when combined with other sentiment, volatility and price-based indicators. The put-call ratio is not a forecasting model. Rather, it is best viewed as a way to quantify emotional extremes and investor positioning—valuable context for strategy, not a signal for action.

How Institutions Use the Put-Call Ratio

Many hedge funds and asset managers use the put-call ratio not as a trading trigger but as a component in their broader market models. For example, macroeconomic strategists might include the ratio alongside futures positioning [from Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) data], ETF flows and volatility premiums to assess whether markets are becoming crowded in one direction.

Portfolio managers may also track put-call ratio trends over multiple time frames—daily, weekly and 21-day—to identify potential inflection points. When extreme readings coincide with technical support levels or valuation discounts, they may take tactical action—though always within the context of their broader process.

Options-focused strategies, such as volatility arbitrage or risk premia strategies, sometimes use put-call ratio trends to calibrate trade sizing or determine when to sell options into elevated fear.

Common Misinterpretations

While the put-call ratio is straightforward in concept, it is frequently misused. Understanding these pitfalls is essential to using the ratio effectively and responsibly.

  • Assuming a high ratio guarantees a bottom: Elevated readings suggest fear but do not guarantee a price reversal.
  • Reacting to single-day spikes: Short-term anomalies may be caused by event-driven flows or institutional hedges.
  • Ignoring volume context: A high ratio on light volume is less meaningful than a similar reading during high-volume panic.
  • Using the ratio in isolation: Without confirmation from other indicators, the ratio alone may give false or premature signals.

One way to improve the reliability of put-call ratio signals is to combine them with market breadth indicators, such as the number of stocks advancing versus declining or new lows relative to new highs.

For example, a high reading when fewer stocks are participating in a market decline may suggest exhaustion of selling pressure. Conversely, if a low put-call ratio coincides with narrow leadership in a rising market, it may signal fragile optimism.

Adding breadth context helps distinguish between healthy corrections and potential systemic fear—and makes interpretation more robust.

Using the Put-Call Ratio for Long-Term Risk Management

Even long-term investors—those with multiyear horizons—can use the put-call ratio as a risk-awareness tool.

  • Rebalancing context: A spike in the ratio during a drawdown may indicate panic-selling conditions—providing psychological reinforcement to stick to a rebalancing plan.
  • Stress testing: Low readings can prompt scenario analysis for a potential correction. This doesn’t imply selling but may support portfolio insurance or risk-reduction discussions.
  • Behavioral calibration: The put-call ratio helps individual investors step back from the headlines and ask, “Is this emotion warranted?”

When used this way, the put-call ratio becomes a steadying influence—not a signal to trade but a reason to pause, reflect and align actions with long-term goals.

Even long-term investors can benefit from the ratio as a psychological tool during rebalancing periods. For instance, a spike in the ratio during a market drawdown may offer emotional reinforcement to follow through on rebalancing plans. At the same time, abnormally low readings could prompt scenario analysis around excessive optimism—without necessarily triggering trades.

The Impact of Zero-Day Options

The growth of zero-days-to-expiration (0DTE) options—contracts that expire on the same day they’re issued—has dramatically changed the structure of options volume. As of 2024, CBOE Global Markets data shows that zero-days-to-expiration contracts regularly account for over 40% of daily S&P 500 options volume.

Much of this activity is driven by intraday speculation, algorithmic trading and hedging flows, not long-term investor sentiment. As a result, analysts and market practitioners warn that the raw put-call ratio, particularly at the index level, may no longer reflect true emotional extremes in the market.

While the equity-only version of the put-call ratio is less impacted, the rise of zero-days-to-expiration options has led many professionals to:

  • Focus on multiday moving averages to filter out short-term noise;
  • Use volume-weighted or percentile-based analysis; and
  • Cross-reference sentiment signals with volatility indexes and market breadth indicators.

In short, structural changes in options trading—especially the rise of zero-days-to-expiration options—mean the put-call ratio remains a useful sentiment tool, but only when used thoughtfully and in context.

Conclusion: A Sentiment Compass, Not a Market Map

The put-call ratio offers investors a rare real-time window into market psychology. It doesn’t forecast precise turning points, but it does help you understand when emotions like fear or greed are running hot.

