Is Covered Calls Halal?

Do the halal screening authorities agree?

How we read the evidence

HalalWallet's editorial synthesis of the screens, scholar positions, and sources documented on this page - not a religious ruling.

Covered calls are the most-asked options question among Muslim investors for an understandable reason: the strategy feels conservative. You own the shares, you collect a premium, and the worst case is selling stock you already hold at a price you chose. Several of the usual objections to options genuinely do not apply — there is no leverage, no naked exposure, and no sale of unowned property.

The problem is what a covered call actually sells. When you write the call, you are not selling your shares — you are selling a right: the buyer's right to purchase your shares at the strike price before expiry. The premium is the price of that right. And the central question in fiqh is whether such a right is valid property (mal) that can be priced and sold at all.

The major contemporary authorities answer no. The OIC International Islamic Fiqh Academy resolved in 1992 (Resolution 63) that option contracts fall under no valid Shariah contract type — the object 'is neither a sum of money nor a utility or a financial right which may be waived' — so both entering and trading them is impermissible. AAOIFI Shariah Standard 21 (rule 3/13) prohibits concluding and trading share options, reasoning that the option right is created by contract, is not wealth, and that options dealing carries gharar and resembles gambling. Mufti Taqi Usmani puts it plainly: a promise to sell at a set price is fine — even morally binding — but the moment you charge a fee for the promise itself, the transaction is invalid, 'no matter whether they are call options or put options.' Mufti Faraz Adam's 2018 analysis for Darul Fiqh reaches the same conclusion and captures the intuition: options trading 'is essentially the trading of risk itself.'

There is a genuine minority view, and honesty requires naming it. Shaykh Joe Bradford — a US scholar who serves as one of Zoya's Shariah advisors — holds that covered calls and cash-secured puts are permissible, since the writer owns the underlying and can deliver. Zoya's own platform, notably, still follows the majority and screens options out; the attribution comes from Zoya's CEO in their community forum, not a published fatwa. IFG (Islamic Finance Guru) has written that it has some sympathy for lenient positions where there is genuine hedging need — a business hedging currency exposure, say — while still recommending against options trading for investment income.

For a US Muslim investor wanting what covered calls promise — extra yield from a stock portfolio — the compliant routes are unexciting but real: dividend-paying screened stocks, sukuk funds (SPSK yields in the 4%+ range), and Shariah-screened REIT exposure (SPRE). They won't match the premium income of a weekly covered-call program. But the majority position is that the premium was never lawful income to begin with.

Business Activity Screen

An income strategy: the investor owns at least 100 shares of a stock and sells (writes) a call option against them, collecting a premium in exchange for the obligation to sell the shares at the strike price if the buyer exercises.

The strategy's mechanics are defined by the listed options contract (SEC/FINRA: one standard contract covers 100 shares; the writer is obligated to deliver if exercised). The Shariah analysis attaches to the option contract itself, not to the underlying stock — which may be perfectly halal.

Scholars' & Screeners' Positions

Published positions, cited as stated. Screeners can reach different conclusions on the same company because of ratio timing and methodology differences - we report the disagreement rather than flatten it.

• AAOIFI Shariah Standard No. 21 (Financial Paper)

  Rule 3/13: 'It is not permitted to conclude contracts of options for shares' — neither their formation nor their trading (cross-referencing Standard 20, rule 5/2). The stated basis: the option right is created by contract and is not wealth (mal) that can be sold; options dealing rests on gharar and resembles gambling.

• OIC International Islamic Fiqh Academy, Resolution 63 (1/7), 1992

  Option contracts 'do not fall under any one of the Shariah nominate contracts. Since the object of the contract is neither a sum of money nor a utility or a financial right which may be waived, the contract is not permissible in Shariah — and since these contracts are initially not permissible, neither is their trading.' Reaffirmed in Resolution 224 (8/23) on hedging.

• Mufti Taqi Usmani

  A promise to sell or buy at a set price is permissible and morally binding — but it 'cannot be the subject matter of a sale or purchase,' so charging a premium for it renders the transaction invalid. 'This ruling applies to all kinds of options, no matter whether they are call options or put options.' Ownership of the underlying shares does not change this analysis.

• Mufti Faraz Adam (Darul Fiqh / Amanah Advisors), 2018 research paper

  Upholds the majority prohibition: conventional options are non-compliant on grounds of gharar, maysir, and the option not being valid tradeable property — 'it is essentially the trading of risk itself.' Shariah-compliant choice mechanisms exist (arbun, khiyar al-shart, wa'd), but none can be traded on a secondary market.

• Minority view — Shaykh Joe Bradford (Zoya Shariah advisor)

  Holds the minority opinion that covered calls (and cash-secured puts) are permissible because the writer owns the shares and can deliver. This attribution comes from Zoya CEO Saad Malik in the Zoya community (May 2026); Bradford has not published a formal written fatwa on it. No standards body (AAOIFI, IIFA) has adopted this view.

Purification

Scholars who prohibit options advise that premiums already collected from past covered-call writing be donated to charity (not kept as income), while the underlying halal shares and their dividends remain lawful.

Related guides