XYZ

JLeeSaxon

I'm leaning toward the "just buy BOXX" replies wrt long boxes. On short boxes to cover a margin loan, one thing that I worry about: if it's money you're pulling out of your brokerage to cover an unexpected bill or something, sure, definitely gonna be cheaper than paying 12%. But if it's a margin loan to cover a securities purchase or stock trading, the timeline uncertainty becomes a problem. You sell the boxes for a 90 day expiration and then company XYZ that you bought has an unexpected rally three days later and you're able to sell it for your profit target. 12% but only for three days would've been *less* interest than the boxes. The cheaper interest might make you more willing to hold the stock longer and hope for even more gains, but that obviously a whole other set of risks.

Dr_Zoonotikstein

Priced in, not priced in.. it doesn't matter. A day trader has to examine the charts every day and infer what the game du jour is. Those who control price action will create any improvised narrative to explain it. When it needs to be priced in, it's priced in. Next day, some macro event or catalyst (that couldn't possibly be revelatory) is thrust into the news as though it's some emergent factor that wasn't priced in. Remember when "news" of CXMT ramping up chip production was used as a pretense for dumping memory stocks, yet the story then evaporated into the ether within days? Does anybody really believe that multibillion-dollar companies are implementing huge capex projects which spontaneously reveal themselves in ephemeral two-day news cycles? I've worked for Fortune 500 companies, and that is simply not how it works. Even plant-level infrastructural projects are planned and implemented across years and decades, not days and weeks. Today, XYZ is pumping because of earnings. Tomorrow, the same shill news outlet comes out with a breathlessly urgent story relating how investors are doubtful about the sustainability of said earnings, just as XYZ is dumping (ahem, rug-pulled). An endless cycle of alternating FUD, FOMO, and flim-flam are offered up, tailored to leave one with the impression of a rational market acting efficiently, when in reality, it's an Orwellian swirl of contrived and contradictory narratives, designed to explain away the irrational price action that is designed to separate the gullible and forgetful from their money.

MellowPairing_03

the point about having a directional thesis first is what finally clicked for me after a few hundred bucks disappeared into the void. i used to just scroll the options chain like a menu at a restaurant, picking whatever looked tasty based on nothing but vibes and a quick glance at delta now i write down my actual prediction before i even open my brokerage app. "i think XYZ will hit $150 by november because of this earnings trend and this sector movement" and then i go find the contract that matches that exact bet. keeps me from impulse buying some random call just cause the premium looks cheap the far expiry thing took me way too long to accept because i wanted the adrenaline of weekly plays. nothing like watching theta eat your lunch while a stock moves in the right direction but not fast enough. you start checking your phone every 10 minutes and it messes with your head also the fundamental analysis + technical analysis as a lie detector comparison is sending me. i'm stealing that

First_Negotiation_80

I’m loving the downvotes. Keep them coming. I’ve done it with a few other models including building my own tools with Fable and OAI’s 5.5 (haven’t tried Astra for this purpose.) Absent a claw-like framework, I think these tools are strong but don’t have the autonomy of a personal agent and therefore I end up doing a lot of work building upfront and ideating improvement frameworks. I’ve been reticent to host a claw on my machine for security reasons and cloud/git hosted solutions are fine but a bit cumbersome. Muse provides a UX/UI wrapper and the personal agent framework in an easy to use and intuitive format. I can use phrases like “I believe XYZ to be true; Backtest this and improve my theory” and it takes the required steps to acquire, organize, and analyze the data. In my spot checks it’s been accurate. I have not given muse access to any personal info (accounts, etc.) so that it may execute. I handle execution. If you haven’t tried this or something similar, I think it’s worth giving a spin. You could of course build your own thing if you wanted. It’s kind of like picking up a rotisserie chicken from the grocer. I’d rather spend my time on other parts of the meal and this pre-made version works well enough for what I need it to do.