Think of it not as a signal to act, but as a reason to pause. When the ratio spikes, it may be time to ask, “Is panic driving decisions?” When it plunges, reflect: “Has optimism gone too far?”

For long-term investors, the put-call ratio isn’t about timing trades. It’s a risk-awareness tool that can:

  • Reinforce discipline during volatile drawdowns,
  • Prompt discussion of portfolio stress tests during euphoric surges and
  • Help you detach from the headlines and refocus on your plan.

Used with other indicators—and always in context—the put-call ratio can be a steadying force in turbulent markets. While we can’t predict sentiment, we can recognize it and respond with clarity rather than emotion.

Discussion

ROBERT A from NC posted about 1 year ago:

“The business schools reward difficult, complex behavior more than simple behavior, but simple behavior is more effective.” - Warren Buffett


Wayne T from IL posted about 1 year ago:

Thank you, Robert—Buffett’s quote is perfectly aligned with the message of this piece. The put-call ratio is one of those elegantly simple tools that cuts through the noise. It doesn't require complex models or predictive algorithms—just real-time market behavior distilled into a single, sentiment-driven indicator. Yet, as the article explores, its effectiveness lies not in its precision, but in its clarity. When fear is rampant (elevated ratios), that often marks opportunity. When euphoria is high (low ratios), caution may be warranted. In an age where data and models grow ever more complex, returning to straightforward, behavior-based measures like the put-call ratio can ground us in market realities—exactly the kind of simplicity Buffett champions. Appreciate your engagement as always.


ROBERT A from NC posted about 1 year ago:

“Forming macro opinions or listening to the macro or market predictions of others is a waste of time. Indeed, it is dangerous because it may blur your vision of the facts that are truly important.” - Warren Buffett


Wayne T from IL posted about 1 year ago:

Right on, Robert! Another classic Buffett gem, and one that resonates deeply with the core message here. That’s exactly why sentiment tools like the put-call ratio matter. They don’t rely on forecasts, narratives, or macro commentary. They just reflect what investors are actually doing with real money, right now. No stories. No predictions. Just a raw behavioral signal. The ratio doesn’t tell you what will happen—it helps you recognize when emotion may be distorting decision-making. When fear peaks, it can be a cue to hold steady or even lean in. When greed dominates, it’s a signal to double-check your discipline. Buffett reminds us that clear thinking and simplicity beat intellectual gymnastics. The put-call ratio fits that mold: no need to guess GDP, time the Fed, or chase headlines. Just observe how people are reacting and stay grounded in your plan. Thanks again for bringing Buffett’s wisdom into the conversation. It’s always a welcome addition!


ROBERT A from NC posted about 1 year ago:

The article indicates that this "raw behavioral signal" is important to hedge fund managers and "many" asset managers, but where is the empirical evidence that it has improved their returns? Average long-term returns from hedge funds are not very impressive, and most actively managed funds fail to beat the market average in the long run. Why should an individual investor follow their examples?


Wayne T from IL posted about 1 year ago:

Robert, let’s stay true to what the article actually says. It never suggests that individual investors should emulate hedge fund strategies or assume that active managers deliver superior long-term returns. In fact, it makes no performance claims about either group. What it does highlight is that even sophisticated players, despite their mixed records, monitor sentiment because market psychology can distort prices in the short term. That’s not a recommendation; it’s an observation. As noted in the article: “The statistical power of the put-call ratio alone is modest… it is best viewed as a way to quantify emotional extremes and investor positioning—valuable context for strategy, not a signal for action.” The takeaway isn’t “follow the pros.” It’s: even those trying to outthink the market are forced to reckon with crowd emotion. That insight applies whether you’re managing billions or your own retirement account. The put-call ratio isn’t about beating the market—it’s about recognizing when fear or euphoria may be clouding judgment. Used that way, it’s a steadying influence, not a strategy in itself.


