0DTE index options (SPY / SPX / QQQ) + GEX / call-put walls / flip + unusual flow — checked against the public tape.

We published seven bilingual evidence posts on TradingFlow, each with Rank → Option Trades → structure screenshots and explicit limits (no smart-money identity, no pin predictions).

The series

1. 0DTE — Read the tape before the pin story

https://www.tradingflow.com/blogs/0dte-spy-spx-qqq-evidence-loop/

2. Call / put walls & pin — Evidence before the magnet story

https://www.tradingflow.com/blogs/call-put-walls-pin-day-evidence/

3. UOA / options flow — Not a signal until the tape checks out

https://www.tradingflow.com/blogs/unusual-options-activity-validate-tape/

4. Negative GEX / regime — Distance to flip beats the cascade slogan

https://www.tradingflow.com/blogs/negative-gex-regime-session-risk/

5. Single-name lottery options — Verify the print before the story

https://www.tradingflow.com/blogs/single-name-lottery-options-verify/

6. Selling premium / theta — Flow and GEX context (honest partial fit)

https://www.tradingflow.com/blogs/selling-premium-theta-flow-context/

7. Tools vs alerts — Why alerts alone fail: rank → tape → structure

https://www.tradingflow.com/blogs/rank-tape-structure-vs-alert-tools/

Chinese versions live at /zh/blogs/<same-slug> on www.tradingflow.com.

Product loop we demonstrate

Rank Symbols/Contracts → Live or Historical Option Trades → GEX / walls / Flow Evidence — with app.tradingflow.com reproduction recipes.

Educational only. Not investment advice. Options involve substantial risk of loss.

— TradingFlow

https://www.tradingflow.com/app/home

A GEX wall (https://www.tradingflow.com/glossary/gamma-exposure) tells you where options structure is concentrated. Options flow (https://www.tradingflow.com/glossary/option-flow) tells you what traded during the session. Those are related views, but they are not the same evidence.

TradingFlow’s Session flow at mapped walls feature brings them together without pretending they have the same time horizon. It places the selected session’s exact-strike flow beside the canonical Call GEX Wall and Put GEX Wall, then applies a small, visible sign rule:

- Flow-aligned — observed flow points in the conventional direction associated with that wall.

- Flow-against — observed flow points the other way.

- Mixed flow — Net DEX is zero, or trustworthy premium direction conflicts with Net DEX.

This is a comparison, not a prediction. It does not claim that a wall will hold, break, attract price, or reveal dealer intent.

[Image: Annotated TradingFlow GEX Flow Evidence view showing expiry scope, the selected-scope GEX map, alignment verdicts, wall evidence, and the transparent status explanation]

A real SPY session in TradingFlow, annotated in the order traders can inspect it: scope → structure map → verdict → wall evidence → rationale. Session values change as new snapshots become available.

Why combine GEX and flow?

GEX and flow answer different questions:

Evidence — Question it answers — Time horizon

Full-chain GEX — Where is gamma structure concentrated? — Structural snapshot

Session Net DEX — Which way did same-session directional flow lean? — Current trading session

Directional premium — How much bullish, bearish, and neutral premium traded? — Current trading session

OI change — How did open interest change versus the comparable prior snapshot? — Separately dated structural comparison

A Call Wall can be structurally important even when nothing traded there today. Heavy flow can appear at a strike that is not a canonical wall. The useful question is therefore not “Which number wins?” It is:

Note: Is today’s observed flow at the exact wall strike aligned with, against, or inconclusive beside the structural map?

That framing helps traders avoid two common mistakes: treating every large GEX level as an automatic trade signal, and treating same-session flow as proof of dealer inventory.

What TradingFlow matches

The feature does not compare a wall with every nearby option. It uses a deliberately narrow join:

1. Select a GEX scope: All expirations, 0DTE, Weekly (1–7 days), or Monthly (8–31 days).

2. Read the canonical Call Wall and Put Wall from that same full-chain scope.

3. Match flow at the exact normalized strike.

4. Use CALL contracts only at the Call Wall and PUT contracts only at the Put Wall.

5. Classify only when flow and structure identify the same effective session and the structure build time is available.

The strict matching matters. A nearby strike is not silently substituted. A call row is not used to explain a Put Wall. One expiry scope does not borrow evidence from another.

How the verdict works

There is no composite score and no hidden confidence model.

Wall — Flow-aligned — Flow-against

Call GEX Wall — Negative CALL Net DEX — Positive CALL Net DEX

Put GEX Wall — Positive PUT Net DEX — Negative PUT Net DEX

If Net DEX is exactly zero, the result is Mixed flow.

Directional premium can change a verdict to Mixed flow only when TradingFlow has exact, valid bullish, bearish, and neutral premium legs and their direction conflicts with Net DEX. Reconstructed or unavailable premium remains visible as provenance, but it does not overrule the status.

This rule is intentionally simple enough to audit from the numbers on screen.

A concrete example

Assume SPY is trading at $555 and the selected scope identifies:

- Put GEX Wall: $550

- Call GEX Wall: $560

At the $560 Call Wall, the same-session CALL contracts produce:

- Net DEX: −38K

- Bearish premium: $12M

- Bullish premium: $3M

- Observed prints: 184

The result is Flow-aligned. Negative CALL Net DEX satisfies the transparent Call Wall sign rule, and the exact premium split points in the same direction.

What does that mean? It means the session’s observed call-side flow at $560 carried negative directional pressure beside a structurally concentrated call strike.

What does it not mean?

- It does not prove traders opened new bearish positions.

- It does not prove dealers are short or long a particular inventory.

- It does not guarantee $560 will act as resistance.

- It does not assign a probability that price will reject the level.

The phrase “negative flow at the Call Wall” also does not mean one trader deliberately “put negative flow on the wall.” Net DEX is an aggregate of inferred trade direction across matching prints. Call selling, closing long calls, spreads, and other activity can contribute. The feature describes the tape; it does not claim to know each participant’s intention.

Now assume the $550 Put Wall shows +21K PUT Net DEX, with $7M bullish premium versus $2M bearish premium. That is also Flow-aligned under the Put Wall rule. If PUT Net DEX were negative instead, it would be Flow-against.

Read the map before the badge

After you select Load flow evidence, the feature opens with a chart-first view:

- Put Wall, structure Spot, and Call Wall arranged by price.

- Selected-scope Call and Put GEX by strike.

- Net DEX and evidence status beside each wall.

- Separate flow-session, structure-session, and structure-build provenance.

The badge is only the summary. The audit cards below it provide the evidence:

- Wall role, strike, and distance from structure Spot.

- Wall-side share of selected-scope gross GEX.

- Same-side Net DEX.

- Exact, reconstructed, or unavailable premium provenance.

- Matched expirations and contracts.

- Traded contracts and print count.

- Covered OI change and its comparison coverage.

Use Why this status? to see the exact rule applied to the wall.

Missing evidence is not zero

TradingFlow keeps several states separate because they mean different things:

- Wall unavailable — the selected GEX scope has no canonical wall for that side.

- No matching contracts — the wall exists, but the session snapshot has no same-side contracts at the exact strike.

- No observed flow — matching contracts exist, but their summed print count is zero.

- Geometry not classified — the wall is on an unconventional side of Spot, or a valid Spot reference is unavailable.

- Session mismatch — flow and structure do not describe the same session.

- Source unavailable — one of the required datasets did not load.

The interface does not turn missing evidence into a numeric zero or force a bullish/bearish label when the comparison is unsafe.

How to open GEX Flow Evidence

You can begin from either Rank view:

From Rank Contracts

1. Open Rank → Contracts.

2. Find a contract worth investigating.

3. Select Open symbol flow at GEX walls in the Inspect column.

4. TradingFlow opens the underlying symbol drawer on Flow while keeping your Contracts filters, sorter, and page intact.

From Rank Symbols

1. Open Rank → Symbols.

2. Open a symbol’s inspection drawer.

3. Select the Flow tab.

Flow Evidence is a paid, user-initiated load. An entitled user selects Load flow evidence before the wall comparison or its values are fetched. Consent is tied to the current symbol and resets when the symbol changes or the drawer closes.

After loading:

1. Confirm that the flow session and structure session match.

2. Choose All, 0DTE, Weekly, or Monthly.

3. Read the GEX profile and Spot/wall geometry.

4. Compare the two wall statuses.

5. Open the audit cards and check Net DEX, premium provenance, print count, and OI coverage.

6. Use View GEX map for the wider structural read.

7. Expand the separate 30-session flow history only when you need symbol-wide context.

A practical trading workflow

Treat the feature as an evidence checkpoint between structure and execution:

Step — TradingFlow surface — Question

Map — GEX tab — Where are the selected-scope structural levels relative to Spot?

Compare — Flow tab — Is same-session exact-strike flow aligned, against, mixed, or unavailable?

Audit — Wall evidence cards — How many contracts and prints support the status? Is premium exact? Is OI coverage usable?

Validate — Option Trades — Are recent prints and price action confirming the same read?

Plan risk — Your execution chart — Where is the setup invalidated if price does something different?

GEX Flow Evidence should narrow your questions, not make the decision for you. A Flow-aligned Call Wall can still break. A Flow-against Put Wall can still hold. Price, liquidity, news, volatility, and changing intraday flow remain part of the trade.

What the feature intentionally does not do

- It does not rank walls.

- It does not calculate a 0–100 confidence score.

- It does not label a wall as a guaranteed target, magnet, support, or resistance.

- It does not infer dealer inventory from Net DEX.

- It does not treat OI change as proof of opening or closing.

- It does not manufacture a classification when sessions or provenance disagree.

That restraint is part of the product. GEX is the structural map; flow is the observed session tape. TradingFlow shows where they agree and where they do not, while keeping the evidence auditable.

Open the workflow

Open SPY Flow Evidence in TradingFlow (https://app.tradingflow.com/app/rank/symbols?selectedSymbol=SPY&drawerTab=flow)

For the underlying concepts, read:

- Gamma Exposure (GEX) explained (https://www.tradingflow.com/learn/greeks-and-gex/)

- Call Walls, Put Walls, OI, and Max Pain (https://www.tradingflow.com/learn/option-chain-and-oi/)

- Symbol-level analysis in Rank (https://www.tradingflow.com/blogs/market-rank)

- GEX Scanner and Screener (https://www.tradingflow.com/blogs/gex-screener)

This feature is an analytical research tool, not investment advice or a mechanical trading signal.

A viral post on X (https://x.com/0xKevin00/status/2082387275464556935) described an options trader selling roughly $7 million of memory-sector puts. Its framing was irresistible: the trader was supposedly betting that memory stocks would fall about 40% within a month, collecting roughly $422,000 of “interest” if they did not, and buying the stocks cheaply if assigned.

We checked the claim against TradingFlow’s historical option flow (https://www.tradingflow.com/glossary/option-flow) tape.

Our verdict: the reported contract quantities and gross premiums reconcile exactly with prints in the tape. The viral interpretation does not.

The evidence supports a large basket of put trades. It does not independently prove the trader’s identity, that every contract was sold to open, or the trader’s intent. The basket is also neither entirely memory-stock exposure nor entirely one-month exposure—and selling a put is not a direct bet that the stock will fall.

[Image: Annotated capture of the original X post highlighting its reported $7 million put scale, one-month 40% drop framing, $422,000 interest language, and MU $660 example]

Annotated capture of the July 29, 2026 source post (https://x.com/0xKevin00/status/2082387275464556935). This establishes the claims being tested; it does not authenticate the trader, prove execution, or identify whether the contracts were opened or closed. The clean, unannotated capture is retained with the article assets.

[Image: Annotated TradingFlow historical Option Trades view showing the July 28 date and time window, $47.36K Put Flow total, three matching MU $660 put prints, 104% IV, and the boundary between what the tape proves and what it cannot prove]

Evidence from TradingFlow Historical Option Trades. The three MU Aug. 28, 2026 $660 put prints total 15 contracts and $47,355 in gross premium. The annotations identify the filters and arithmetic; the underlying screenshot is otherwise unchanged.

