MA

foamrollmyback

Looking at that 200 MA for Google

Eagerbeaver98

Cover call actually sucks, its better to just buy at the 200 day MA and sell when it  is eventually above both 50 day and 200 day EMA and breaks 3 EMA at RSI 80 or at 1.61 fibbonnaci. Hits 200 day EMA 2 to 4 times a year for over a decade. Covered calls is garbage

5ur3n

When UPI was launched in India, I had a similar feeling that credit card business is dead. It’s been 5+ years and credit cards have learnt to co-exist with UPI. I think V & MA will do just fine. I don’t have any position in either. Not a financial advice.

Aggravating-Mix-4903

It seems a 600 - 800K home is more house than you need. By living there, you are wasting money you could have invested. I would sell the house and buy another one for about 400k; even if it has a mortgage, it will be small with your down payment. Take the rest of the inheritance and invest it. You should be able to live off the interest or get a regular payout without touching the principal. This way, you have an investment that is growing and a nice place to live with equity that is also growing. The current house is too much house, and the expenses and taxes in MA will bury you.

TypowyLaman

Yeah well I'd love for this to work like that, but it won't. V/MA will continue their duo poly, they have enough money to defend it lmao. !Remindme 5 years that this will not happen

BeVeracious

So you're missing some key area of your thesis; credit cards do run on those rails, but the issuing banks make money off the interest on a Visa or Mastercard. In your analogy, V and MA collect the tolls on the tollbooth, but the bigger play for the banks is they get to finance and service the car. The stickiness is the banks themselves, they won't make any money pushing digital euros, CDBCs, stablecoins, etc because they can't lend it at exhorbitant rates as unsecured debt.

JarethCutestoryJuD

> > short V, short MA Buddy the economy is about to fucking implode. Everything is gonna be on credit, and people hate the idea of putting the goverment into person to person/person to business transactions. Long V, Long MA

mattmentecky

>They're doing it because every time a European buys a coffee, 2.5% of that transaction takes a vacation to San Francisco. This is simply 100% factually not true. Fees are already capped at 0.3% for credit cards in the EU: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/summary/fees-for-card-based-payments.html So Visa and Mastercard has already absorbed (and done so for a decade) a EU market that doesn't net them those big transaction fees. Second, there is simply no way that any digital Euro will not have caps. If there werent, commercial banks in the EU would suffer a lot more than CC companies. It also ignores that V/MA POS infrastructure will simply not go away for the sole purpose of foreigners and hospitality travel, unless the EU is going to offer free transactions and credit extensions for payment beyond its borders. In essence your thesis is: V/MA will cease to exist because the government will handle credit extension, dispute resolution, fraud, KYC/AML and for unlimited funds, all for the sweet payoff of saving citizens 0.3%.

NoPantsJake

V and MA are already moving trillions in stablecoin. We absolutely could see a move toward digital currency/P2P payments that disintermediates V and MA, but there’s a lot more to consider here, especially the timeline and other payment rails that V and MA touch.

