CRM reports after the bell, and the setup is actually fascinating. The stock sits around $235, down 36% from highs and 30% YTD. Growth has slowed, but fundamentals aren't broken. They're just… less sexy. IV is pricing a 7-8% move, skew is modest, and this is exactly the type of environment where I want to be slightly long CRM and short rich downside vol, with a wide cushion if we get a controlled pullback. Let's see what Marc Benioff brings us tonight!

In 2024, I achieved 77% returns with a very conservative options portfolio, focusing on strategic setups and managing risk through asymmetric opportunities. No speculation, just disciplined and calculated trades. In my latest video, I break down: - My annual performance and how it compared to the market - The trades that worked (and the ones that didn't!) - Key lessons from navigating a volatile year You can watch the full breakdown and see how a strategic, conservative approach can deliver results: https://youtu.be/RJChiEsGClA?si=vaH2CRwZvCkHy1pS What's your biggest trading goal this year?

Hey, in the previous posts, I shared that rotation charts are finally giving us clean signals: XLV (Healthcare) keeps gaining relative strength, while XLE (Energy) is recovering after weeks of underperformance. Both sectors moved into a decision zone, and today I'm showing the exact structure I'm using to trade that divergence in the hedge fund. Part 1: XLE Call Debit Spread (Defined-Risk Snapback Play) - Buy 88C / Sell 91C Jan 16 (51 DTE), Debit: $1.59, Max Profit: $141 - A clean, defined-risk way to play the standard Energy bounce inside a choppy, low-volatility range. If XLE mean-reverts toward 90–92, this structure pays quickly Part 2: XLV Call Ratio Spread (Harvesting Exhaustion) - Buy 160C / Sell 2× 163C Jan 16 (51 DTE), Max Profit: $357, Max Risk is undefined (but extremely manageable in XLV). - XLV is extended, overbought, and showing early fatigue. Elevated IV makes upper-strike calls expensive, perfect for a ratio spread that benefits from slowing momentum or shallow consolidation. Why it works as a pairs trade? These aren't two isolated ideas, they're one combined expression: - XLE - defined-risk long delta where bounce probability is high - XLV - premium capture where trend exhaustion is visible - Combined - smooth Greeks, positive theta, and exposure to sector divergence rather than index direction. This is how you express rotation and sector behavior without guessing the market's next move. A clean, elegant pairs structure built for this macro regime.

Hey, NVDA reports today after the close, and this is one of those earnings where the reaction can tell you more about the entire AI cycle than the numbers themselves. IV Rank is high (37), implied move is around 6-7%. Historically, NVDA often moves less than implied, and post-earnings IV drops fast. Everyone tonight is obsessed with one thing: "How are you trading NVDA earnings?" My honest answer: most people shouldn't. It's a crowded, binary event with sky-high expectations already priced in. Yes, IV is juicy, but one wrong line in the guidance and you're fighting a 10-15% gap in a single name. I'd rather attack the same theme, AI and semiconductors, in a calmer, higher-probability way: through SMH, the semiconductor ETF. So why SMH gives more edge than straight NVDA? SMH still benefits from the whole AI chip story, but: - You're diversified across the basket, not hostage to one conference call. - Earnings noise in any single name is diluted. - IV is elevated, but moves are usually much more reasonable than NVDA's all or nothing gaps. That's exactly the environment where short premium, and high probability of profit shines. So, my main play today is not NVDA itself, but a Jade Lizard in SMH:

Hi, I just finished my latest research post, and I think it can be genuinely useful for advanced traders. Every trader knows the classic dilemma: you can collect theta, but it means taking on vega risk. You can position for a vol spike, but you'll bleed premium if the market goes quiet. So when a strategy claims to profit in both directions of volatility while generating consistent income, skepticism is the only rational response. But what if it actually worked? That's the idea behind the Flyagonal - a hybrid of a broken-wing butterfly and a put diagonal that was traded live by Steve Ganz with a 96% win rate. It's one of those rare setups that adapts across market regimes, defines risk upfront, and can deliver steady returns in calm conditions. It still struggles in violent crashes or runaway rallies, but in the right environment (short duration, modest ranges, low IV) it can be a surprisingly effective income engine with clean mechanics and defined risk. So, if you already trade iron condors, calendars, or broken wings, this might be the most interesting addition to your playbook you've seen in years: read the full post on my blog