What matched

The source image listed six option series. Filtering the July 28, 2026 tape by symbol, expiration, and strike produced the same quantities and gross premiums:

Underlying — Expiration — Put strike — Contracts — Gross premium — Exercise obligation

EWY — Aug. 28, 2026 — $135 — 150 — $89,860 — $2,025,000

MU — Aug. 28, 2026 — $655 — 15 — $43,230 — $982,500

MU — Aug. 28, 2026 — $660 — 15 — $47,355 — $990,000

MU — Mar. 19, 2027 — $400 — 25 — $80,725 — $1,000,000

SNDK — Aug. 28, 2026 — $750 — 13 — $64,285 — $975,000

SNDK — Feb. 19, 2027 — $360 — 30 — $96,680 — $1,080,000

Total — 248 — $422,135 — $7,052,500

The exercise obligation is straightforward:

Note: strike × 100 shares × contracts

If all six positions were short puts and every contract were assigned, the gross cash required to buy the shares would be $7,052,500.

The source image also reported $168.50 in fees. That figure is not observable in public market data, but its arithmetic checks:

- Gross premium: $422,135

- Reported fees: $168.50

- Net premium: $421,966.50

- Exercise obligation minus net premium: $6,630,533.50

That is where the viral post’s “about $6.63 million” figure comes from.

The clearest match: MU $660 puts

[Image: Annotated TradingFlow filter recipe for reproducing the MU Aug. 28, 2026 $660 put search, including Historical mode, MU, July 28, the 10:43–10:45 New York time window, PUT type, and the $660 strike]

The exact filter recipe used in the authenticated test-app verification. To reproduce it publicly, open Historical Option Trades in TradingFlow (https://app.tradingflow.com/app/option-trades/historical), sign in, select Historical, and apply the same controls shown above.

Use these settings:

- Symbol: MU

- Date range: July 28, 2026

- Time range: 10:43–10:45 New York time

- Expiration: August 28, 2026

- Type: PUT

- Strike price: 660 to 660

The annotated screenshot isolates the MU Aug. 28 $660 puts between 10:43 and 10:45:

Time — Contracts — Option price — Gross premium — Tape side — IV

10:43:23 — 5 — $31.70 — $15,850 — Mid — 104%

10:43:35 — 5 — $31.61 — $15,805 — Mid — 104%

10:44:06 — 5 — $31.40 — $15,700 — Bid — 104%

Total — 15 — $31.57 weighted average — $47,355

The reconciliation is exact:

Note: 5 × 100 × ($31.70 + $31.61 + $31.40) = $47,355

The same process reconciled the other five reported series. This is strong evidence that the source image was built from real market prints rather than invented numbers.

It is not a broker confirmation. Public tape is anonymous, and a Bid or Mid label describes where a print occurred relative to the quoted spread. It does not reveal the account, prove sale-to-open, or tell us whether another leg existed elsewhere.

What open interest adds—and what it cannot prove

The same TradingFlow view adds a useful second layer. Each MU $660 row shows OI 98 with a green ↑130 comparison. In other words, the app found a positive open-interest change after the trade-time snapshot. TradingFlow’s own glossary describes OI as an overnight-updated measure, so this is a next-session confirmation of net contract creation—not an intraday open/close flag.

[Image: Annotated close-up of the three MU $660 put prints highlighting OI 98 and the positive 130 next-session comparison on every row]

The close-up makes the OI evidence readable at article width: all three prints carry the same positive comparison. That supports net new positioning at the contract level; it does not identify the account or its order instruction.

That makes the prints OI-supported and opening-like, not proven sale-to-open trades. Open interest is an aggregate number: if one participant opens while another closes, OI can stay flat; if both sides open, it rises; if both sides close, it falls. None of those outcomes identifies the anonymous seller’s account or side. The app also exposes an “Opening Position” filter, but that is a flow/OI classification heuristic, not a broker-supplied order instruction.

[Image: Annotated TradingFlow Filter View with the Opening Position switch enabled and a warning that it is a screening heuristic rather than a broker order flag]

The Opening Position control was rechecked in the authenticated test app on July 31, 2026. Readers can find the same control from TradingFlow Historical Option Trades (https://app.tradingflow.com/app/option-trades/historical) by opening Filters, scrolling to Options, and enabling Opening Position.

The strongest defensible wording is therefore: the tape matches the prints, and the subsequent OI increase is consistent with new positioning; the public data still cannot confirm that the trader sold these puts to open.

Where the viral interpretation breaks down

1. Selling puts is not a bet that the stocks will fall

A short put is generally a neutral-to-bullish position at expiry.

- The maximum gain is the premium received.

- The seller keeps that maximum only if the option expires worthless.

- Below the strike, assignment becomes possible.

- Below the strike minus premium, the position loses money at expiry.

- The loss grows as the underlying falls.

The seller may be willing to acquire shares at a lower effective price. That is different from profiting because the shares fell. A 40% collapse would be favorable to a long put buyer, not automatically to the put seller.

2. Only part of the basket expires in one month

Four series expire on Aug. 28, 2026:

- 193 of 248 contracts, or 77.8%

- $4,972,500 of the exercise obligation, or 70.5%

- $244,730 of gross premium, or 58.0%

The remaining two series—$2.08 million of exercise obligation and $177,405 of gross premium—expire in February and March 2027.

Calling the entire $422,135 a one-month return mixes short-dated premium with capital committed to long-dated options.

3. The one-month strikes were not 40% below the tape

At the observed underlying prices, the August strikes were approximately:

Series — Approx. spot at the print — Strike — Strike below spot

EWY Aug. $135 put — $152.60 — $135 — 11.5%

MU Aug. $655 put — $819.52 — $655 — 20.1%

MU Aug. $660 put — about $812 — $660 — about 18.7%

SNDK Aug. $750 put — $1,065.59 — $750 — 29.6%

The much lower strikes were the 2027 contracts: MU $400 and SNDK $360. Combining those long-dated crash strikes with the August expirations creates the misleading “40% in one month” summary.

4. EWY is not a pure memory stock

MU and SNDK are direct memory and storage equities. EWY is a broad South Korea ETF. It can carry substantial semiconductor and memory-industry exposure through its holdings, but it is not a single memory company.

MU and SNDK account for $5,027,500, or about 71.3%, of the basket’s exercise obligation. EWY accounts for the other 28.7%.

“Memory-heavy basket” is fair. “$7 million of memory stocks” is too neat.

5. Premium is not interest

Option premium is compensation for taking an obligation and its risk. It is not a fixed-interest payment.

Before expiration, a short put can move sharply against the seller as the stock falls or implied volatility (https://www.tradingflow.com/learn/greeks-and-gex/) rises. American-style equity and ETF options can also be assigned early. Closing or rolling the position may cost more than the original credit.

The 104% IV visible in the MU screenshot is especially important. It is annualized implied volatility—not a 104% probability and not a forecast that MU will fall 104%. It signals that the option market was charging a high price for uncertainty.

What the effective entries would be

If these were short puts, if the premium were fully retained, and if assignment occurred, the gross-premium-adjusted entry price would be:

Underlying — Put strike — Premium per share — Effective entry before fees

EWY Aug. 2026 — $135 — $5.9907 — $129.01

MU Aug. 2026 — $655 — $28.82 — $626.18

MU Aug. 2026 — $660 — $31.57 — $628.43

MU Mar. 2027 — $400 — $32.29 — $367.71

SNDK Aug. 2026 — $750 — $49.45 — $700.55

SNDK Feb. 2027 — $360 — $32.2267 — $327.77

The two August MU positions together cover 3,000 shares. Their combined effective entry is about $627.31 per share, consistent with the approximately $627 figure in the viral post.

That does not make the risk disappear. If MU were far below $627.31 at August expiration, the assigned position would carry an unrealized loss. “I am happy to own it there” must still survive position sizing, drawdowns, news gaps, and the possibility that the original thesis is wrong.

A better way to read the trade

The most defensible description is:

Note: A large, memory-heavy basket of short-put-like prints split between high-IV August exposure and much lower 2027 strikes, with roughly $7.05 million of potential exercise obligation.

That description separates three different claims:

1. What traded: contract, expiration, strike, size, price, premium, and IV.

2. What the position could mean: premium selling, conditional share acquisition, downside underwriting, or a multi-leg strategy.

3. What the trader intended: unknowable from anonymous tape alone.

This separation matters whenever you use an options-flow scanner. A print can be real while the story attached to it is wrong.

Before copying a trade like this

Ask questions the viral summary skips:

- Is the position cash-secured, margined, or part of a spread?

- Can the account fund assignment across every expiration?

- Is the effective entry still attractive after a large fundamental change?

- How much of the premium comes from unusually high IV?

- What is the plan for early assignment, closing, or rolling?

- How concentrated is the risk across correlated underlyings?

- Would a gap below breakeven make the position unmanageable?

The premium is visible immediately. The obligation is what needs underwriting.

How we verified it

We preserved a clean capture of the source post, annotated the four claims that drive its narrative, transcribed the six reported option series, and then used an authenticated TradingFlow historical Option Trades session to search the July 28, 2026 tape.

For each series, we matched:

- underlying

- expiration

- put strike

- contract quantity

- execution price

- gross premium

We captured the MU $660 evidence view after applying the exact date, time, expiration, type, and strike filters. The screenshot annotation marks the selected scope, the $47.36K Put Flow total, the three matching rows, and the repeated 104% IV.

We also checked the OI comparison in that view and the app’s Opening Position filter. The three rows show the same positive ↑130 OI comparison. That is useful T+1 evidence for net new positioning, but it remains an inference about the contract’s aggregate open interest—not proof of an individual account’s sell-to-open instruction.

The check has limits. Market tape is anonymous. It cannot authenticate the source account, observe private broker fees, prove opening versus closing, or reveal a hedge executed in another instrument. The source image remains the attribution for the trader identity and the claimed sell-to-open direction.

Bottom line

The trade data is credible: six series, 248 contracts, $422,135 in gross premium, and $7,052,500 in potential exercise obligation all reconcile.

The viral explanation is not: this was not simply a $7 million bet that memory stocks would drop 40% in one month, and $422,000 was not guaranteed interest.

The useful lesson is bigger than this one post. Verify the prints first, then challenge the narrative. Open TradingFlow Historical Option Trades (https://app.tradingflow.com/app/option-trades/historical) to repeat the workflow, or read the Option Trades tutorial (https://www.tradingflow.com/blogs/option-trades/) for more context. Sound analysis begins by respecting what the tape still cannot tell you.

This article is for research and education only. It is not investment advice or a recommendation to copy the position.

A viral post on X (https://x.com/WiseInvest513/status/2080840562337579135) attributed an order preview for 1,000 SPCX Dec. 18, 2026 $115 puts to value investor Duan Yongping. At the displayed $23.20 limit, the strategy would collect $2.32 million upfront while accepting an $11.5 million obligation to buy 100,000 SPCX shares if assigned.

After subtracting the premium, the effective expiry entry would be $91.80 per share. That is the real reason the post is interesting: if the attribution and execution are genuine, this is less an income trade than a disciplined attempt to get paid while waiting to buy SpaceX exposure at a lower price.

That makes this a useful case study in two questions. First, why would a value investor use short puts to buy the dip? Second, can TradingFlow verify whether the market evidence actually supports the viral report?

Who is Duan Yongping?

Duan Yongping is an entrepreneur turned value investor whose reputation was built long before this SPCX screenshot. A KrASIA profile of Duan (https://kr-asia.com/duan-yongping-from-chopping-firewood-in-the-countryside-to-creating-a-billion-dollar-legacy-part-3-of-3) traces his role in building BBK and the businesses that later became OPPO and vivo. The same profile recounts his early-2002 purchase of more than $2 million of NetEase shares near $0.80 while the company was deeply out of favor.