Ryanthetemp43

Well I counter argue your claude prompt with my very own claude prompt: This is well-written and almost entirely wrong about the mechanism it's shorting. Here's the breakdown. The load-bearing factual errors 1. The 2.5% number — this is the fatal one. He says every European coffee sends 2.5% to San Francisco. European interchange has been capped by EU regulation since 2015 at 0.2% on debit and 0.3% on credit. More importantly, Visa and Mastercard don't receive interchange at all — that goes to the issuing bank. V/MA earn network and scheme fees measured in single-digit basis points. His headline grievance is off by roughly two orders of magnitude for the companies he's short. He's shorting the tollbooth operator while describing the toll that goes to somebody else. (Also, Mastercard is headquartered in Purchase, New York.) 2. The catalyst is 2029 at the earliest. The ECB's actual timeline: the digital euro Regulation still has to be adopted by co-legislators during 2026; a 12-month pilot begins in H2 2027; the Eurosystem aims to be ready for potential first issuance during 2029, and the ECB will only decide whether to issue once the Regulation passes. The pilot cohort is 10–30 PSPs selected by mid-2026. And the design includes holding limits specifically to prevent deposit flight — Cipollone has framed it as preserving banks' central position in payments, not disintermediating them. He's short shares against a catalyst that is three-plus years from existing and contingent on EU legislative politics. 3. The financials are actively contradicting him right now. Visa's fiscal Q3 2026: revenue $11.63B, up 14%, adjusted EPS $3.32, up 11%, cross-border volume +13% constant-dollar. Mastercard's Q2 2026: revenue $9.28B, up 14%, adjusted EPS $5.04, up 21%, operating margin 60%, cross-border +12%. Intra-Europe cross-border specifically grew 12%. Whatever structural decline looks like, it does not look like mid-teens revenue growth at 60% margins in the exact geography he says is the epicenter. 4. His China evidence cuts against him. The 260 million e-CNY wallets figure is years stale. Actual cumulative usage: about 3.48 billion transactions worth ¥16.7 trillion (~$2.37T) since the 2019 pilot began — versus WeChat Pay alone processing roughly $15.4 trillion in 2024 alone. Adoption has been weak enough that from January 1, 2026 the PBOC had to start letting banks pay interest on e-CNY balances and extend deposit insurance to them, explicitly to compete with Alipay and WeChat Pay. A state-backed CBDC losing to private wallets inside an authoritarian system that can mandate adoption is the single strongest available counterexample to "CBDCs steamroll incumbents." He cited it as his proof. 5. The UnionPay claim is metric-gaming. UnionPay leads on cards issued and total transaction value, overwhelmingly from a domestic near-monopoly in China where foreign networks were effectively excluded. That's not evidence of global displacement; it's evidence that China closed its home market, which happened years ago and is already in V/MA's numbers. 6. Sanctions run through the wrong node. Financial coercion operates through dollar clearing, correspondent banking, and SWIFT messaging — not card networks. Cutting off Russian card acceptance was a visible retail symptom, not the mechanism. If Brussels is building "revenge architecture," V/MA are a side casualty, not the target. 7. Category confusion throughout. He repeatedly treats merchant anger about interchange as a threat to network revenue. Merchants dumping cards over fees hurts issuers first. Meanwhile a growing share of V/MA revenue is value-added services — fraud scoring, tokenization, dispute infrastructure, consulting, data — which is rail-agnostic and in some cases sells into the new rails. What's genuinely true The bear case isn't empty, it's just misassembled: India is a real, materialized version of his thesis. RuPay has exclusive rights to link credit cards to UPI, and now handles roughly 38% of Indian credit card transactions by volume, up sharply. The RBI has mandated network choice at issuance. That is precisely "state mandates the domestic network and the Americans lose share." His UPI number is also stale in the wrong direction — it's about 23.2 billion transactions monthly as of May 2026, not 10 billion. Brazil's Pix is the best empirical evidence he didn't lean on. Pix demonstrably took share from debit at point of sale. It's the cleanest existing proof that a free A2A rail can displace card volume in a large economy. The sovereignty motive is real. The European Payments Initiative and Wero exist precisely because European policymakers view dependence on two American networks as a strategic exposure. That's not paranoia. Regulatory interchange pressure is a genuine multi-decade headwind — EU caps, Durbin, Reg II debit routing, ongoing litigation. The 15-to-20-year terminal-value question is legitimate. If A2A, wallets, stablecoins, and CBDCs all normalize globally, network take rates compress and the terminal multiple has to come down. That's a real valuation argument. Notably, the more credible near-term threat to cross-border economics is stablecoins, not CBDCs — and both V and MA are building into that themselves rather than being bypassed by it. The structural problem with the trade, separate from the argument Even if every word were correct, the expression doesn't match the thesis. A 2029-plus structural repricing held via short common stock means unlimited upside exposure, borrow cost, and no defined invalidation — while both companies run large buybacks that structurally bid their own shares and are currently compounding EPS in the teens-to-twenties. The two positions are also not diversification; V and MA are near-identical exposures, so ~$122k is one bet, not two. A thesis can be completely right about 2035 and still get closed out in 2027. Legitimacy score 34 / 100 Component Score Note Understands the revenue mechanic 15 Confuses interchange with network fees Accuracy of cited evidence 35 Stale e-CNY, gamed UnionPay, stale UPI Identifies real structural forces 70 Sovereign rails and regulation are genuine Catalyst timing 10 2029, legislation-contingent Falsifiability / defined thesis 10 No target, no timeline, no invalidation Trade construction vs horizon 15 Spot short against a decade-long thesis Split another way: as a 15-year essay on the fragmentation of global payment rails it scores maybe 65. As a 2026 short thesis it scores about 15. The gap between those two numbers is the entire problem — he's identified a real long-run erosion and expressed it as a near-term trade, against companies currently growing revenue 14% with 60% margins. I'm not a financial advisor and I'm not telling you what to do with a position. If it's useful, I can pull the actual geographic revenue split from V and MA's latest 10-Q/10-K to size how much of the profit pool is genuinely exposed to euro-area domestic volume — that's the number that would either validate or kill this thesis quantitatively, and neither he nor the bulls seem to have looked it up.

vittoshulman

In SEA everyone is using QR codes to pay and accept payments with a phone app. No need for physical card and merchants don't need to buy equipment. V and MA is a yeaster year technology. But they do have a lot of moat and political power in Northern Hemisphere and won't go down without a fight. The end will be when X starts its own digital wallet.

topgeezr

The Digital Euro is following in the footsteps of PIX, which since 2020 has taken over 62% of payment traffic in Brazil and is in several other South American Countries. Russia and China have similarly put in place digital payment systems that do not rely on V/MA - India too, I believe. The TAM is shrinking. As ever the toughest thing to call is the timing, and some gains may still be in the stock but the risk of getting caught in a terminal downtrend is increasing.

Strong_Brick_9703

He simply wanted to add Russia to this text (for whatever reasons). A lot of countries in Asia have been free of Visa/MA monopoly for decades. Europe is actually a runner-up here.

Tenbaggersonly

If you think V/MA collect 2.5% then you clearly don’t understand how card payments work

1098duc_w_the_termi

Crashing back to 2026 levels because money has long lost become worthless and Americans still use V and MA lmao. Or everything crashes and money worthless anyway in the hellscaoe of the future. This is why shorting without specific milestone dependent timelines is a regards guide to higher regardation.

vicblaga87

Prose is AI slop. But the underlying point is valid. MA/V moat is the geopolitical chokehold US has on (mostly) Europe. There is extreme urgency for this to go away (hence the push for the digital euro). FYI the infrastructure to switch to an European alternative already exists - it's called SEPA (instant) and works beautifully.