ROBERT A from NC posted about 1 year ago:

Oh, I think I see now. The thing to do is to look at the put/call ratio and then keep doing what you're doing, since it's a "steadying influence." Gotcha. Otherwise, there would be a concrete example in the article showing how to profit from its use. This also makes sense to me since "market sentiment" in the aggregate is important only if it depresses the price of a security I want to buy, and if it does that, the depressed price itself is my "signal," so I don't need a secondary indicator that "may" (or may not) have some semblance of accuracy. As James B. Cloonan put it, "so much option activity involves hedging that [the put/call ratio] is probably not an effective measure of sentiment any more" (if it ever was). In addition, regarding indicators of market sentiment, Mr. Cloonan stated, "While I certainly agree that there are stupid investors and smart investors, and that doing the opposite of the stupid investors might be beneficial, I don't know if one could work out the time delays and random aspects enough to take advantage of such information."


Wayne T from IL posted about 1 year ago:

Robert, this feels familiar: if you don’t personally use a tool, the default argument becomes that it must be useless for everyone. But investing isn’t a monoculture. Different approaches, time horizons, and risk tolerances call for different lenses. The put-call ratio isn’t meant to be a trade trigger—it’s presented clearly as a behavioral checkpoint, not a profit lever. You quoted Cloonan—rightly—but let’s be accurate about his legacy. He was deeply skeptical of market timing, but he was cognizant of the impact emotion can have on the investment process. That’s exactly how the ratio is framed in the article: a way to surface emotional extremes, not capitalize on them. There’s no claim that the put-call ratio leads to superior returns. There’s no suggestion to emulate hedge fund positioning. What is suggested is that recognizing market sentiment—even if imperfect—can help long-term investors stay grounded, especially during periods of euphoria or panic. If it doesn’t fit your process, that’s fine. But reducing it to “useless” because it doesn’t generate trade signals misses the point—and frankly, shuts down a discussion that many investors do find valuable. Let's not flatten nuance just to make a point.


ROBERT A from NC posted about 1 year ago:

I'm certainly not trying to "shut down" a discussion. I'm simply offering an alternative view. Readers are free to choose your lens or a different one. Mine is clearly different. I see constructs such as the put/call ratio as mere distractions instead of useful concepts for building wealth. To the extent you are trying to use the ratio to help investors stand firm and stay the course (which is not at all clear to me from your article, but maybe through my jaded lens I'm missing it), I applaud you for the effort while disagreeing with your method. I merely hope my contrary opinion will give comfort to a young investor who reads your article (and the comments) and is confused as to the ratio's essentiality. In the humble opinion of one who has invested successfully for over 40 years without any attention to the put/call ratio, I claim that they may similarly ignore it without peril.


JOHN L from NJ posted about 1 year ago:

Wayne is writing articles to explain well known stock market indicators such as the put-call ratio in this issue. Last month it was CAPE. This is all good stuff for educating novices on tools that have been used to navigate the stock market. However, as Robert A points out in his commentary above; none of this old stuff like the put-call ratio will give you an edge in earning market beating returns. Too widely known and followed. The real value in Wayne's articles is now you know what won't work so you can concentrate on finding something else that might give you an edge.


Wayne T from IL posted about 1 year ago:

Thank you, John, for your support. However, I do want to clarify something important. These articles aren’t written to compile a list of "what won’t work." They’re written to contextualize widely referenced market tools, especially those often cited without understanding. The goal isn’t to suggest the put-call ratio (or CAPE, or anything else) is a secret weapon. It’s to explain what these tools actually do, what they don’t do, and how they might serve long-term investors as part of their decision-making framework. The article's purpose was never to debunk outdated ideas. That’s not what the article says, and it’s not the spirit in which it was written. The piece explicitly states: “The put-call ratio is not a forecasting model… it’s best viewed as a way to quantify emotional extremes and investor positioning—valuable context for strategy, not a signal for action.” If some investors find that helpful in grounding their discipline during volatile markets, that’s a win. If others see no need for it, that’s fine too. The article wasn’t promising an edge. It was offering understanding. Thanks again for weighing in.


PATTI R from AZ posted about 1 year ago:

I appreciate Wayne's educational articles. Member commentary adds additional insight. Keep up the good work. I love being more informed, even if it doesn't affect my investment strategy or actions.