His public investing persona centers on patience, concentration, and understanding the underlying business rather than trading the headline. Notes from his Stanford conversation (https://finance.yahoo.com/news/notes-duan-yongpings-talk-stanford-160613922.html) describe his connection to OPPO and vivo, his 2006 winning bid for Warren Buffett’s charity lunch, and his “Stop Doing List”—the idea that resisting the wrong action can matter more than constantly finding something new to do.

That history does not authenticate the SPCX order. It explains why the attribution became compelling: a large short-put position, designed to collect premium or acquire a desired asset after a decline, fits the public image of a patient value investor.

Why this looks like a $91.80 buy-the-dip strategy

If all 1,000 puts filled at $23.20, the strategy’s economics would be:

[Image: Infographic showing the hypothetical premium, assignment obligation, breakeven, and downside of 1000 SPCX 115-dollar short puts filled at 23.20]

This is scenario math, not proof of execution. It shows how a short put can function as a paid commitment to buy at a lower effective price.

- Gross premium: $23.20 × 100 × 1,000 = $2,320,000

- Estimated net after the displayed $200 commission: $2,319,800

- Gross assignment obligation: $115 × 100 × 1,000 = $11,500,000

- Expiry breakeven before other costs: $115 − $23.20 = $91.80 per share

- Maximum premium gain: $2.32 million before fees

- Loss if the shares went to zero: $91.80 × 100 × 1,000 = $9.18 million before fees

At expiry, three paths matter:

- SPCX at or above $115: the puts can expire worthless and the seller keeps the premium.

- SPCX between $91.80 and $115: assignment buys the shares at $115, but the premium reduces the effective cost to $91.80, leaving the position ahead at expiry while SPCX remains above that level.

- SPCX below $91.80: losses grow dollar-for-dollar as the shares fall, offset only by the premium already collected.

For an investor who already wants the underlying exposure, a cash-secured short put can resemble a paid limit order. The crucial difference is obligation: once assigned, the seller cannot simply decline the purchase. Calling this a buy-the-dip move therefore makes sense only as a description of the intended strategy—not as proof that it was submitted, filled, or profitable.

The alleged intention can be inferred from the order structure:

Note: “If SPCX stays above $115, keep the $2.32 million premium. If it falls below $115, accept assignment at an effective $91.80 entry.”

That is a strategy interpretation, not a verified statement from Duan Yongping.

TradingFlow verdict: plausible strategy, unverified execution

We converted each part of the viral report into a testable market-data claim, then checked the exact contract in TradingFlow’s historical option flow (https://www.tradingflow.com/glossary/option-flow/) tape for July 24, 2026.

Claim in the viral report — How TradingFlow tests it — Finding — Verdict

The $115 put traded near $23.20 — Filter SPCX, date, expiry, type, and strike — A 30-contract print appeared at $23.19 — Supported

One 1,000-contract order filled — Add Size ≥ 1,000 — Zero matching prints — Not verified as a single fill

It was sell-to-open — Compare trade size, volume, OI, and Opening Position context — Tape has no broker-side open/close instruction — Not verified

It belonged to Duan Yongping — Identify the account behind the print — Public tape is anonymous — Cannot be verified from market data

The strategy collects $2.32M with a $91.80 breakeven — Recalculate the displayed order — Math is correct if fully filled at $23.20 — Conditionally correct

This distinction is the product value: TradingFlow can test whether the contract, price, timestamp, size, and positioning evidence support a media claim. It cannot turn anonymous exchange prints into proof of a named account.

[Image: Infographic distinguishing an SPCX order preview from an execution confirmation and the anonymous public option tape]

The evidence ladder matters: an order preview records an intention; a broker fill report records execution; public tape records anonymous market prints. Only the latter two can help verify a fill, and neither identifies the account from this post.

Step 1: separate order intention from execution

[Image: Annotated screenshot of the original WiseInvest X post and its embedded SPCX broker order preview]

Original-post evidence captured from X on Aug. 1, 2026. Callout 1 preserves the post’s attribution to Duan Yongping; callout 2 isolates the reported STO 1,000 SPCX $115 put at a $23.20 limit; callout 3 shows that the broker screen still displays “Place Order.”

The broker screen in the X post reads approximately:

Note: STO 1,000 SPCX 12/18/2026 115 Put @ Limit $23.20, Day

It also shows an estimated commission of $200, an estimated total credit of $2,319,800, and a visible Place Order button. Those details are consistent with a prepared sell-to-open limit order. They are not the fields a completed execution would normally need: order status, filled quantity, average fill price, and execution time.

This distinction is the first verification gate. A screenshot can be authentic while the caption overstates what the screenshot proves.

Step 2: reproduce the exact contract in TradingFlow

We used authenticated Historical Option Trades in the TradingFlow test environment. Readers with the required access can open Historical Option Trades in the public app (https://app.tradingflow.com/app/option-trades/historical) and reproduce the same workflow manually.

Start with:

- Mode: Historical

- Symbol: SPCX

- Date: July 24, 2026

- Type: PUT

- Days to Expiry: 147 to 147

- Strike Price: 115 to 115

- Time range: Full day

[Image: Annotated TradingFlow Filter View highlighting 147 days to expiry and the 115-dollar strike for the SPCX December 2026 put]

Annotated browser evidence from the authenticated test environment. Callout 1 fixes the Dec. 18 expiration through 147 DTE; callout 2 isolates the $115 strike. The public reproduction route is TradingFlow Historical Option Trades (https://app.tradingflow.com/app/option-trades/historical).

These filters returned actual prints for the contract. Sorting the tape by Size descending showed this largest-first sample:

New York time — Tape side — Option price — Size — Gross premium — OI shown

15:32:57 — Ask — $23.89 — 50 — $119.5K — 7,447

11:37:14 — Bid — $23.84 — 50 — $119.5K — 7,447

10:33:17 — Mid — $24.04 — 40 — $96.2K — 7,447

09:30:00 — Mid — $22.73 — 34 — $76.9K — 7,447

10:25:19 — Ask — $24.00 — 32 — $76.8K — 7,447

09:40:58 — Ask — $23.19 — 30 — $69.6K — 7,447

The table supports a narrower conclusion than the post: the contract traded around the cited price, but the largest displayed print was 50—not 1,000. A price match by itself cannot link an anonymous print to a named trader.

Step 3: test the reported 1,000-contract size

Next we added a minimum-size filter of 1,000 contracts while preserving the exact contract and date.

[Image: Annotated TradingFlow Filter View highlighting 147 DTE, the 115-dollar strike, and a minimum size of 1000 contracts]

Callouts 1 and 2 retain the exact contract; callout 3 tests the viral claim directly. Apply the same settings from Historical Option Trades (https://app.tradingflow.com/app/option-trades/historical).

The committed filter set was:

Note: SPCX · July 24, 2026 · PUT · DTE 147 · strike $115 · size ≥ 1,000

TradingFlow returned no matching rows.

[Image: Annotated TradingFlow Historical Option Trades result showing SPCX on July 24, the exact applied filters, and no trades matching a minimum size of 1000]

Callout 1 identifies SPCX and the July 24 session; callout 2 preserves the exact PUT, DTE, strike, and size criteria; callout 3 shows the zero-result state. This rules out a single 1,000-contract print in the captured tape view. It does not rule out a parent order divided into smaller executions.

This is why “we found no 1,000-lot print” is stronger and more honest than “the trade was fake.” A large limit order could be canceled, remain unfilled, receive a partial fill, or execute as multiple smaller prints. Public market data also cannot identify whose order participated in any particular print.

Step 4: ask whether OI proves sell-to-open

No. Open interest (https://www.tradingflow.com/learn/option-chain-and-oi/) is useful, but it is not an account-level order flag.

The July 24 SPCX rows showed OI 7,447. The single-session view did not expose a broker-side open/close instruction or a point-in-time OI series we could use to attribute the order. OI is an aggregate count that normally updates after clearing. Even if a later snapshot rose, that would support net contract creation across the market; it would not tell us which account opened, which side that account took, or whether another participant closed an offsetting position.

TradingFlow also has an Opening Position filter. Its classification is a size/volume/OI screening heuristic, not broker-supplied “buy to open” or “sell to open” data. In this case, the tape’s largest visible size was 50 against OI of 7,447, so it does not produce anything resembling the claimed 1,000-lot opening confirmation.

There is another freshness boundary: in a wider Historical window, TradingFlow compares older flow rows with the latest known OI for the contract. That is useful current context, but it is not a point-in-time OI series for every trade date. Learn the clocks behind the columns in Option Chain & OI (https://www.tradingflow.com/learn/option-chain-and-oi/) and the Option Trades tutorial (https://www.tradingflow.com/learn/option-trades/).

The defensible conclusion is therefore:

Note: The ticket shows an intended sell-to-open order. The captured tape does not verify a single 1,000-contract execution, and OI cannot connect anonymous contract-level changes to the claimed account.

Final finding: the idea is credible; the reported trade is unconfirmed

Supported by the source and TradingFlow evidence:

- The source prepared an order for 1,000 SPCX Dec. 18 $115 puts at a $23.20 limit.

- The contract traded on July 24 around that price.

- TradingFlow showed no single print of 1,000 contracts or more under the exact filters.

- The largest visible print in the size-sorted result was 50 contracts.

Not established:

- That the 1,000-contract order was submitted, filled, or filled completely.

- That any tape print belonged to the person named in the post.

- That the account sold to open rather than used another order instruction or multi-leg structure.

- That an OI change, by itself, identifies either side of this trade.

This is the practical value of an options flow scanner (https://www.tradingflow.com/learn/options-and-flow-concepts/): not to turn every viral screenshot into certainty, but to separate contract facts, market prints, positioning context, and interpretation. Here, the alleged Duan Yongping buy-the-dip strategy is economically coherent, yet the available evidence does not verify the account attribution or the reported 1,000-contract execution.

To investigate the next market headline yourself, start at TradingFlow App Home (https://app.tradingflow.com/app/home), open Historical Option Trades (https://app.tradingflow.com/app/option-trades/historical), and convert the report into exact symbol, date, expiry, strike, price, and size filters. That is how a viral claim becomes a reproducible market-data check.

Educational market-data analysis only; not investment advice. Public option tape is anonymous and may not show every broker-side detail or parent-order relationship.

A widely shared X post from Li Laoshi Is Not Your Teacher (https://x.com/whyyoutouzhele/status/2077513537711476844) revisited the “100-person insider-trading case” surrounding Futu Holdings (FUTU) and UP Fintech (TIGR). The post discussed the first named defendants and alleged links between trading funds and prominent Hong Kong political and business figures.

Those are serious claims. They also combine several evidence layers that should not be collapsed into one story: a social-media report, allegations in a civil complaint, official company filings, anonymous option prints, and a future legal finding.

So we tested the part TradingFlow can actually observe: did the options tape show unusually large FUTU or TIGR put activity before the May 22 regulatory news, and does open interest confirm that the trades were opening positions?

Note: Finding: the tape does corroborate unusually large pre-news put activity. The strongest captured example is an $870K FUTU put print on May 20, two days before the disclosures, with size 1,000 against OI of 2 and Vol/OI of 500x. But it printed at the mid-market, and the captured session did not return a usable next-session OI history. It is therefore opening-like, not opening-confirmed. The tape does not prove account identity, inside information, total profit, or legal liability.

[Image: Evidence chain separating the social claim, official documents, TradingFlow tape, next-session OI test, and bounded conclusion]

The evidence chain prevents a real option print from being mistaken for proof of who traded it or why.

What the official record actually says

The chronology matters more than the viral framing.

Date — Public record — What it establishes

May 7–21, 2026 — A later federal complaint (https://assets.bwbx.io/documents/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/rhMp0u3Q5JcY/v0) alleged concentrated purchases of short-dated FUTU and TIGR puts through several brokers — A litigant's detailed allegations—not a final judicial finding

May 20 — TradingFlow captured a large FUTU Jun. 18 $124 put print — A verifiable anonymous market print before the news

May 22 — Futu's SEC filing (https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1754581/000110465926065484/tm2615466d1_6k.htm) disclosed a proposed penalty of about RMB1.85 billion; UP Fintech's filing (https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1756699/000119312526235622/tigr-ex99.htm) disclosed penalties and confiscation across subsidiaries — The dated regulatory disclosures that moved the stocks and options

June 29 — The case was filed in the Southern District of New York, docketed as 1:26-cv-05474 (https://dockets.justia.com/docket/new-york/nysdce/1%3A2026cv05474/667213) — A real court proceeding with temporary-restraint and discovery activity

July 15 — The X post discussed newly named parties and alleged relationships — A public report that still requires documentary and legal verification

The complaint alleged that traders bought more than 50,000 FUTU put contracts and 150,000 TIGR put contracts, with heavy concentration on May 21. It also alleged roughly $12 million of option spending and profits exceeding $100 million after the May 22 announcements. Those are allegations from a pleading. This TradingFlow review does not independently reconcile the complaint's account-level cost, profit, brokerage, or ownership claims.

The strongest pre-news print we found

We opened the authenticated TradingFlow test app and searched Historical Option Trades (https://app.tradingflow.com/app/option-trades/historical) for FUTU puts before the public disclosures.

The May 20 filter returned one standout row:

Field — TradingFlow observation

Time — May 20, 12:40:03 New York time

Contract — FUTU Jun. 18, 2026 $124 put

Spot / moneyness — $126.03 / out of the money

Execution — Mid-market at $8.70

Size / premium — 1,000 contracts / $870K

OI / Vol-OI — 2 / 500x

[Image: Annotated TradingFlow Historical Option Trades screenshot showing the May 20 FUTU session, $870K put flow, and a 1,000-contract row against OI of 2]

Browser-chrome-free evidence from the authenticated TradingFlow test app, captured August 1, 2026. Callout 1 fixes the pre-news date; callout 2 shows the session's $870K put flow; callout 3 isolates size 1,000, OI 2, and Vol/OI 500x. Public reproduction starts at Historical Option Trades (https://app.tradingflow.com/app/option-trades/historical).

This is genuinely unusual option flow (https://www.tradingflow.com/glossary/option-flow/). A 1,000-contract print was enormous relative to the standing OI shown on the row. It is also directionally consistent with a downside thesis before bad news.

But two details stop us from calling it a confirmed put purchase:

- The execution side is Mid. A mid-market print does not identify the aggressor. It may be a buyer, a seller, a negotiated block, or one leg of a larger structure.

- The tape is anonymous. It cannot connect this print to any defendant, broker account, beneficial owner, or person named in the X post or complaint.

The trade is strong evidence of abnormal pre-news activity. It is not identity or intent evidence.

Was it an opening position? The OI test

This is the extra check every article about a supposed new position should make.

Open interest (https://www.tradingflow.com/learn/option-chain-and-oi/) normally reflects contracts still open after the prior clearing cycle. When a 1,000-lot trades against OI of 2, the row looks like a potential opening position because today's activity dwarfs the standing book. TradingFlow's star marker and Opening Position screen use that relationship as a discovery heuristic.

However, Size > OI and a huge Vol/OI ratio (https://www.tradingflow.com/glossary/vol-oi/) are not broker-supplied “buy to open” or “sell to open” instructions. The stronger test is the exact contract's next-session OI:

- If OI rose materially after clearing, that would support net contract creation across the market.

- If OI stayed flat or fell, the activity could reflect churn, closing, offsets, or reporting differences.

- Even a large OI increase would not reveal which participant opened, whether that participant bought or sold, or whether the trade was hedged elsewhere.

We attempted that comparison for FUTU260618P00124000. In the captured test-app session, the contract-level Positioning view did not return a usable T+1 OI series, and the May 21 exact-contract tape did not yield a readable next-session OI row. We therefore do not promote this trade from “opening-like” to “opening-confirmed.”

That limitation is part of the finding, not a footnote to hide. The Option Trades tutorial (https://www.tradingflow.com/learn/option-trades/) explains the flow columns; Option Chain & OI (https://www.tradingflow.com/learn/option-chain-and-oi/) explains why trade prints and settled positioning run on different clocks.

Why the May 21–22 totals are not pre-news proof

Next we widened the FUTU window to May 21–22. TradingFlow showed $78.72M of put flow across the two-day range, including a May 22 ask-side 0DTE row with $218K premium and OI of 7,703.

[Image: Annotated TradingFlow screenshot showing $78.72M of FUTU put flow across May 21 and May 22 and marking the visible row as post-news]

The two-day aggregate includes the announcement session. It demonstrates how violently the option tape expanded around the event, but it cannot be quoted as a pre-news-only total.

This distinction matters. The complaint's “subject trades” were alleged to have occurred through May 21. A May 22 option can be a reaction, hedge, exit, or fresh event trade after the disclosure. Mixing it into pre-news evidence would inflate the apparent corroboration.

TIGR shows the same event-window trap

The TIGR May 21–22 view surfaced two large May 22 0DTE rows:

- $6 put: 4,566 contracts, $681.9K premium, OI 23,994, printed at Bid.

- $5 put: 10,953 contracts, $536.7K premium, OI 20,555, printed at Bid.

[Image: Annotated TradingFlow screenshot showing the TIGR May 21–22 filter, unavailable aggregate metrics, and two large May 22 bid-side rows]

The aggregate metrics failed in this captured state, so we use only the visible rows. Both are event-day bid-side prints. They may reflect selling or exits and do not establish pre-news put buying.

This is useful negative evidence. A large put print is not automatically bearish put buying. Bid, ask, and mid (https://www.tradingflow.com/learn/options-and-flow-concepts/) change what can reasonably be inferred, and event-day flow must be separated from the pre-event tape.

Claim-by-claim verdict

Claim — Evidence found — Verdict

Large FUTU/TIGR put activity existed before the May 22 news — $870K FUTU May 20 print, size 1,000, OI 2, Vol/OI 500x — Corroborated in part

The May 20 FUTU row was definitely a put purchase — It printed at Mid — Not established

The trade opened a new position — Size and Vol/OI are opening-like; usable T+1 OI was unavailable — Not confirmed

May 21–22 aggregate put flow is all pre-news activity — The window includes May 22 event-day rows — False framing

Named defendants or related funds placed the observed prints — Public option tape is anonymous — Not verifiable from TradingFlow

Roughly $12M became more than $100M — Court-pleading allegation; no account-level reconciliation here — Not independently verified

Insider knowledge or liability is proved — Requires discovery, account records, and judicial findings — Not proved by market data

Reproduce the check in TradingFlow

Open TradingFlow Historical Option Trades (https://app.tradingflow.com/app/option-trades/historical) and start with:

1. Mode: Historical

2. Symbol: FUTU

3. Date: May 20, 2026

4. Type: PUT

5. Premium: at least 500,000

6. Time range: Full day

Read the result in this order: contract and expiration, side, strike and spot, premium, size, OI, then Vol/OI. To attempt the OI follow-up, isolate the Jun. 18 $124 put and compare the next settled session or open the exact contract's Positioning view when history is available.

Then run May 21 and May 22 as separate windows. Do not combine them until you have labeled which rows are pre-news and which are event-day reactions.

Bottom line

The most defensible conclusion is narrower—and more useful—than the viral version:

TradingFlow corroborates an abnormally large FUTU put print before the regulatory disclosures. The row is opening-like because 1,000 contracts traded against OI of 2, but T+1 OI confirmation was not available, and the mid-market execution does not identify a buyer. Nothing in the public tape proves who traded, what they knew, how much they ultimately made, or whether they violated the law.

That is what a market-data verification tool should do: make the observable part reproducible while preserving the boundary around everything the tape cannot know. Start at TradingFlow App Home (https://app.tradingflow.com/app/home), then use Historical Option Trades to test the next market headline against the actual tape.

Educational market-data analysis only. This article is not investment advice or a legal conclusion. Allegations in a complaint remain allegations unless established through evidence and adjudication.

Recently, Chinese assets have been making notable moves in the market.

Last Monday (December 9), the Nasdaq Golden Dragon China Index closed up 8.54%, marking its largest single-day gain since 26th September. Signs of capital flows betting heavily on China ETFs began emerging as early as late November, with traders making significant bets on call options.

For example, on 2nd December, a trader purchased approximately 210,000 call options for the Direxion Daily CSI 300 China A Share Bull 2X ETF ($CHAU), spending an estimated $55 million at average prices. This level of activity stands out sharply, as $CHAU typically sees very little options trading.

Except $CHAU, other China-related ETFs like $YINN and $FXI have also shown unusual call option activity. According to the latest open interest (OI) data, traders appear to have closed only a small fraction of their positions, leaving the majority still open.

This article explores the capital flows behind the call options for $YINN, $CHAU, and $FXI, offering a closer look at the potential signals these trades reveal and retracing the steps of the "smart money".

1. $YINN

According to TradingFlow's Option Chain Explorer section, the $YINN call options set to expire on 16th January, 2026, with a strike price of $27, showed significant activity on 29th November. Specifically, open interest (OI) surged by over 90,000 contracts that day (kindly note that #OI DIFF indicates changes from the previous trading session).

Further investigation via TradingFlow's Contract Level Explorer reveals a steady inflow of large capital into these call options. As of this writing, based on the current OI data, traders have closed only a small portion of their positions, leaving the majority still open.

2. $CHAU

The first notable signs of large-scale bullish bets on $CHAU call options emerged on 3rd December, later than the unusual activity observed in $YINN.

Data shows that the $CHAU call option contract expiring on 16th May, 2025, with a strike price of $15, experienced a single-day open interest (OI) increase of up to 200,000 contracts. Similarly, as of now, a significant portion of these contracts remains open and unclosed.

3. $FXI

Several $FXI call option contracts have shown unusual activity. For instance, the $FXI call option expiring on 20th December, 2024, with a strike price of $32, saw a sharp increase in open interest (OI) on 29th November, adding 9,757 contracts—significantly higher than the previous daily changes, which were typically below 500.

After the initial surge in large-scale positions for this contract, additional notable inflows were observed on trading days such as 2nd December and 6th December. As of this writing, a significant portion of these contracts remains open, with only a small fraction closed.

Using the average price of this contract as a reference, traders who added nearly 10,000 contracts on 29th November could have seen unrealized gains exceeding 550% by 9th December, assuming the newly opened positions remained unclosed on that date. However, as of last Friday’s close, most of these positions are still open and are likely now in a losing state.

This activity has drawn significant market attention to the OI values of $FXI and the previously mentioned ETF-related call options. Are traders gearing up for the next leg higher? Stay tuned with TradingFlow for their next moves!

If you like this article, please subscribe. To use all the tools, start a free trial for 14 days now.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Before making any financial investment decisions, please ensure you thoroughly understand all aspects of the information and conduct your own research.

🎁 Bonus time 🎁 with Moomoo, one of the most cost-effective investment platforms currently on the market!

Click the link below to try moomoo and receive your welcome free stock and cash sweep bonus! 👉: https://j.moomoo.com/00IRhe

Recently, as Trump’s popularity surged on the prediction platform Polymarket, a wave of Trump Trades has swept the market.

Leading the charge, Trump-linked stock Trump Media & Technology Group Corp (DJT), skyrocketed with the rally beginning on 24th September and peaking intraday at $54.68 on 28th October, a remarkable gain of nearly 350%.

During DJT’s recent price surge, TradingFlow team identified the strong short-term bullish trend early on, based on unusual options data movement, with the trend confirmed as early as 11th October. At that confirmation point, there was still more than 100% upside potential until DJT’s stock reached its record high.

Now, let's take a look back at how our team detected this explosive rally signal by analyzing changes in Open Interest (OI). Using TradingFlow's Option Chain Explorer data, we observed a sharp increase in OI for DJT's bullish options contracts, with nearly 50,000 open contracts, suggesting a substantial inflow of capital betting on a major DJT rally.

Then, looking further at the related call options showing significant OI changes on the Option Chain Explorer:

· Strike price of $25, Expires on Nov. 15, 2024

Data shows that on 10th October, a large volume of new call buy orders opened, betting on a rise in DJT (note: the OI DIFF value updated on 11th October reflects the previous trading day's change). These positions were gradually closed over subsequent trading days. By 30th October, when DJT experienced a pullback, the OI for this contract was only about 15% of its 11th October peak."

· Strike price of $25, Expires on Nov. 15, 2024

The inference logic for the $35 strike call option contract is similar to the one mentioned earlier, though the exit level for this contract has been less extensive than the $25 strike call option with the same expiration date. This might be because there is still some time until the U.S. election, and traders have retained some positions as a strategic hold.

Interested readers can check out the specific contract activities on the trading day by exploring the data section of TradingFlow’s Contract Level Explorer. Subscribe our blog to catch more trend signals together!

If you like this article, please subscribe. To use all the tools, start a free trial for 14 days now.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Before making any financial investment decisions, please ensure you thoroughly understand all aspects of the information and conduct your own research.

🎁 Bonus time 🎁 with Moomoo, one of the most cost-effective investment platforms currently on the market!

Click the link below to try moomoo and receive your welcome free stock and cash sweep bonus! 👉: https://j.moomoo.com/00IRhe

If you missed it, please refer to: The Rebound of Chinese Concept Stocks: Key Insights from the Options Market.

As the market fluctuates, we’ve observed some unusual activity in the options market including three Chinese concept stocks: Tiger Brokers (TIGR), Alibaba (BABA), and Pinduoduo (PDD). Hope this article could help you to identify and interpret key information within the options data, providing valuable insights for decision-making.

On 30th September, an unusual movement was observed in the $TIGR call options contract with a strike price of $6 and an expiration date of 17th January, 2025. About one hour after the market opened, a surge in buy orders pushed the contract volume close to 9,000. According to TradingFlow data, the trader executed the order near the day's high at approximately $1.03, bringing the total cost of the options premium to nearly $900,000.

Later, as $TIGR's stock price weakened by midday, the price of the $6 strike options contract, expiring on 17th January, 2025, also dropped, hitting a low of $0.75, marking a decline of over 27% from the trader's entry price. However, by the end of the trading day, no further large transactions were recorded for this contract.

Data updated on 1st October shows that the Open Interest (OI) on 30th September increased by 11,058, confirming that the large transaction mentioned above was most likely a new position, and it remains open.

In the following trading days, the price of $TIGR continued to surge. Based on the Open Interest (OI) value of the aforementioned contract, it is highly likely that the trader who opened the position on 30th September is still holding it. As of the updated average price on 4th October, this trade may have yielded a profit of over 460%.

The unusual options activity for Pinduoduo appeared on 24th September, with the $PDD call options contract expiring on 15th November, 2024, and a strike price of $115. A large volume of contracts was executed at the ask price of approximately $4.15.

Similarly, based on the change in Open Interest (OI), this trade was a new position opened on 24th September. As of the most recent trading day (4th October), there is no data indicating that the trader has closed the position. Calculating from the change in the average contract price, this position has already gained 600%.

During the early session on 1st October, two large buy orders for the $BABA call options contract, expiring on 11th October, 2024, with a strike price of $116, flooded the market. The total trading volume was approximately 7,500 contracts, with an average execution price of about $2.01.

Still considering the change and absolute value of Open Interest (OI), it appears that the trader executing this operation continues to hold the position and has not closed it. Based on the average contract price on 4th October and the trader's entry cost, the profit margin has reached 70%.

If you like this article, please subscribe. To use all the tools, start a free trial for 14 days now.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Before making any financial investment decisions, please ensure you thoroughly understand all aspects of the information and conduct your own research.

🎁 Bonus time 🎁 with Moomoo, one of the most cost-effective investment platforms currently on the market!

Click the link below to try moomoo and receive your welcome free stock and cash sweep bonus! 👉: https://j.moomoo.com/00IRhe

Policy Support and Federal Reserve Rate Cuts: Multiple Catalysts Driving the Rebound of Chinese Concept Stocks

The recent broad surge in Chinese concept stocks has been fueled by both the Federal Reserve’s interest rate cuts and multiple supportive policies from the Chinese government. These factors combined have led to a short-term market recovery for Chinese stocks and may lay the foundation for future valuation corrections.

（Source: Tradingview, data as of 4th October）

Firstly, the Federal Reserve’s shift in monetary policy has had a significant impact on the market. On September 18, the Federal Reserve announced a 50-basis-point rate cut and indicated that further cuts of 50 basis points or more could occur within 2024. This move not only signals the end of the U.S.'s tightening policy but also releases global liquidity, creating opportunities for capital inflows into emerging markets. As a key part of the global market, Chinese concept stocks, with their relatively low valuations, have attracted more attention from investors. After nearly four consecutive years of decline, the valuations of Chinese concept stocks have dropped to historical lows. As of September 23, the price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of Chinese concept stocks stood at just 17.75, significantly lower than the median valuation over the past five years, making them more attractive compared to other asset classes.

Moreover, the Federal Reserve’s rate cuts typically lead to a weaker U.S. dollar. Historical trends show that when the dollar weakens, capital tends to flow back into emerging markets. This suggests that more international capital may be reallocated to high-quality emerging market assets, including Chinese concept stocks, driving their valuations higher.

At the same time, China’s government policies have provided additional internal support for Chinese concept stocks. Recently, the Chinese government announced a policy allowing investors to take out loans using their stock accounts as collateral, injecting a substantial amount of incremental capital into the stock market. This policy enables investors to use the assets in their stock accounts as collateral to obtain loans, allowing them to further leverage their portfolios and increase market liquidity. This has significantly boosted the stock market, particularly for Chinese concept stocks.

Additionally, the Chinese government has injected 500 billion yuan of "targeted liquidity" into the stock market. A portion of these funds has been explicitly directed toward supporting the development of capital markets, helping restore market confidence and vitality. The injection of capital not only increases market liquidity but also stabilizes investor expectations, especially for those long-undervalued Chinese concept stocks. Against this backdrop, the market performance of Chinese stocks has received multiple layers of support, showing strong rebound potential.

With the dual benefits of the Federal Reserve and Chinese government policies, capital is flowing back into Chinese concept stocks. After suffering a decline of up to 70%, the market has already fully priced in factors such as policy, performance, and high valuations. Now, as the Federal Reserve's rate-cutting cycle begins, coupled with the easing of domestic policies in China, market pessimism is gradually being corrected.

Of particular note are certain Chinese concept stock leaders that have bucked the downtrend during the market collapse, such as Trip.com and Legend Biotech, which have demonstrated strong risk resistance. According to Trading Flow’s option data, Trip.com’s option Open Interest surged significantly over the past week. Further analysis by navigating to the Symbol Level Developer interface, where contracts are sorted in descending order by contract Premium and Size, we can see that the majority of these open positions are call options for Trip.com. Delving further deeper into these call options, we can see from the Option Chain Analysis Historical OI Overview section in the following graph, the TCOM $55 Call with expiration date 12/20/2024 had 94.2K and 171.5K completed on Ask side on Sept. 24 and Sept. 27th accordingly. This was a huge bullish sentiment indicating buyers were eager to buy this $55 Call option. Another unusual movement was the TCOM $55 Call with expiration date 01/17/2025 roared from September 26th to September 27th. The contract size of TCOM $65 Call with expiration date 06/20/2025 was outstandingly larger than other call options of which sizes were already large, indicating Trip.com may have further growth in the near future. Trip.com’s robust performance in both domestic and international markets, along with its expansion strategy in the Asia-Pacific region, helped it achieve a countertrend growth of over 28% while most Chinese stocks were in decline.

Overall, the Federal Reserve’s rate cuts will continue to release liquidity, attracting more capital to flow into emerging markets, while China's policy support provides crucial internal momentum for Chinese concept stocks. Going forward, as policies ease and liquidity increases, Chinese concept stocks are likely to experience further valuation recovery. Those leading companies that performed well during the downturn are most likely to become the driving force behind the rebound. Therefore, as market sentiment improves and capital returns, Chinese concept stocks are poised to emerge from their prolonged decline and enter a new upward cycle.

If you like this article, please subscribe. To use all the tools, start a free trial for 14 days now.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Before making any financial investment decisions, please ensure you thoroughly understand all aspects of the information and conduct your own research.

🎁 Bonus time 🎁 with Moomoo, one of the most cost-effective investment platforms currently on the market!

Click the link below to try moomoo and receive your welcome free stock and cash sweep bonus! 👉: https://j.moomoo.com/00IRhe

What is VIX?

The VIX Index is a calculation designed to produce a measure of constant, 30-day expected volatility of the U.S. stock market, derived from real-time, mid-quote prices of S&P 500 Index call and put options. The VIX rises when there is uncertainty or fear in the markets, as investors anticipate higher volatility, and it tends to fall when market conditions are stable or bullish. Therefore, we can see from this 1-month VIX chart, that VIX remains high from September 4th to September 11th 2024.

VIX and U.S. Stock Market

As a volatility index, the VIX is inversely correlated with major stock indices such as the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq Composite Index. This inverse relationship exists because rising volatility often accompanies periods of market decline, as investors become more cautious and uncertain about future market conditions. In contrast, during periods of optimism and market growth, volatility tends to be lower, and the VIX declines. The chart above demonstrates this inverse relationship – when SPY and Nasdaq rise, VIX fall. According to its special feature, it is often considered as a good choice to hedge with U.S. stock market in a compositive portfolio.

Market Sentiment

The correlation between the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq with the VIX provides valuable insights into market sentiment. When both indices are trending upward, the VIX usually declines, signaling confidence among investors. Conversely, when the VIX spikes, it indicates rising fear and uncertainty, often preceding significant drops in the S&P 500 and Nasdaq. Understanding this relationship is crucial for traders and investors who use the VIX as a tool to hedge against market volatility or as an indicator for potential market movements.

According to Trading Flow’s data in Contract Developer Section under Historical Option Trades, we can see on September 6th 2024, VIX had Premium high as $8.75 million, and Average of Implied Volatility was up to 259.66%. This leads to the high percentage of transactions completed on the Bid side of 47.74%, indicating investors were eager to “buy to open” VIX and its rising price and market sentiment was reaching resistance level such that VIX price was high enough. However, looking at SPY that had Net Delta Exposure of -906.08 thousands with a negative market sentiment, the total value of SPY portfolio in the market was positioned to benefit if the underlying asset's (S&P 500) price decreases. There was a clear contrast between VIX high price and SPY negative market sentiment.

Delving deeper into this, let us go to the OI Change Rank under Option Chain Analysis Section in Trading Flow, by selecting the symbol for VIX and ranking the OI DEX that is the OI change by Delta Exposure, the strike price on September 6th 2024 remained high, and there was even on strike price up to $35 with 1,766 volume. Looking at Contract Level Developer by filling in symbol as SPY, expiration date as 2024-09-06, and strike price as 541 for put options, we could see the sharp increase of OI on September 24th. The same day, Nasdaq dropped 2.89%, having a positive correlation with SPY.

If you like this article, please subscribe. To use all the tools, start a free trial for 14 days now.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Before making any financial investment decisions, please ensure you thoroughly understand all aspects of the information and conduct your own research.

🎁 Bonus time 🎁 with Moomoo, one of the most cost-effective investment platforms currently on the market!

Click the link below to try moomoo and receive your welcome free stock and cash sweep bonus! 👉: https://j.moomoo.com/00IRhe

(Source: Unsplash)

The Federal Reserve Announces a Significant 50 Basis Point Rate Cut

Last Wednesday (September 18), the Federal Reserve announced its rate adjustment decision at 2:00 PM Eastern Time.

Shortly after, Chairman Jerome Powell held a press conference at 2:30 PM to explain the reasons behind the rate decision, assess economic conditions, and provide guidance for future policy directions.

This rate cut, the first since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, lowers the benchmark rate by 0.5 percentage points in an effort to prevent further slowdown in the labor market.

Federal Reserve Chairman Powell expressed recent concerns about the labor market. Although layoffs have not significantly increased, hiring activities have slowed down considerably. In fact, the last time the monthly hiring rate fell to the current 3.5% (of the total workforce), the unemployment rate exceeded 6%.

As employment and inflation pressures eased, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) decided to lower the key overnight lending rate by 50 basis points, in line with the market's shift towards expecting a larger rate cut.

Apart from the emergency rate cuts during the pandemic, the last time the FOMC made such a large 0.5 percentage point cut was during the global financial crisis of 2008.

This decision lowers the federal funds rate to the 4.75%-5% range.

Additionally, the committee indicated through the "dot plot" that another 50 basis point cut could be expected by the end of the year, aligning with market expectations. Officials also projected a further 1 percentage point rate cut by the end of 2025, and another 0.5 percentage point cut by 2026. Overall, the dot plot suggests that the benchmark rate will drop by approximately 2 percentage points following this rate cut. How did this significant rate cut impact U.S. stocks?

Stock Market Performance After the 50 Basis Point Rate Cut

Following the U.S. rate cut of 50 basis points, global capital markets were shaken, with U.S. institutions engaging in both long and short trades. On Wednesday afternoon, September 18, the Dow Jones dropped 0.25%, the S&P 500 fell 0.29%, and the Nasdaq declined 0.31%. Nvidia decreased by 1.92%, with Apple being the only stock to rise, gaining 1.80%.

However, on Thursday, September 19, U.S. stock futures surged across the board. The Dow Jones rose by 1.27%, the Nasdaq by 2.49%, and the S&P 500 index increased by 1.66%, surpassing 5700 points and setting a new all-time high. According to SPY options data from the Option Chain Explorer in Trading Flow's Option Chain Analysis, the open interest for SPY call options at a strike price of 550 surged on September 18, with positions being set as early as September 6. The open interest for call options with a strike price of 561 continuously increased between September 6 and September 17, reflecting investor expectations of the rate cut.

Chip stocks broadly rose, with ASML up over 5%, TSMC, Arm Holdings up over 4%, Nvidia up over 3%, and Intel up more than 2%.

Bitcoin surged over 6% intraday, breaking through $63,000, with blockchain-related stocks strengthening. MicroStrategy gained over 6%, while Riot Platforms and Coinbase rose more than 5%. Popular Chinese stocks also saw gains, with XPeng up more than 6%, JD.com rising nearly 6%, and Alibaba and Pinduoduo both up nearly 4%.

If you like this article, please subscribe. To use all the tools, start a free trial for 14 days now.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Before making any financial investment decisions, please ensure you thoroughly understand all aspects of the information and conduct your own research.

🎁 Bonus time 🎁 with Moomoo, one of the most cost-effective investment platforms currently on the market!

Click the link below to try moomoo and receive your welcome free stock and cash sweep bonus! 👉: https://j.moomoo.com/00IRhe

This is the TradingFlow Team, and in today's analysis, we'll explore the concept of gamma impact using the Gamma Exposure feature on Trading Flow in Option Chain Analysis, focusing on the S&P 500 ETF Trust ($SPY).

To illustrate gamma impact, we'll examine the $542 strike for SPY on August 13, 2024.

At the close of trading on August 13th, we noticed a significant negative gamma bar at the $542 strike in $SPY, which was surprising given the strong rally $SPY experienced throughout the day. There was notable activity at this strike, particularly with Calls. On a day with an upward trend, it was expected that there would be high volume for options expiring that same day (0DTE), given that gamma is a short-term effect and short-dated options typically have the highest gamma values.

For further investigation, we reviewed the options chain for SPY, specifically the 0DTE $542 call contract that expired on August 13th. By selecting Contract Level Explorer within Historical Option Trades that next to Option Chain Analysis, then selecting Size with the proper symbol, expiration date, strike price, and call/put, finally scolling down to the second graph, we accessed the intraday data for this contract.

Immediately, we observed a large spike in ask-side transactions at the $542 strike, with over 25,000 contracts traded around 10:50 AM ET. The average fill price for these contracts was $0.11. The low cost of these contracts, on such a large and liquid instrument as SPY, indicated that they were far out of the money at the time of the transaction. As a result, despite the high volume, the distance from the spot price led to a relatively minor directional gamma impact. To confirm, we clicked on the relevant volume bar.

Upon clicking, we were directed to the OI Rank Change in Option Chain Analysis page, where filters were set to the selected time interval and the selected symbol, and our assumption was validated—the directional gamma impact of the trade was indeed small. To illustrate this, we did some quick calculations.

For simplicity, let's round the trade size to 24,000 contracts. To calculate the total gamma, we multiply the number of contracts (24,000) by 100 (the number of shares each contract represents), and then multiply that by the contract's gamma (0.0589): 24,000 x 100 x 0.0589 = $141,360. This indicates that the impact of this single trade on the entire $SPY options complex was a relatively small $141,360 per 1% move in the underlying asset. Despite the large position size, the gamma impact was minimal.

As the day progressed, the markets rallied strongly. The $SPY price rose from $538.32, closing the regular trading session above $542. Around 1:00 PM ET, we noted a substantial bid-side order for 8,000 SPY $542C contracts.

Let's assume this was the original trader ("Mr. 25K") partially closing their position. Since the spot price was now much closer to the strike price ($541.15), the contract's gamma had increased significantly from 0.0589 to 0.4203—an almost 614% rise. As a result, the 8,000-contract bid-side transaction had a much more pronounced gamma effect.

To quantify this:

8,000 x 100 x -0.420347 = -$336,227.6 per 1% move

(Source: Unsplash)

Earlier, we saw that the 25,000-contract order had a relatively small positive gamma impact, even with a large volume. However, this 8,000-contract bid-side transaction, despite being only 32% of the size of the previous ask-side order, had a much larger negative gamma impact because the spot price was now much closer to the $542 strike. As the day went on, the gamma value for the $542 strike contracts continued to grow, since both Calls and Puts were near the money. This means that as more transactions occurred at the $542 strike, especially those involving the highly profitable $542 Calls, the spot gamma bar for $542 became increasingly negative.

While we won't replicate all the calculations needed to fully account for this effect (as it would require aggregating all $542 strike Call and Put trades across all expirations), this example demonstrates how a small positive gamma impact early in the day can evolve into a large negative gamma impact later on, helping to explain the seemingly counterintuitive "market up, spot gamma negative" bar on the chart.

If you like this article, please subscribe. To use all the tools, start a free trial for 14 days now.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Before making any financial investment decisions, please ensure you thoroughly understand all aspects of the information and conduct your own research.

🎁 Bonus time 🎁 with Moomoo, one of the most cost-effective investment platforms currently on the market!

Click the link below to try moomoo and receive your welcome free stock and cash sweep bonus! 👉: https://j.moomoo.com/00IRhe

Market Summary and Outlook

At the beginning of the August, the U.S. stock market experienced extreme volatility, driven by multiple factors including rumors of Warren Buffett reducing his Apple holdings, changes in Japanese yen carry trades, and mixed economic signals. The week saw wild swings, with major indices like the Nasdaq fluctuating dramatically.

Monday (5th August) saw the Nasdaq drop 6.2% at the open, only to recover some losses by the end of the day. Despite a strong rebound mid-week, investor sentiment remains cautious due to uncertainty surrounding the Fed’s interest rate decisions and upcoming economic data releases.

On Tuesday, after the Bank of Japan hinted at a more supportive approach to monetary policy, the market saw a broad rebound. The Nikkei index, which had hit the lower circuit breaker in the previous trading day, surged and hit the upper circuit breaker. This also led to a strong rally in U.S. stocks, with intraday gains of up to 2.5%. From Trading Flow data, for NDX 240816P176000, most transactions were completed on the ask side, indicating a bearish signal, which Nasdaq rebounded from August 5th’s 17,895.16 to August 6th 18,077.92. However, the option OI increased on Tuesday, indicating the situation might not be as simple. In the last hour of trading, the U.S. stock market experienced a dramatic plunge, dropping 1.5%, catching the bulls off guard.

On Wednesday, the Federal Reserve issued a statement suggesting they were likely to maintain a stricter approach and wouldn't cut interest rates soon. The market rallied again, with the index surging 2% at the open. But just when we thought the market had turned bullish, the index once again experienced a sharp drop after a strong open, this time even more than on Tuesday. By the end of the day, the index closed down 1%, with an intraday drop of 3%. The average volatility of the seven major tech giants exceeded 5%.

On Thursday, unemployment claims data were released, and because the figures were below expectations, the market interpreted this as a sign that the economy had not yet entered a recession. The index saw another violent rebound, closing up 2.87%, with intraday volatility once again reaching 3%. In other words, in the first four trading days of the week, daily volatility exceeded 3%, which led to increased caution across the board on Friday.

On Friday, there wasn’t much happening—it was primarily a day of crushing options implied volatility. The three major indices collectively closed higher, ending the most turbulent week since the beginning of the year. However, looking at the week's overall performance, it can be said that the bulls and bears were temporarily at a stalemate. The Dow Jones fell 0.6% over the week, the S&P 500 dropped 0.04%, and the Nasdaq lost 0.18%. Neither side made significant gains, but options buyers were completely wiped out.

Market Volatility and Strategic Considerations

The market’s current volatility can be attributed to reduced liquidity, with significant sell-offs from major investors like Buffett and declining market liquidity. The VIX index, which measures market volatility, reached levels not seen since the 2020 pandemic peak, indicating heightened uncertainty. While some analysts, like those at Goldman Sachs, believe the market has bottomed out and expect a general uptrend, others, like those at JPMorgan, remain cautious due to potential risks.

(Source: Unsplash)

Trading Strategy

Given the market’s unpredictable nature, a cautious approach is recommended. The potential for further volatility is high, especially with the upcoming data releases. A strategy of buying on dips, particularly in robust companies like META, NVDA, and MSFT, is advised, while being wary of companies facing uncertainties like AAPL, TSLA, and GOOG. The market may see a significant downturn this week, but this could present a buying opportunity, especially towards the end of the week as the outlook stabilizes.

In summary, while the market may not have reached a definitive bottom, it’s approaching a period where strategic buying opportunities could arise, especially if key support levels hold.

If you like this article, please subscribe. To use all the tools, start a free trial for 14 days now.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Before making any financial investment decisions, please ensure you thoroughly understand all aspects of the information and conduct your own research.

🎁 Bonus time 🎁 with Moomoo, one of the most cost-effective investment platforms currently on the market!

Click the link below to try moomoo and receive your welcome free stock and cash sweep bonus! 👉: https://j.moomoo.com/00IRhe

This is the TradingFlow Team, and this article will focus on options or equities, guiding you through the rationale behind compelling trades and demonstrating how to effectively utilize TradingFlow tools.

This article will explore the concept of Gamma in options trading, detailing its significance and practical applications within the context of managing options portfolios.

(Source: Unsplash)

Understanding Gamma:

Gamma measures the rate of change of delta (Δ) with respect to changes in the price of the underlying asset. Delta represents the sensitivity of the option's price to changes in the price of the underlying asset, S is the price of the underlying asset, and V is the value of the option.

Gamma is close to 0 implies either the relationship between the price of the option and the price of the underlying asset is linear or the option position has no convexity, i.e., the position holding is far OTM or ITM. Conversely, gamma is highest when option is ATM according to the fastest change of delta at option ATM price, even a small change in underlying price can cause a significant change in delta.

Understanding 0DTE:

Most investors who play around with 0DTE options usually buy OTM or ATM options to bet for the instrinsic value with lower premium. For institutional investors and market makers, understanding 0DTE gamma is crucial for managing risk. They need to adjust their hedging strategies frequently to maintain a delta-neutral position and manage exposure to price changes in the underlying asset.

For example, this is the Intel call option expiring on July 12th 2024. The stock price is 34.6, and the strike price is 35 with 2 more days of expiry. Option price equals intrinsic value plus time value. Since this is an OTM call option, the option price has intrinsic value of 0 left only with time value of 0.38. Suppose Intel stock price rises from 34.6 to 35.6, then this OTM call option becomes ITM, thus the option price becomes 0.92 after calculation. With $1 increase, this 0DTE call option rises 1.5x.

Using the same example by looking at the chart above, we can see this OTM call option on Intel has chance to be ITM, but this high return comes along with high risk. Because 0DTE options have a trading life of only one day, they may lose most of their value within a trading session due to time decay—a concept known as theta. Then there is gamma, which tracks changes in the delta of an option, which makes it highly attuned to the price of the underlying asset. So, in a single trading session, even a minor change in the price of the underlying asset of a 0DTE option can greatly affect the value of the option before it expires.

Understanding Gamma at 0DTE:

Besides moneyness, gamma is also affected by time to expiration. Investors tend to look at 0DTE gamma for several reasons, primarily due to the high sensitivity and potential for significant price movements in the underlying asset as the options approach expiration. As 0DTE approaches, if an option is OTM, it has smaller chance than longer expiration date to be ITM. Thus the delta won’t change that much, leading to a more stable gamma. Same logic applies for ITM options. For ATM options, as expiration nears, gamma increases and the bell-curve-shaped chart of gamma becomes more peaked since it is no surprise that those options which are at the money and with very little time to expiration are the most instable, with highest gamma.

High Sensitivity to Price Movements:

• Increased Gamma: As options near expiration, their gamma increases significantly. This means that the delta of the options changes rapidly with small movements in the underlying asset's price. This heightened sensitivity can lead to substantial gains or losses in a very short period (QuantInfo).

Potential for Significant Profit:

• Leverage: 0DTE options provide traders with the opportunity to use leverage effectively. With high gamma, small movements in the underlying asset can lead to large percentage changes in the option's value, offering the potential for substantial profits from small investments (SteadyOptions).

Market Directional Bets:

• Short-Term Trading: Traders use 0DTE options to make short-term bets on the direction of the underlying asset's price. Given the high gamma, even minor price movements can significantly impact the option's value, making them an attractive tool for day traders and those looking to capitalize on short-term market movements (Morpher).

Risk Management and Hedging:

• Dynamic Hedging: For institutional investors and market makers, understanding 0DTE gamma is crucial for managing risk. They need to adjust their hedging strategies frequently to maintain a delta-neutral position and manage exposure to price changes in the underlying asset (The Trading Analyst).

Market Sentiment Indicators:

• Volatility Indicators: The activity in 0DTE options can also serve as a gauge of market sentiment and expected volatility. High trading volumes and significant gamma exposure in these options can indicate that investors are expecting major price movements or heightened volatility (QuantInfo).

The focus on 0DTE gamma stems from its ability to magnify the effects of price movements in the underlying asset as expiration approaches. This characteristic makes 0DTE options a powerful tool for both speculative trading and risk management, providing opportunities for significant profit while also requiring careful attention to manage the associated risks.

If you like this article, please subscribe. To use all the tools, start a free trial for 14 days now.

In addition, we also offer TradingFlow self-service analysis platform. If you are interested in learning more or trying it out, please apply through this link.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Before making any financial investment decisions, please ensure you thoroughly understand all aspects of the information and conduct your own research.

🎁 Bonus time 🎁 with Moomoo, one of the most cost-effective investment platforms currently on the market!

Click the link below to try moomoo and receive your welcome free stock and cash sweep bonus! 👉: https://j.moomoo.com/00IRhe

This article will introduce how traders have profited from Reddit stocks amidst the recent increase in volatility in the U.S. stock market.

（Source: Unsplash）

Last week, driven by the U.S. election and Tesla's earnings report, the volatility in the U.S. stock market increased significantly. Tesla's stock plunged over 12% in a single day after its earnings report, sparking a rise in market panic.

How do traders operate in such a highly volatile market?

TradingFlow team has identified profit opportunities by trading Reddit ($RDDT) stock. On Monday, 22 July, trading signals indicated traders were shorting Reddit. TradingFlow detected unusual activity in Reddit's put options expiring on 9 August with a strike price of $62. Traders bought a large number of these put options when the stock was around $69.75, with an average contract price of $3.37.

From a more precise change in Open Interest (OI), it appears that traders opened over 2,000 new put option positions that day. (Note: The change in OI for a given trading day can only be observed on the following trading day. For example, the OI change for 22 July can be viewed on 23 July.)

Subsequently, Reddit's stock price continued to decline. On Wednesday, 24 July, the intraday low of Reddit's stock approached $62, and the average price of the put options purchased by traders reached $5.58, yielding a profit of over 60% for them.

According to the OI changes, as of 26 July, traders had likely not yet closed their profitable positions and even increased their holdings on 24 July. As of this writing, Reddit's stock price stands at $60.85, hovering around its one-month low, with traders' unrealized gains further expanding.

If you like this article, please subscribe. To use all the tools, start a free trial for 14 days now.

In addition, we also offer TradingFlow self-service analysis platform. If you are interested in learning more or trying it out, please apply through this link.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Before making any financial investment decisions, please ensure you thoroughly understand all aspects of the information and conduct your own research.

🎁 Bonus time 🎁 with Moomoo, one of the most cost-effective investment platforms currently on the market!

Click the link below to try moomoo and receive your welcome free stock and cash sweep bonus! 👉: https://j.moomoo.com/00IRhe

This article will review the recent sharp decline in the U.S. stock market, analyze the reasons behind it, and take a look at what the market should focus on moving forward.

NASDAQ Plummets 3%: Tech Giants' Earnings Misses Spark Market Turmoil

According to TradingFlow data, the NASDAQ's net DEX was negative from July 16 to July 23, indicating a bearish signal. The NASDAQ 100 index plummeted 3.6%, wiping out $1 trillion in market value, marking its worst performance since October 2022, driven by disappointing earnings from tech giants TSLA and GOOG. Leading AI sector companies like NVIDIA, Broadcom, and Arm also saw significant declines. The "Big Seven" index of U.S. tech giants fell 5.9%, breaking below the 50-day moving average for the first time since May. Mapsignals Chief Investment Strategist Alec Young noted that investors are realizing the returns on AI investments will take time, which will affect the short-term growth of these giants.

Poor earnings reports from Tesla and Alphabet (Google) have caused investors to question whether the 2024 rally driven by large tech companies and artificial intelligence is sustainable. Tesla's stock dropped 12% due to declining electric vehicle sales. Although Alphabet's earnings had some positive aspects, the market ultimately interpreted them as negative, leading to a sharp drop in its stock price. In the upcoming week, earnings reports from META, MSFT, AMZN, and AAPL will be released, with the market expecting at least two of these companies to miss expectations, potentially exacerbating the decline in U.S. stocks. As the market plummeted, the Chicago Board Options Exchange Volatility Index (VIX), also known as Wall Street's fear gauge, rose to 18.46, its highest level since late April. TradingFlow data indicated that VIX options turnover on Tuesday was nearly double the usual amount.

IBM's second-quarter earnings exceeded expectations, attributing over $2 billion in orders to generative AI, but the market response was muted. As shown in the chart, IBM's net GEX was positive. SK Hynix also reported more than doubling its second-quarter revenue, indicating that the global surge in AI hardware spending may continue. Microsoft introduced gen-AI in Bing search, similar to Google's AI Overviews, while Nvidia designed a new chip specifically for Chinese servers to comply with U.S. regulations.

The market is concerned about the investment prospects of AI technology, fearing that the AI-driven bubble may burst. According to TradingFlow SPY's Gamma Exposure data, the net GEX was negative over the past week, meaning market makers would sell as prices rise and buy as prices fall, increasing market volatility. Although IBM and SK Hynix's earnings showed growth in generative AI and high-bandwidth storage chips, they did not alleviate the market's pessimism towards tech stocks.

Goldman Sachs analysis indicates that the S&P 500 and NASDAQ 100 indices have breached the commodity trading advisor (CTA) sell signal thresholds. If the market continues to decline, trend-following traders might withdraw up to $219 billion from global stock markets, including $67.1 billion from the U.S. market.

The Federal Reserve's interest rate cut expectations also add to market uncertainty. UBS senior U.S. economist Brian Rose stated that the likelihood of a Fed rate cut in September is "close to 100%." However, the market fears that an early rate cut might spark economic recession and earnings decline speculation, leading to a recession trade and further drops in U.S. stocks.

Overall, disappointing earnings from tech giants and concerns over an AI bubble burst have triggered a sharp decline in the NASDAQ. Investors need to monitor the upcoming earnings reports from the four major tech giants and the Fed's rate cut moves to assess the market's future direction.

If you like this article, please subscribe. To use all the tools, start a free trial for 14 days now.

In addition, we also offer TradingFlow self-service analysis platform. If you are interested in learning more or trying it out, please apply through this link.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Before making any financial investment decisions, please ensure you thoroughly understand all aspects of the information and conduct your own research.

🎁 Bonus time 🎁 with Moomoo, one of the most cost-effective investment platforms currently on the market!

Click the link below to try moomoo and receive your welcome free stock and cash sweep bonus! 👉: https://j.moomoo.com/00IRhe

（Source: Unsplash）

Exploring the Correlation Between Tech Stocks and Bitcoin

The advent of Bitcoin heralds significant technological innovations and the rise of decentralized blockchain networks. It's intriguing to explore the correlation between the performance of tech stocks and shifts in the Bitcoin market. Often referred to as "digital gold" due to its limited supply and store of value, Bitcoin has experienced notable market movements, especially with the emergence of Grayscale and iShares Bitcoin ETFs. Starting in November 2023, Bitcoin's price surged, reaching a peak of over $73,000 in March 2024.

Invesco QQQ Trust (QQQ):

• Overview: QQQ is an ETF that tracks the Nasdaq-100 Index, encompassing 100 of the largest non-financial companies listed on the Nasdaq Stock Market. This ETF provides exposure to major technology and growth-oriented companies such as Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, and Google.

Direxion Daily Technology Bull 3X Shares (TECL):

• Overview: TECL is a leveraged ETF designed to provide three times the daily performance of the Technology Select Sector Index. It uses financial derivatives to amplify returns, making it suitable for short-term trading rather than long-term investment.

Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC):

• Overview: GBTC is an investment trust providing exposure to Bitcoin's price movements without requiring direct purchase and storage of the cryptocurrency. It holds Bitcoin, reflecting its value and making it accessible through traditional brokerage accounts.

Market Sentiment and Correlation

Both tech stocks and Bitcoin often respond to overall market sentiment and risk appetite. During periods of high investor confidence, both asset classes tend to perform well as investors seek higher returns from growth-oriented and speculative assets. Conversely, during market downturns or periods of heightened risk aversion, both tech stocks and Bitcoin can experience significant declines as investors move towards safer assets.

Advances in blockchain technology, increased use of digital currencies, and the growth of tech companies contribute to their performance. Macroeconomic factors such as interest rates, inflation, and monetary policy can influence both tech stocks and Bitcoin. For instance, low interest rates and expansive monetary policies can drive investment into high-growth and speculative assets, benefiting both tech stocks and Bitcoin. Conversely, expectations of rising interest rates or tightening monetary policy can negatively impact both asset classes as investors reassess risk and return profiles.

Recent Performance and Trends

From the graph above, it is evident that Bitcoin and GBTC sometimes move in tandem with TECL and QQQ, while at other times, their movements diverge due to various factors discussed. Starting from November 2023, Bitcoin began to rise in September, while QQQ and TECL started their upward trend later. All four assets were in an increasing trend until December 28, 2023, when TECL and QQQ experienced a pullback, leading Bitcoin to a congestion area until February 10, 2024. At this point, Bitcoin’s annual return of 56.95% aligned with TECL’s annual return of 57.92%. Bitcoin began its rapid growth, reaching its historical peak at 73096.85 usdt on March 13th 2024. The 90-day correlation coefficient of the digital currency and the tech-heavy Nasdaq 100 index reached 0.46 in mid May.

From February 10 to July 3, TECL and Bitcoin appeared to have a negative correlation. However, the minor trends within each day and their amplitude were still largely correlated, influenced by market expectations regarding Powell’s speeches, interest rate adjustments, and technological developments.

Recent Market Events

In the past week, from July 3 to July 10, Bitcoin's price dropped to $53,485.93 over two consecutive days, creating market fear and leading the Fear and Greed Index to zero. This was influenced by events such as Mt.Gox’s compensation of 142,000 Bitcoins to past cryptocurrency holders and the German government’s sell-offs. In contrast, TECL showed bearish signs with a net delta exposure of -14.33k from July 1 to July 5, despite a bullish market sentiment indicated by higher call open interest compared to puts.

On July 9, the total open interest of calls was 352,039, and the total open interest of puts was 151,623, suggesting a bullish sentiment for TECL. On the same day, Bitcoin increased from $57,247 to $59,470. While long-term prospects for both Bitcoin and tech stocks remain bullish, particularly with potential decreases in interest rates, short-term breakouts may not be imminent.

Conclusion

Understanding the performance and characteristics of QQQ, TECL, BTC, and GBTC provides a foundation for analyzing their correlation. While each asset has unique drivers, their performance often aligns due to shared market sentiment, innovation trends, liquidity conditions, and macroeconomic influences. Investors can use this correlation to inform their portfolio strategies, balancing risk and return across different asset classes.

If you like this article, please subscribe. To use all the tools, start a free trial for 14 days now.

In addition, we also offer TradingFlow self-service analysis platform. If you are interested in learning more or trying it out, please apply through this link.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Before making any financial investment decisions, please ensure you thoroughly understand all aspects of the information and conduct your own research.

🎁 Bonus time 🎁 with Moomoo, one of the most cost-effective investment platforms currently on the market!

Click the link below to try moomoo and receive your welcome free stock and cash sweep bonus! 👉: https://j.moomoo.com/00IRhe

Last week, the US stock market and cryptocurrency market experienced a crazy surge of MEME, reminiscent of the 2021 'retail investors vs. Wall Street' phenomenon.

This new wave of excitement was sparked by the return of the leader from the 2021 frenzy! Roaring Kitty, named Keith Gill, hinted at his comeback on 13th May (last Monday) with a post on his X platform, which had been inactive for three years. GameStop ($GME) saw an intraday surge of over 100%, triggering multiple trading halts. The rally continued into the next trading day (14th May).

GameStop's wild trading activity directly boosted the meme stock sector. AMC Theatres ($AMC) closed up nearly 80% last Monday, with an intraday peak of almost 100%. Last Tuesday, $AMC opened over 100% higher but then declined, closing with a gain of nearly 32%.

Why is Roaring Kitty so influential?

The title "Leader of the Retail Investor Revolution" sounds very intriguing at first. However, an article titled "Who is Roaring Kitty and why is he causing a GameStop stock surge?" gives a more detailed account of Roaring Kitty's journey:

He initially worked at a financial company, but his real rise to fame came through social media.

From 2014 to 2015, he joined Twitter and YouTube, showcasing his trades and market analysis. In 2019, he joined Reddit under the username DFV (DeepFuckingValue). That same year, he started buying $GME stock, believing it was significantly undervalued.

Reportedly, Roaring Kitty initially bought around $53,000 worth of $GME stock at about $5 per share. He then shared his position on Reddit's WallstreetBets (WSB) board, explaining his investment strategy and urging others to join in.

In January 2021, spurred by some positive developments, more and more retail investors started buying $GME, causing the stock to surge by up to 50% in a single day and nearly 700% in one month.

As a result, the short-selling hedge fund Melvin Capital ultimately closed its short positions and admitted defeat.

Options Market Signals Before the Frenzy?

At the end of last month, some $GME stock options showed unusual activity: call options expiring on 17 May with a strike price of $25 saw a large number of ask-side trades on 25 April. On 26 April, even more buy orders flowed in.

More detailed trading data can be seen in the chart below: on 25 April, the open interest for these options increased by 2,374 contracts, with an average price of about $0.10. On 26 April, more buy orders flowed in, and open interest increased by 10,128 contracts. Judging by the average price, the buy orders made on 25 April might have already seen a 100% profit.

Looking at the 'OI DIFF' changes, there was a consistent net inflow of funds before 10 May , with the contracts from the end of April remaining open.

Two weeks later, on 13 May, Roaring Kitty tweeted, and $GME's stock price skyrocketed, sparking the meme frenzy mentioned at the beginning of this article. $GME's price peaked at $64.83. The call options expiring on May 17 with a strike price of $25 saw their average price soar to $24.84, compared to the initial $0.10—an incredible profit!

If you like this article, please subscribe. To use all the tools, start a free trial for 14 days now. Promotion 30% off with promo code: 30PCTOFF ends July 15th, 2024.

In addition, we also offer TradingFlow self-service analysis platform. If you are interested in learning more or trying it out, please apply through this link.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Before making any financial investment decisions, please ensure you thoroughly understand all aspects of the information and conduct your own research.

🎁 Bonus time 🎁 with Moomoo, one of the most cost-effective investment platforms currently on the market!

Click the link below to try moomoo and receive your welcome free stock and cash sweep bonus! 👉: https://j.moomoo.com/00IRhe

The US Q1 earnings season is in full swing, with Tesla ($TSLA) and Meta ($META) experiencing significant volatility following their earnings announcements. Betting on short-term volatility is a common profit-making strategy during earnings season. Additionally, some traders position themselves ahead of time in the direction they foresee, often reaping substantial profits after navigating through the market's fluctuations.

Medical device company Boston Scientific ($BSX) announced its Q1 earnings in the pre-market on Wednesday, beating expectations and propelling its stock price to soar. More than a month prior to $BSX's earnings announcement, traders had already positioned themselves in anticipation.

According to TradingFlow data, on 15th March, shortly after market open, traders began to enter the fray. A large trade of 3.1k contracts, expiring on 17th May with a strike price of $67.5, was executed, with the contracts trading near the midpoint at approximately $2.10, indicating a 'mid' execution.

(Source: TradingFlow.com)

Referring to the open interest (OI) data (see chart below) provides more clues about this trade. On 15th March, the initial OI value was 1072, and the aforementioned trade involved a volume of 3.1k, indicating it was likely a new position being opened. The OI for this call option increased by 3120 on the same day, indicating it was executed at the ask price, classified as a 'mid' execution on the order book.

(Source: TradingFlow.com)

Judging from the change in open interest (OI) for this call option (see chart below), even amid fluctuations, and possibly retracements in contract prices from 15th March until the eve of $BSX's earnings day (23rd April), traders held their positions without liquidating.

(Source: TradingFlow.com)

On 4th April, the contract price surged to a peak of $3.3 (see chart below). On 22nd April, just before $BSX announced its earnings, a large call option with a volume of 5.02k flowed in, while the contract price had fallen from its previous high of $3.3 to around $2.8. As the contract was executed near the midpoint of the bid-ask spread, it was classified as a 'mid' execution. Following the aforementioned logic, it's more likely that the transaction was executed at the ask price. You can explore the data analysis further on TradingFlow.

(Source: TradingFlow.com)

On 24th April, $BSX announced its latest quarterly earnings. Q1 performance exceeded Wall Street expectations, with earnings per share of $0.56, surpassing FactSet's forecast of $0.51. Additionally, $BSX raised its full-year 2024 outlook, adjusting earnings per share from the previous range of $2.23 - $2.27 to $2.29 - $2.34, surpassing the market's general expectation of $2.25.

Following the earnings announcement, $BSX stock price surged, reaching a high of $74.39 during Wednesday's trading session, up nearly 7.6%. By the close, the gains retreated to 5.68%, but the company's stock still hit a historical high.

(Source: Moomoo)

Meanwhile, the call option contracts that the aforementioned trader wagered on reached a peak of $7.10 during intraday trading. Considering only the transaction volume of 3.1k contracts (with a cost of approximately $2.10), compared to the highest contract price, the trader's profit amounted to approximately 238%.

(Source: Moomoo)

If you like this article, please subscribe. To use all the tools, start a free trial for 14 days now. Promotion 30% off with promo code: 30PCTOFF ends July 15th, 2024.

In addition, we also offer TradingFlow self-service analysis platform. If you are interested in learning more or trying it out, please apply through this link.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Before making any financial investment decisions, please ensure you thoroughly understand all aspects of the information and conduct your own research.

🎁 Bonus time 🎁 with Moomoo, one of the most cost-effective investment platforms currently on the market!

Click the link below to try moomoo and receive your welcome free stock and cash sweep bonus! 👉: https://j.moomoo.com/00IRhe

The US stock market has entered the bustling stage of Q1 earnings season. Commencing this week, the market will progressively witness the earnings evaluations of tech behemoths like Microsoft and Meta. With last week's tech stock sell-off, the direction of the earnings season's trend has become more uncertain.

In order to capture market signals in advance, this article will take stock of recent options big players' bets on four star tech stocks including $NVDA, $META, $AMZN, and $MSFT. Bullish options for all four tech giants have attracted substantial capital. What does this signal mean?

· Nvidia $NVDA

By tracking the flow of funds, our TradingFlow team discovered that Nvidia's call options with a strike price of $880 expiring on 21 June, 2024, saw a massive influx of capital, with a trading volume of 37,700 contracts.

From the open interest (OI) perspective, this substantial volume of call options has not yet been closed, indicating traders' confidence in Nvidia's future market trends.

· Meta Platforms $META

The scrutiny facing TikTok in the US is likely to benefit Meta in terms of expanding its business. From the perspective of options big players' fund operations, long-term bullish options have garnered favor. For instance, the open interest (OI) of Meta call options with a strike price of $600, expiring on 19 December, 2025, has consistently remained high:

Considering the flow of funds, some options big players have engaged in forward rolling, shifting their positions from call options expiring on June 18, 2026, with a strike price of $950 to $1030. The trading volume amounted to approximately 95,000 contracts, involving about $200 million. This move, transitioning from out-of-the-money to even further out-of-the-money options, suggests that traders believe the previous leverage was not high enough and have decided to further increase their bets.

· Amazon $AMZN

Goldman Sachs lowered its target price for Pinduoduo ($PDD) due to the potential impact of H.R.7521 bill passed by the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce on its cross-border business in March. Which company stands to benefit? Taking into account the U.S. economy, employment, inflation, and consumption, Amazon may stand to benefit.

Option data indicates that some options big players closed out bullish call options expiring on 15 March, 2024, with a strike price of $145, and rolled over to bullish call options expiring on 21 June, 2024, with a strike price of $160. This involved a trading volume of approximately 155,000 contracts, totaling around $300 million.

· Microsoft $MSFT

As the AI industry continues to thrive, more and more companies are joining the fray. Industry leader Microsoft is gradually becoming more subdued, and its stock performance is relatively average. However, there are still large bullish options positions lurking.

Data shows that some options big players have rolled over from call options expiring on 15 March, 2024, with a strike price of $350 to call options expiring on 17 May, 2024, with a strike price of $380. This involved a trading volume of approximately 50,000 contracts.

If you like this article, please subscribe. To use all the tools, start a free trial for 14 days now. Promotion 30% off with promo code: 30PCTOFF ends July 15th, 2024.

In addition, we also offer TradingFlow self-service analysis platform. If you are interested in learning more or trying it out, please apply through this link.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Before making any financial investment decisions, please ensure you thoroughly understand all aspects of the information and conduct your own research.

🎁 Bonus time 🎁 with Moomoo, one of the most cost-effective investment platforms currently on the market!

Click the link below to try moomoo and receive your welcome free stock and cash sweep bonus! 👉: https://j.moomoo.com/00IRhe