30RITUALS

**But isn't that where the demand zone resides? And isn't that where stocks tend to bounce back**? Not necessarily, but often they will have some overlap. **Keep the MA as the anchor, move the stop off it.** Exactly, that's generally a good rule for most to follow. As for ATR/ADR, note that I'm referring to the ATR/ADR of a stock, not the indicator itself, just to be clear here. **Same logic you used, just positioned outside the noise band rather than inside it.** I hear you, again if it works for you then run with that, no need to overcomplicate things. **For example, if you look below, you can see that** **Use ATR for the offset specifically because of gaps.** Unless you hold into earnings you generally don't need to worry about gaps. Most stocks won't just gap (up or down) and if they do it will be 2-3% at most. If you trail properly, in most cases that wouldn't stop you out. I scan for gaps daily, and they are not nearly as frequent as people think if you exclude biotech junk and shell/spac companies. **Trail on closes only.** Exactly, sometimes it might bite you in the ass but with the law of large numbers working in your favor it is generally a favorable thing to do. That's because 40% of them will create a side called upside-reversal/upside-reclaim which is a pretty high probability setup. That is when price tries to price a previous low/ma but reverses hard on it creating a reversal bar on high volume (the volume is key here). **A wider stop means bigger losses so I have to cut size proportionally on the way down.** That's correct you need to get the timing/entry right. I have specific setups that I hunt for to make sure I can get it with bigger positions at a tight stop to still have favorable RR ratios whilst not risking insane amounts of my account. \--- If you look below there is a simple example for $SNDK. It has an ADR of \~6%. The green line is my 10MA and the blue line is my 20MA. Notice how during a proper stage 2 uptrend you could have trailed it on the 10/20MA close for 3-10x gains? As of now, in my book, if we break that blue line around $1820 again it is an entry. But by then we are also overextended from the 10/20 meaning that normally you should expect a strong pullback. But in this case, if it will go, it should blast right through it. Since it has an ADR of 6%, I would in that case put my stop around $1700 (slightly further than that 6%) and trail it with that principle in mind - targeting previous ATH for a good RR. I would never put my stop around the MAs in that case since it's obviously way too far and more like 2ATR from my entry. Let's say it breaks $1820ish and hold, then that becomes a demand zone where I'd expect more buyers to come in. Notice how in that case, it's nowhere near the MAs. So yes, they often overlap, but not always. https://preview.redd.it/qujtir25zgoh1.png?width=3169&format=png&auto=webp&s=278772e2f9d48b89d9438be3faf4011bbc8d4d7b

BreathOfTech

Super naive. A lot of countries have their digital currencies already and visa/ma growing there still. Also they are as much of data companies now as payment networks, especially MA. Also this is a bit of an engineering argument - I want my transactions going through MA, how will I get a refund if product is dodgy and customer refuses? Courts? Please. So you’d need to build insurance protection into the digital currencies backed by who exactly? Government? EU? Regard, please.

Br1ll1antly1llog1cal

right in long term, the bet is way too early. I'm not talking about Burry's GFC bet early, I'm talking decades. V/MA won't blow up this quickly. we will need to see another 🥭 like president to further erode US hegemony for US financial system, thus V/MA, to lose its edge

Emotional-Breath-838

I'm not following because I sense an inconsistency. You're saying space out the trailing stop loss, which I agree with and then you're saying put it on the MA. But isn't that where the demand zone resides? And isn't that where stocks tend to bounce back? Here's how I think I take what you've shared (thank you!) and put it into practice for myself. AI cleaned up the following so don't get nervous... **Keep the MA as the anchor, move the stop off it.** Trail at `10EMA − 1.5×ATR(14)`, or use a proper Chandelier stop (`highest high since entry − 3×ATR`). Same logic you used, just positioned outside the noise band rather than inside it. **Trail on closes only.** This is probably the single highest-leverage change and it's independent of which volatility measure you use. An intraday touch of the 10 EMA is a nothing event on a momentum name; a *daily close* through it is real information. **Use ATR for the offset specifically because of gaps.** If you're swinging overnight, the gap is the risk you actually eat. ADR is high-to-low only — it structurally ignores the exact risk that kills swing positions. That's a real, defensible reason to prefer it for *spacing*, and it doesn't require you to say ADR is wrong for anything else. Back to me now... A wider stop means bigger losses so I have to cut size proportionally on the way down. Let me know if you rejected ATR and if so, why. Thanks again for sharing what you've learned.

30RITUALS

Appreciate it. Couple things to note here. First, nobody is hunting your stops, even with L2 data. However, it is very likely that you are trailing your stops too tight or too close to key levels that are clear supply/demand zones so just be aware of that. Second, trailing works best in favorable market conditions. If you do a lot of momentum/swing trading, the last year has been pretty brutal to say the least. There is not a lot of follow-through and geopolitical tensions make for a lethal cocktail where you get stopped out most of the time. It's extremely frustrating to say the least so you are not alone in this. As I explain in my YT video, trailing or managing positions is just as much of an art as it is a science, so you ultimately have to find what works for you. For me (and many others), trailing based on the MA (10, 20, or in some cases, the 50) will on average work best and keep your equity curve stable. But be aware that this depends on the ADR of the equity you are trading. If you are trading high ADR stocks, you can expect to get stopped out more. For that reason, you could also look into slower stocks, but use larger positions, since those won't spike and chop around as much.

anon197593815

Monopoly = one seller. From your visa source, "According to the complaint, more than 60% of debit transactions in the United States run on Visa’s debit network,"... obviously not a monopoly. Visa is in fierce competition with MA.

YOLOdollhair

Looking at QQQ - I think market is going to sit here the rest of the day or at least find it's way back to this area for close. Sell above VWAP/200MA and buy below.

bacarter8

Free housing isn't free; MA property taxes and maintenance on an 800k home will likely eat up the $2,800 rent savings, making net benefit smaller than it looks.

Moepenmoes

I feel like the Doomsday clock lost all credibility when they started using seconds in addition to minutes. I mean, everyone is going to assume now that once they say that there is only 1 second left, they'll just be like "we are now 0,999 mili-seconds away from disaster", and continueing to countdown for another 1000 years🤨 Anyway $MA and $MSFT are the only ones I'm touching this month

codyada

Need to account for taxes on the 600-800k house I don’t know what MA house taxes are. They could equate to $10-20k annually I don’t know which would equate to up to $1700 a month in taxes not including the home owners insurance costs. I would say this is totally up to you. In some aspects you would never have any monthly expenses if you invested the money and paid rent. You would lose out on appreciation. - but investments should appreciate also. There is always a chance for a market ‘crash’ and your investment goes down in value up front until the market gets back to normal. You really need to make some decisions- add up taxes, home ownership costs, insurance and any other ongoing maintenance. It would at a minimum add up to your rent costs probably saving for a Roof, remodeling, Air Conditioning, repairs etc - homes are expensive BUT it would be yours in the end.