BARRY J from TX posted about 1 year ago:

Wayne, Robert, John, and Patti, you sold me on ignoring all this Put/Call Ratio meshuga gambling and the potential visceral and emotional discomfort it portends. #1 Claude Shannon’s signal-to-noise information ratio is always asymmetrically lower (due to the randomness of the time delays) than the put-to-call ratio, and therefore, has a lower “actionable” ordinal value payoff than the expected value. #2 Options are not like “one person - one vote voting. Any of the millions of Put/Call buyers/sellers can have as many open orders as they want. #3 Programmed computer algorithms can be used to distort the P/C ratio at any given nanosecond greatly and are deployed daily by some Chicago denizens like Leroy Brown to ensnare Texas country boys comme moi. #4 I greatly enjoyed the intramural bantering. I think the points scored in this ping pong match of Buffett quotes stands at 20-19 with Wayne still holding serve. I’ll let Patti referee the denouement. #5 Thanks for the tutorial. Regards all.


Wayne T from IL posted about 1 year ago:

Appreciate you weighing in, Barry, and the Shannon reference definitely raised the signal-to-entertainment ratio. Again, to clarify: the article doesn’t pitch the put-call ratio as a secret edge or a predictive weapon. It’s framed—as plainly as possible—as a behavioral tool. Not a trading trigger. Not a performance enhancer. Just a way to help investors stay level-headed when emotions are running high. Yes, the signal is imperfect. Yes, it can be distorted. But that doesn’t make it worthless, especially for investors who benefit from any tool that helps them pause, reflect, and resist acting out of fear or euphoria. If your process doesn’t need it, that’s great. But dismissing it because it’s not pure or profit-generating kind of misses the point. This isn’t about edge. It’s about discipline. Glad the thread sparked good back-and-forth. And as for the scoreboard? I’ll take holding serve if it keeps the conversation grounded. Wayne


JAMES L from TN posted about 1 year ago:

In contrast to what the article states, American options can be assigned at any time. Also, if the option is as much as 1 cent in the money at expiration and a period of time thereafter, many brokers can and will exercise the option against you at their discretion (some may use lotteries, etc. to keep this "fair"). The use of the put/call ratio is one of the trickiest to use that I have observed, and I agree that a great deal of backup is required to make it useful except as a very general indication of sentiment, and so much backup is required that the put/call ratio seems redundant when compared to all the data required to establish its efficacy. Still, as with many other indicators, it is usually worth a look, after looking at almost everything else.


Wayne T from IL posted about 1 year ago:

Thanks, James—your clarification on American-style options is well taken. You’re absolutely right: they *can* be assigned at any time, and many brokers will automatically exercise any option that finishes even slightly in the money at expiration. That nuance matters, especially for income strategies and risk management, and I appreciate you highlighting it. As for the put-call ratio, I agree with much of your take—especially the idea that it should be approached with caution. The article doesn't argue that it's easy to use or high-precision. In fact, it goes out of its way to emphasize its limitations: <<“The statistical power of the put-call ratio alone is modest… It is best viewed as a way to quantify emotional extremes and investor positioning—valuable context for strategy, not a signal for action.”>> It’s not meant to replace deeper analysis or stand on its own. It’s meant to *supplement* it—particularly for long-term investors looking to anchor their thinking during emotional swings. I’d argue that even if it comes “after everything else,” as you noted, that’s not a strike against its usefulness. Sometimes, that final gut-check on sentiment is exactly what helps prevent behavioral mistakes. Thanks again for bringing both technical precision and a balanced perspective to the conversation. Always welcome.


JAMES L from TN posted about 1 year ago:

Thanks for the good and appropriate reply, Wayne T. The newest CBOE manual on options has taken the phrase "but not the obligation" out of their basic definition of an option, when, in fact, it should never have been in the manual in the first place, and has falsely mislead countless people unnecessarily for many years, and probably caused great pain and losses, so it should stop being stated in options articles. I am aware that you have clearly acknowledged this in your reply (Thank You), and I am not trying to be tedious on this, but I would take it out of the body of the article for the sake of those that do not read the comments. It just demonstrates that you can't always believe what you read, even in official documents.


You need to log in as a registered AAII user before commenting.
Create an account

Log In

Get your free copy of our special report analyzing the tech stocks most likely to outperform the market.

Download the FREE Report Here: