For people doing short strangles around earnings, why not short ICs instead?

Strangles pay more premium and cost less commissions & fees. This increases the expected return, and it provides a cushion against adverse moves. Relatedly, on a large move the OTM leg loses much more premium (due to it carrying more gamma and premium on entry) than a Condor. The trade-off is ultimately: The wider an IC, the less likely a left-tail event becomes, but the more it hurts relative to premium.

Strangles are a better choice, except they cost a lot of buying power based on the instrument. I almost exclusively run short vol on SPX, and I can’t afford a strangle there, so it’s IC for me.

The irony is, losses are typically greater for irony condors. This is because they can't be managed the same way naked strangles can, and they collect less credit. But you're playing around earnings specifically so you'll get burned one way or another, just pick your poison.

why can short strangles be managed better? btw, i don't have good experience with short ICs

Very easy to roll a strangle for net credit. Nearly impossible for IC

but doesn't risk scale up as well when you roll out if there is price action? imagine having a short strangle for Microsoft, rolling out will increase your losses, no?

The risk the moment you put on a strangle is infinity - credit received. If you roll for net credit, the risk is now infinity - initial credit - roll credit. Since you've taken on more credit and your max loss is the same, your risk has decreased. 

yes, and it's 50/50 every day whether it's going to rain

It depends on how you like to manage trades. I only roll for a credit, otherwise I just hold the position. I also never sell a put if I’m not willing to take the shares at that price, so even if a put is ITM I’ll let it sit. Unless I believe the underlying won’t recover to a point where I can profit from it, then I’ll close it for a loss and move on to the next thing

Most Brokers only allow 4 leg orders. So you can't roll an IC together, you have to split up the order.

I've rarely actually gotten an IC to execute at my preferred price - you end up paying a hidden premium for the luxury of having a four-leg strategy, compared to a two-leg straddle or strangle that just fires at the bids of its legs.

Yes, it is a certainly a matter of your risk tolerance but modified by your broker's risk tolerance, as expressed through BP requirements and level of options privilege.

I prefer risk capped at my debit but if not I keep the spread risk tight . And I always go directional. Just my bias. If you want exposure at earnings find a steady company and just harvest IV crush off the earnings with a long butterfly strangle, CC or CSP. I’ve done a long stock + short Slightly OTM CC on companies that go ex- dividend very close to earnings to try and capture IV crush, the dividend and the post dividend rebound but it’s not very exciting returns.

Errrr, neither of these two strategies are meant for volatile situations. This is inspite of what Internet influencers want you to believe. Earnings are a coin flip. You better believe it.

Commissions, slippage, most of the greeks except delta cancel out, leaving you with the position open longer than necessary if it were a strangle. ICs are a pain to manage in general.

I do strangles on cheap stocks and IC on expensive ones.

When I put on an earnings trade I’m looking for a shorter duration and IV crush after the earnings event. Quick in, quick out. Iron condors take longer to get to my profit target due to the nature of how the long legs work. If I really want to define my risk I’ll do a jade lizard (short put, short call spread) knowing that I’m giving up some premium.

Because the wings are very expensive. They're giving you the opposite of the exposure you want. If you can't handle selling naked, try calendars. Just span earnings for the ATM short leg and use the nearest LEAPS for the long one, or close to that.

You can get much farther away from the current price with a strangle and still get a lot of premium.

1. One is paying for the wings in IC irrespective of whether one needs them or not. 2. These wings will also undergo iv crush 3. The returns of IC are less than Strangle for the obvious reason - the implied risk is lesser. 4. IC has 4 legs - execution friction, slippage is more. 5. Choosing wings range is another decision that can go wrong for you. Another arbitrary variable that will effect long term PNL.

Don't be an insurance company that doesn't have insurance.

Becoz you are looking to profit from vol contraction and you are paying for the elevated vol for the long legs. That's is just the opposite of what you want to do. You can easily manage your risk by selling wider strikes and "hard" stop.loss, rather than doing the opposite of your trade thesis