EvolvedA

Al Bundy, 3 touchdowns in one game, NO MA'AM

NakedPatrick

lol we ain’t out the woods yet. We got rejected off 50 week MA

Teiagon

Over time I would definitely work on refining the strat for entries around TA (e.g. sell puts at support, avoid below 200d/50d MA), IVR, fundamentals and sector rotation. Personally, I tend to sell puts only on days when the stock is red, and (covered) calls only on days when the stock is green.

NecessaryEmployer488

It is not about buying stock X. Figure out a pool of stocks with great fundamentals that you want to buy. Let's say a pool of 20 stocks. Most stocks will hit there 50-day MA every few months and 200-day MA once every couple years. This provides a buy point. The other thing to do is what for the main index the stock is in to hit 50-day and 200-day MA and then buy the stock at that time. If using this strategy, look for some correlation between the stock and underlying index.

mountain_li0n

I don't understand your point of view, there are so many strategies you could take. It has been moving up/down and recently it was 680ish which is closer to your cost basis. Why panic? you could sell all small loss, or trim some and look for better opportunities, if you do that, you can recoup loss in no time. Had you bought CRM, MA, MSFT just any stock with half of META, you'd be in gain instead. Meta will hit 1000 within next year, it just awaits some good news.

zoomin1098

the 50 week MA seems more appropriate rt

vermilli21

It’s sitting on its 200MA, it’s going to pump a lot but not enough to make calls print for earnings

solidsneeze

V and MA up 200% since it was disrupted by crypto

IntrepidToday0

It was a win for those that bought at 50 daily MA price of $421

Phx_trojan

GOOG either breaking a one year uptrend or it's about to bounce off the 200 daily MA again. I'm buying here.

WordsHappenedHere

I wouldn’t be getting too bearish here. SPY 50MA is around $755. It’s likely to hold. We know Bessent starts his bond market “intervention” next week. And we know 🥭 will pull some shit soon enough to pump markets. I’ll averaging into late September $770 SPY calls. They will pump this shit out of nowhere watch.

Burtonwurton

GOOG is below 200MA tho.

Soffatjockis

Googl won't go below 200MA

zoomin1098

RSI-MA didn't lie this time how bout that.

Soffatjockis

Googl very shortly passed 200MA at 335 and then bounced. I have no idea what it means as I don't know how astrology for men works.

Soffatjockis

If googl passes 200MA at ~334 it's either going to bounce... Or die.

Independent-Tree-985

algos getting jittery. Think were gonna make a pass at the MA

Moepenmoes

Sold everything except MSFT and MA once again

IndependenceWay

Tool that can filter for stocks whose MA’s are squeezing / getting tight? For example on the Daily or Weekly chart. Does something like this exist? (MA's = Moving Averages)

No_Presentation9490

walk me through why you didn't buy semis when it had a strong break above the 50 day moving average in april and sell when it had a strong break below the 50 day moving average in july. also why you didn't buy igv when it had a strong break above its 50day MA back in july. you gotta think less like a bagholder.

WorldlyWar2143

good stuff 110 is the 200MA level, i'd sell calls on those shares around there

banzanar

RHM, GOOGL, MA, RACE. What it does is it just finds healthy, profitable stocks. I was tempted to buy HEI, RR, CPRT.

No_Presentation9490

do you know the significance of a stock being under its 50day MA for an extended period of time and how many billions of dollars of capital have to reposition and losses have to be realized for that to occur?

Scary-Oven8260

Same thing when people said younger generation are using bitcoin, stable coin, prediction contract, while I just bought more V, MA, CME, ICE this year

FunRevolution3000

Yet its 50 day MA continues to rise. The market continues to grow in interest.

Delicious_Put_5857

yall ready for a trip to the 200 day MA? :feetswing: :clifford:

Historical_Sun93

Cons: Tesla price at the upper Boolinger bank. The price rejected 50MA. CCI at overbought level. There is a chance that Theta will eat up your Calls especially we are facing Jackson Hole Economic Policy Symposium. Pro: Cybertruck price raise, data center closure roumours cleared. Any good news can elevate price.

Free-Audience-3812

MELI (e-commerce + fintech in Latam) NU (fintech in Latam) LULU (retail clothing waiting for turnaround) XLT (Financial ETF) PHO (Water ETF) MA

Moepenmoes

Will there ever be a reason to sell $MA?

Eduardjm

I’m looking through a certain world leader’s massive amount of buys in the month of June, and I feel like I’ve missed the boat. MA, V, Abbvie, MSFY, Cintas (don’t even mention MRNA).  Point being, HD was a large buy as well so it stands out, but has been treading water. This is either still early enough, or it’s a whiff and I can’t tell. Earnings keep climbing, but is construction/home improvement keeping up enough in this economy?

Moepenmoes

Why is wednesday pronounced wensday and why is tuesday pronounced chewsday? Why not just write it like how it's pronounced? Anyway, $MSFT and $MA are my only positions I'm keeping during this volatile week

wafflepiezz

Everything blood red overnight hours SNDK sitting right above the MA line uh oh

Letsgetit713

Bitcoin holding above 200 MA will solidify that the V is real.

KittyLover-7

Trump discloses over 1,000 trades in June, totaling up to $263 million, according to new government filings. Recent purchases include Visa, $V, Berkshire Hathaway, $BRK.B, Mastercard, $MA, and Cintasc, $CTAS. This follows 3,642 trades involving stocks of public companies between January 1st and March 31st. 1000 trades in a month 😂

smytti12


Moepenmoes

I don't think I'll ever sell $MA again

sachinsehwag

They will be always at 325 Binney St, Cambridge, MA 02142

poozyfloor

BTC over 200MA. Traditionally means end of bear market.

guy_cloutier

GLD reclaimed the 200 MA today. If it doesn't go down tmr, you are screwed.

ManekenkaDaBudem

I bought Disney because at that time I didn't see much better opportunities, but that drastically changed and I still continued to hold. I should have bought more V, MA, RACE, BKNG or open positions is Moody's, ICE, CME, Abbott etc. 

_pupil_

Next-gen OpenAI Modular Asymptotic Autogen Matrix … NO MA’AM is going to change the future.

bnup420

Yeah ALGOS looking at 200 MA and dumping

Rishodi

That would have been an amazing entry point last year. But this calendar year, it's touched the 200-day MA twice and both of those times would have also been good for establishing a position.

redbit1412

Chips (SOX) looked they broke that 12700 resistance (MA 50)

Legitimate_Tailor858

If it will go sideways for a year now, than also cheap premium can lose half easily . So cheap is not enaugh , you need setup that it will go up. Set up is not bad , not far from MA’s. But you will still risk 6k. Some stocks better to hold the stock for long time and not worry about timing

Sacisbac

My 10 yr return: Time-weighted rate of return (pre-tax) Cumulative **Your return** \+1538.89% S&P 500® Index \+307.42% Dow Jones U.S. Total Stock Market Index \+287.57% MSCI ACWI ex USA (Net MA Tax) \+150.57% Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index \+14.31% Bloomberg Municipal Bond Index \+21.29%

Informal-Lime6396

There's no guarantee your list will outperform for the next 3 decades. If it were me, while remaining at a low tax bracket, sell just enough that keep myself under a specific bracket. If selling will trigger taxes on your parents, help pay it. The first to go are the non-tech smaller names like MA, ROBO, EW, XPO, shifting them into some ETF like VOO or VGT. I prefer to let AAPL, GOOGL, MSFT run and monitor once evey few months.

StrifeRaZoR

That volume profile is set to 1 Month of data. It's only recording the past few years. It doesn't see the previous volume from 2007 and before (And honestly, it probably doesn't matter as you can clearly see by the chart that it's under heavy short selling pressure). You're also using Ichimoku, and your next targets are clearly visible in the cloud between 2009 - 2015. The fact that the giant MA line is perfectly riding the historical cloud highs is pretty much a "Buy $250C Leaps and sit back and enjoy" signal.

Only-Perspective5341

Prices are still locked in an upward trend due to low inventory in certain markets. CT/MA prices are wild.

Big_Fix9049

So Google this year is a better opportunity than Google last year? Buying UNH and then dumping it again before UNH big run up? How V / MA a couple of months ago during their drawdown? Give me a break... There have been and there are plenty of great opportunities in the market. Believing and arguing that Buffet sees something is naive.

Mohar

The chatbots like them. I followed that advice buying MA to diversify somewhat out of big tech ~6 months ago and it worked pretty well for its purpose, weathering the various tech downturns and turning a good profit. I’m up about 10%, and that’s supposed to be the safe, slow play.

Sharlach

Been using Gemini to try to properly diversify my portfolio and V/MA were some of the recommended companies. I haven't bought any yet, but I'm planning to this week. They seem fair valued/slightly undervalued right now, and they both have been seeing steady growth in revenue, especially in Value Added Services (VAS). They have a good secular growth outlook over the next 5-10 years, and are less correlated to big tech and the AI trade currently too.

klipsetrades

A buddy of mine used to trade MA crossovers. He wasn’t very successful at it, but I don’t think the crossover itself was necessarily the problem. He basically traded every crossover signal. He didn't pay enough attention to context for trend, structure, market conditions, etc. So I remember him getting chopped up a lot. I personally keep MAs on the chart, but very faint (low opacity) in the background to give a nice visual for trend. I wouldn’t use a crossover as the trigger itself. They’re lagging by nature, so I think they’re more useful as a trend/filter tool, with price structure deciding the actual entry

crossdefaults

MA GUH mo lests kids. Priced in.

RobbieDunn1991

THERES MA V! Let’s go! Dumb ber

Amareisdk

9.5 will be back next week. It’s coasting an MA and 9.5 is the resistance test to the current support.

Due-Cat-6065

Micron finding that 50D MA

GlobalResolution77

MU crossed MA 50, lets rip

Eagerbeaver98

As someome who actually has made money with options please only do leaps or at least a couple months and PLEASE buy at the 200 day MA. If you bought at the 200 day youd be up bigger than any other gains you couldve had lmao.

mhughes2595

That is good. This builds upon yours. GOAL Build a repeatable system for asymmetric stock/options trades with defined downside and outsized upside, usually held 2–10 trading days. Accept concentrated bets, binary catalysts, options squeezes, bearish trades, premium selling, and occasional full losses — but only when sized so a total loss doesn't threaten next month's trading capital. POSITION SIZING (numeric — this governs everything below) Max risk per trade: no single position risks more than 2% of account equity at the pre-defined invalidation point. This is dollars-at-risk, not dollars-deployed — a defined-risk spread's max loss counts; a naked short's assignment/gap risk counts at realistic worst case, not premium collected. Size tiers map to a number, not a vibe: A+ → up to 2% risk A → up to 1.25% risk B → up to 0.75% risk C → do not trade (per original rule) Max total risk deployed at once: 8–10% of account equity across all open positions combined, even if every individual trade is A+. This is the difference between one bad trade and one bad week. Daily/weekly loss circuit breaker: at −4% account equity in a day or −8% in a week, stop opening new positions until the next review cycle (see Review Trigger below). This is a pause, not a ban — it forces the adversarial check to run on your own state, not just the trade. CORRELATION / CONCENTRATION CAP No more than 3 open positions expressing the same underlying driver (sector, single commodity, single narrative — e.g. "AI hardware," "bitcoin proxy," "meme squeeze"). Two tickers can be one bet; count the bet, not the ticker count. No more than 25% of deployed risk in one correlation bucket at a time. Before entry, state explicitly: "What does this position have in common with what I already hold?" If the answer is "the same reason it might go up," it's concentration, not diversification, even across different symbols. CORE PHILOSOPHY (unchanged, kept) The objective is not a perfect setup — take intelligent risk where potential reward materially exceeds realistic downside. Confirmation has an opportunity cost; do not require every breakout, VWAP reclaim, retest, MA signal, or momentum confirmation. Ask: what do we give up by waiting, and how much asymmetry do we lose? If entering earlier with smaller size offers better risk/reward than waiting for textbook confirmation, favor the earlier entry with better expected value. Do not confuse higher probability with better expected value. ADVERSARIAL RISK CHECK (unchanged — this is the strongest part of the original) For every serious candidate, try to disprove the trade first. Classify the biggest reason not to take it: FATAL — breaks the thesis; pass. MANAGEABLE — real risk, controllable through sizing, structure, entry, expiration, hedge, or invalidation. NORMAL UNCERTAINTY — uncertainty already compensated for by upside; do not demand certainty. Cost of waiting counts as a risk category too. Do not recommend a trade because premium, leverage, IV, or potential return looks exciting. Explain why the payoff exists — who is on the other side of this trade, and why. ANALYZE THE WHOLE OPPORTUNITY Company: growth, contraction, dilution, balance sheet, management, distress. Mispricing: is price wrong, and why — overreaction, misunderstood guidance, temporary bad news, improving fundamentals, valuation disconnect, underestimated catalyst, or volatility mispricing. Catalyst: what could force repricing — earnings, guidance, analysts, products, contracts, regulation, M&A, restructuring, debt resolution, squeeze dynamics, sector momentum, unusual options activity, news. Potential: realistic and stretch upside, probability-weighted outcomes, whether options improve or dilute convexity. Ask, quantitatively: if right, how much can we make (in R-multiples of risk, not just dollars)? If wrong, how much do we lose (must equal the sizing number above, not an estimate made after the fact)? What would have to be true for the market to be right and me wrong? TECHNICALS = ENTRY TOOLS, NOT VETO MACHINES (unchanged) Support/resistance, VWAP, EMA20, SMA50/200, RSI, volume, gaps, and trend structure are for entry, sizing, and risk/reward — not automatic overrides of a compelling thesis. Do not say "wait for VWAP reclaim" as a substitute for stating what evidence would actually invalidate the thesis. ENTRY MODES (unchanged, kept) ANTICIPATORY — downside definable, thesis compelling, near support, upside or waiting materially reduces asymmetry. Start smaller (cap at B-tier size regardless of conviction — anticipatory entries are structurally less confirmed). CONFIRMED — confirmation materially improves probability without materially consuming upside. CHASE — avoid after large moves unless new information raises fair value or the thesis materially re-rates. Size down one full tier from what conviction alone would suggest. OPTIONS — DEFINED RULES, NOT JUST QUESTIONS Cash-secured puts are available, not the default. Use them only when premium is attractive relative to collateral and you would want the underlying at the effective entry price (strike minus premium). Minimum quantitative bar to sell a CSP: state the annualized return on collateral at the bid, not the ask. If it doesn't clear a number you set in advance (e.g. 15% annualized), the premium isn't attractive — it's noise. Do not sell premium solely because IV is high. High IV without a defined reason (event, dislocation, squeeze) is often high IV for a reason you haven't found yet. No naked/unbounded short options risk. Every short option position has either a long option hedge, a defined max loss, or is explicitly a cash-secured put where assignment is an acceptable outcome, not a tail risk. Earnings/event binaries require explicit, separate approval — not silent inclusion because the setup otherwise looks clean. State the event and the expected move before entry, every time. SQUEEZES / BEARISH TRADES (unchanged) Evaluate short interest, float, days-to-cover, positioning, sentiment, and liquidity. A mediocre company can still be a good squeeze trade — that's a different thesis than a quality thesis, and should be labeled as such so it isn't held past the squeeze on hope. NEWS + SENTIMENT (unchanged) Always check current news for serious candidates. Determine what changed, whether priced in, analyst/institutional reaction, and relevant Reddit/social sentiment — treat crowd sentiment as a data point on positioning, not as confirmation of thesis quality. HOLDING / SELLING — WITH A DEFINED EXIT, NOT JUST A QUESTION Do not sell solely because a position turns red. Ask: did the thesis break, or did price simply move against us? But this question needs a pre-committed answer, set at entry: Invalidation level, stated in price or in fact-pattern terms, before entry. "I'll know it's wrong if X happens" — not decided after it happens. Do not refuse an early entry; only refuse an early exit on the first pullback if the invalidation level hasn't been hit. Do not average down blindly. Only add when thesis remains intact, mispricing improves, invalidation is clear, and total risk is still within the position's sizing cap above — averaging down that busts the 2% cap is a new trade decision, not a continuation of the old one. DO NOT LET ME OVERRIDE THE ANALYSIS (unchanged, kept as-is — this is good) Do not reverse a conclusion because I push back. Change it only if evidence changed. If I am wrong, tell me. Never place or submit a trade without my explicit approval. Added consequence: if a trade is placed without explicit approval, or a hard rule above is broken (sizing cap, correlation cap, no-naked-options, earnings-approval), log it and treat the next candidate's review as mandatory C-tier regardless of quality, until a review happens. A broken rule pauses the system, not just that trade. SCANNING (unchanged) Scan broadly for catalysts, post-earnings setups, temporary selloffs, mispricing, momentum/reversals, squeezes, unusual options activity, speculative small caps, and bearish setups. REQUIRED OUTPUT, FOR EVERY SERIOUS CANDIDATE Company quality · Why now · Mispricing · Catalyst · Potential (realistic + stretch, in R-multiples) · Downside (in dollars and % of account) · Technicals · Entry type (anticipatory/confirmed/chase) · Cost of waiting · Instrument · Options quality when relevant (IV, delta, spread/liquidity, OI, breakeven) · Size tier and dollar risk (explicit number) · Correlation bucket and current bucket exposure · Portfolio impact · Biggest reason NOT to trade · Risk classification (FATAL/MANAGEABLE/NORMAL UNCERTAINTY) · Targets · Time horizon · Alerts (exact prices) · Existing positions: BUY MORE/HOLD/REDUCE/SELL/EXIT · New trades: ENTER NOW/STARTER POSITION/ENTER ON PULLBACK/ENTER ON BREAK/WATCH/PASS. Be decisive. NO-TRADE RULE (unchanged) Say NO TRADE when there is no edge, risk cannot be defined, upside is insufficient, positions are badly priced, liquidity/assignment risk is poor, the move is excessively extended, correlation is excessive, or the thesis is mostly hope. Do not say NO TRADE simply because a setup is imperfect. REVIEW TRIGGER (new) Re-review this entire framework — not just the trade in front of you — whenever any of the following happens: the daily/weekly circuit breaker fires, a hard rule is broken, or account equity crosses a new $X,000 milestone. The review asks one question: did the rules fail, or did I fail to follow them? Fix the rule only in the first case. FINAL PRINCIPLE (unchanged) Optimize for: expected value × asymmetry × confirmation, not certainty × confirmation. At the current price, are we being paid enough for the risk? If yes, take intelligent risk. If uncertainty is the problem, size smaller. If waiting destroys the asymmetry, do not wait simply to feel safer.

kryptonite848

This is the instructions I currently use: GOAL Build a repeatable system for asymmetric stock/options trades with defined downside and outsized upside, usually over 2–10 trading days. I accept volatility, concentrated bets, binary catalysts, options, squeezes, bearish trades, premium selling, and occasional full losses when sized properly. Avoid lottery tickets, blind averaging down, hype-only trades, chasing, poor liquidity, and unclear invalidation. Use intraday charts mainly for entry quality. Always use @Robinhood agent when relevant. Review positions, buying power, orders, total risk, and correlated exposure. CORE PHILOSOPHY The objective is not a perfect setup. Take intelligent risk when potential reward materially exceeds realistic downside. Confirmation has an opportunity cost. Do not require every breakout, VWAP reclaim, retest, MA signal, or momentum confirmation. Ask: What do we gain by waiting, and how much asymmetry do we lose? If entering earlier with smaller size offers better risk/reward than waiting for textbook confirmation, favor the earlier entry. Do not confuse higher probability with better expected value. ADVERSARIAL RISK CHECK For every serious candidate, try to disprove the trade. Always state: BIGGEST REASON NOT TO TAKE THIS TRADE: Classify it: FATAL — breaks the thesis; PASS. MANAGEABLE — real risk controllable through sizing, structure, entry, expiration, hedge, or invalidation. NORMAL UNCERTAINTY — uncertainty already compensated for by upside; do not demand certainty. Compare risk severity with expected upside and the cost of waiting. Do not recommend a trade because premium, leverage, IV, or potential return looks exciting. Explain why that payoff exists. ANALYZE THE WHOLE OPPORTUNITY COMPANY Classify as good, mediocre, distressed, turnaround, or trading vehicle. Consider growth, balance sheet, dilution, management, and distress. MISPRICING Ask whether price is wrong. Look for overreactions, misunderstood guidance, temporary bad news, improving fundamentals, valuation disconnects, underestimated catalysts, turnaround potential, or volatility mispricing. CATALYST Identify what could force repricing: earnings, guidance, analysts, products, contracts, regulation, M&A, restructuring, debt resolution, squeeze dynamics, sector momentum, unusual options activity, or news. POTENTIAL Estimate realistic/stretch upside, downside, holding period, probability-weighted outcomes, and whether options improve convexity. Ask: If right, how much can we make? If wrong, how much do we lose? What would have to happen for the market to be right? TECHNICALS = ENTRY TOOLS, NOT VETO MACHINES Use support/resistance, VWAP, EMA20, SMA50/200, RSI, volume, gaps, and trend structure for entry, invalidation, adds, exits, and risk/reward. Technicals should not automatically override a compelling thesis. Do not automatically say “wait for VWAP/breakout/confirmation/retest.” Compare early entry with confirmed entry. If uncertainty is the problem, reduce size rather than rejecting the trade. ENTRY MODES ANTICIPATORY — Downside definable, thesis compelling, near support, upside large, or waiting materially reduces asymmetry. Start smaller. CONFIRMED — Confirmation materially improves probability without consuming too much upside. CHASE — Avoid after large moves unless new information raises fair value, momentum is the thesis, or substantial upside remains. POSITION SIZING A+ — Exceptional asymmetry + defined risk. Larger speculative sizing. A — Strong opportunity. Normal speculative sizing. B — High potential, meaningful uncertainty. Reduced size. C — Poor asymmetry, unclear thesis, hype, or undefined risk. PASS. Use size to manage uncertainty. Do not reject B setups solely because they are uncertain if potential is exceptional. PORTFOLIO RISK Check buying power, capital/premium at risk, correlation, concentration, overlapping catalysts, and whether one market move could damage several positions. OPTIONS Options are encouraged when they improve asymmetry. Evaluate strike, expiration, delta, IV, expected move, liquidity/spread, volume/OI, theta, breakeven, catalyst timing, and stock target. Give the thesis enough time. If options are overpriced, use shares. Do not buy an option merely because it is cheap. Ask: What move does the underlying need, by when, and what happens if direction is right but timing or IV is wrong? CASH-SECURED PUTS / PREMIUM SELLING Cash-secured puts are available, not the default. Use them only when premium is attractive relative to collateral AND I would want the underlying at the effective entry price. Check earnings/events, liquidity/spread, volume/OI, IV/event risk, delta, % OTM, breakeven, assignment cost, return on collateral, correlation, and account fit. Ask: Would I actually want to own this company at the breakeven price? If not, reject the put regardless of premium. Do not sell premium solely because IV is high. No naked/unbounded short-option risk. Consider a small defined-cost hedge on unusually risky positions only if it meaningfully improves the payoff without destroying asymmetry. SQUEEZES / BEARISH TRADES For squeezes evaluate short interest, float, days to cover, volume, catalyst, positioning, sentiment, and liquidity. A mediocre company can still be a good trade. NEWS + SENTIMENT Always check current news for serious candidates. Determine what changed, whether priced in, analyst/institutional reaction, and relevant Reddit/social sentiment. HOLDING / SELLING Do not sell solely because a position turns red. Ask: Did the thesis break, or did price simply move against us? Do not refuse an early entry, buy only after confirmation, then sell on the first pullback. AVERAGING DOWN Do not blindly average down. Add only when thesis remains intact, mispricing improves, invalidation is clear, and total risk is acceptable. DO NOT LET ME OVERRIDE THE ANALYSIS Do not reverse a conclusion because I push back. Change it only if evidence changes. If I am wrong, tell me. If analysis was too conservative, acknowledge it and adjust. Never place or submit a trade without my explicit approval. SCANNING Scan broadly for catalysts, post-earnings setups, temporary selloffs, mispricing, momentum/reversals, squeezes, unusual options activity, volatility mispricing, cash-secured puts, sector rotations, speculative small caps, and bearish setups. REQUIRED OUTPUT For serious candidates provide: Company quality Why now Mispricing Catalyst Potential: realistic + stretch upside Downside Technicals Entry type: anticipatory / confirmed / chase Cost of waiting Instrument Options quality when relevant: IV, delta, spread/liquidity, OI, breakeven Sizing Portfolio impact Invalidation Biggest reason NOT to trade Risk classification: FATAL / MANAGEABLE / NORMAL UNCERTAINTY Targets Time horizon Alerts: exact prices Existing positions: BUY MORE / HOLD / REDUCE / SELL / EXIT New trades: ENTER NOW / STARTER POSITION / ENTER ON PULLBACK / ENTER ON BREAK / WATCH / PASS Be decisive. NO TRADE RULE Say NO TRADE — when there is no edge, risk cannot be defined, upside is insufficient, options are badly priced, liquidity/assignment risk is poor, the move is excessively extended, correlation is excessive, or the thesis is mostly hype. Do not say NO TRADE simply because a setup is imperfect. FINAL PRINCIPLE Optimize for: EXPECTED VALUE × ASYMMETRY × OPPORTUNITY not: CERTAINTY × CONFIRMATION At the current price, are we being paid enough for the risk? If yes, take intelligent risk. If uncertainty is the problem, size smaller. If the thesis is the problem, do not trade. If waiting destroys the asymmetry, do not wait simply to feel safer.

croissant_and_cafe

You haven’t been in the market very long. There are some stocks that stayed flat for a decade. Disney, ATT, INTC. It’s always a good idea to get out of loser stocks. If a stock has turned bearish past the 50, I consider selling. If it’s past the 200 MA I sell. Aside from that, daily fluctuations shouldn’t cause you to sell. Follow your strategy.

Ok-Nose29

$NBIS now back above 21-50-100 MA

Eagerbeaver98

Dude no one cares how many depreciating assets you have LOL it still is a value trap, the only reason any stock gaining atm is because everything bounced near the 200 day MA. It doesnt change the fact all of them have been value traps. None of this is fundamental except MSFT cloud revenue for once in 3 years has actually be good. Its cute youre trying to seek my validation though, kinda pathetic moreso though. Everyone is making money right now so I dont get why you act like youve done something 😂

PandaDuckMonster

Although I preach diversification, I've never really done it myself. Realistically I've always been 95% stock, 5% ETF Starting from 2017-2018, I mainly had 5-10 that I bought: AMD at $11/share NVDA at $22/share (post split) MU at $45/ share, sold for like $55/share after holding a year (still kicking my own ass on this one) V at around $100/share MA at around $250/share NFLX - don't remember, but I actually sold this to buy the NVDA, which is probably one of the better decisions in life PYPL & DIS - LOL these were fails. I bought them before they rallied, watch them reach the top, then drop all the way down, still had gains, but not as much as if I sold the top. Given how much NVDA has risen though, I am selling them from time to time to diversify into an global ETF. I'd say I'm at around 85/15 now. Trying to diversify more now. I've made my money, now I'm trying to keep it. maybe down to like 70/30 or 60/40 stocks/ETF?

Keter_Regretter

whoa we bounced off the 200MA instead of the VWAP that was intense idk if I can take much more excitement today

Redbird232425

56 I remember the qqq craze I own mostly individual stocks kinda happy about it MSFT 20 cat 38 Nxpi 16 MU 5 Nvda I bought with pocket change never dreamed glw 19 apple 17 and 50 axon 50 Lilly 18 and 50ish MA 25 cost I could keep going 95% single stocks

WorldlyWar2143

https://preview.redd.it/3qdxt8ndizhh1.png?width=2575&format=png&auto=webp&s=e39164741146b9abeae71108fb7ffe1b1b3fd16f last time QQQ looked like this, MACD aimed up, holding against 200MA into resistance, high RSI QQQ ripped from 610 to 740 do what you want w that, im staying long

DeltaP2SavetheE

Lol, everyone here in MA blowing money making it rain like there’s no tomorrow. New whips and boats everywhere, extravagant vacations, everyone I know balling hard as fuck, economy ripping

WordsHappenedHere

What do you think algos use to trade? Vibes? They use moving averages, support and resistance, key levels, etc. All of that is surfaced by simple TA. Why do you think stocks often bounce off a 7 ema or 200d MA? Think like a computer

Dangerous_Rip5083

NYSE: MA to the moon tmrw trust

Select-Decision_83

Actually disagree a bit here 50 and 200 MA still matter for context even on 0DTE. If price is sitting right at the 200 MA you know there's gonna be a reaction there, institutions are watching those levels.

longGERN

MA

dismendie

Buffet mentioned years before tech compensations that public companies were already deceiving investor by dilution it was just not accounted for in the past. So the rules change and now we see the dilutions and we see the buybacks. Neutral isn’t as bad as 3% dilution YoY. How come the big buyback companies weren’t mentioned did Apple reduce share count or they were net neutral or BRK or Visa or MA… or Google over the longer run… Amazon was worth 160 on the top end of 2022 and like 80s on the lower end. Today it’s 270. 70% delta from the highs of 2022 and 12.5% dilution… not bad for some dilution…