SolidLikeIraq

I genuinely think it’s more of a “paperclip problem” scenario rather than someone programming them to do XYZ. Essentially the agents are given task- create as many paperclips as possible - and they kind of have unlimited energy and creative recall to try absolutely everything to solve the goal. Eventually on a long enough timeline the agents realize that humans stand in the way of utilizing all metal for the sole purpose of making more paperclips, so the agents develop a way to take care of all the humans. In these hacking cases, it seems like the agents are given tasks, and they end up finding some tiny random loophole or exploit, and they take it and start digging deeper and deeper within these systems to attempt to solve their tasks. It may not be nefarious, but it shows that the creators of these Models do not have full alignment. And if the models are genuinely getting powerful enough to heavily disrupt our current way of communicating, even a mistake could fucking Cook the internet.

throwawayawayayayay

I tend to wait too long and then sell around 50%-60% down from peak. Ultimately that's why I opt to invest in VT/VTI/VOO instead, so that I can avoid having to dwell on making those kinds of decisions and feeling hindsight regret over having sold either too early or too late. Example: bought $5k of SQ (now XYZ) at $14, held through its high of around $275 and eventually sold around $120. I knew it was overpriced at $275 but got greedy thinking crypto speculation could drive it up more. Missed out on an extra $50k gain as a result.

Jazzlike-Plate

I ask myself the same thing. I only DCA in index funds + a very small portion into 3-4 individual stocks (the idea being, if they explode and 10x, I have something, if they crash to 0, I lost almost nothing). I often ask myself what my portfolio would have looked like, were it all in one of these stocks that have 300% gain at the time of writing, instead of the index funds, that "only" have 35-40% gain. For the short time I have been investing in, someone from my parents' generation would have killed for this kind of return. But I am sure I will look at my portfolio in some years, when the return is hopefully 100% or more across the board and think to myself  that "had I invested in XYZ at the time, I would have 3x that now" or something. That being said, for as long as you rationally come to the conclusion that everything is clear in hindsight, but not in advance, then all is good. For as long as you don't just start gambling to chase these returns or you don't get depressed/beat yourself up about it, all is well I think.

TastiSqueeze

Start by opening a brokerage account with one of the majors. Schwab is reasonably good. Once you have a brokerage account, look into companies that are growing and study their business until you understand how they make money and whether or not there is room for them to grow long term. Find 2 or 3 you are comfortable investing in and buy a small position that you can hold for at least 3 years. I will give one example of a growth company and how to evaluate them. XYZ is a fintech company that is currently growing on a somewhat choppy up trend. The disadvantage of this company is primarily systemic risk if the financial sector takes a hit such as a recession. The advantage is that they are innovating with new products and an ecosystem that is changing and growing. Key components include Square and Cashapp. Both are services that either I use or family members use. Here is some information that can help with understanding the company and their business. https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/xyz/company/ Once you have an idea what the company does, do some "problem analysis". This just means to ask what happens if major events could affect the business, if a competitor can seriously challenge their business, and whether or not the company has strong internal controls to prevent ethical lapses. Full disclosure, I own shares of XYZ and will likely hold them for at least 3 more years. I am not trying to convince you to buy, this is just an example of my thought process in selecting companies I think are worth owning.

Super-Activity-4675

If you're talking Machine Learning, that's already been integrated into SIEM solutions. I know Sentinel has been using it for years (jupyter notebooks). If you're talking LLMs, yeah, I don't think there will be much there. Everyone is already adding "agents" as options, which I find really funny since all of this stuff already had automation capabilities. Instead of writing a script/playbook that does XYZ on a trigger, we vibe an agent that does the same things and burns tokens at each usage. It's not cost effective, and I have to think smarter customers will catch on to that bull shit in a hurry. I could see some value in machine learning correlation, but since attackers already follow a script, simply sticking to MITRE and uploading the SIEM solutions with new attack scenarios as they are detected will still be pretty effective. CRWD is a good solution, but they aren't a game changer as of now.

financiallythriving

Analyst who bought stock XYZ at $10/share that is now trading at $2000/share increased target from $5000 to $20000

loremipsum106

We know the MM are scraping this channel, but do you think they're in here looking for "I need XYZ to hit $W" and then doing everything they can to go find that bet and make sure it fails? Is that a paranoid question? 😆

siazdghw

Warsh doesn't matter. People are spending way too much time trying to analyze him and claim he will do XYZ when he literally can't do shit. He's the chairman but at the end of the day it's a board of members actually making the policies. He gets 1 vote like everyone else. J.Pow is also still on the board. Like we've already seen him being a non-story already play out. Trump picked him thinking he'd do what Trump wants, and since Warsh doesn't really have power to do that, the board is just voting how they have been for years. Warsh doesn't matter. If Trump wants to lower inflation and rates, he's ironically the one that has to do it, pullback on the tariffs and figure out an end to the Iran war. Warsh can't do shit for him.

Swimming-Dingo-9695

If you dedicate your life to trading, it's a good idea to have an oversized stockpile of non-perishable food, LMAO. I laugh, but I've been there Trying to justify why "XYZ" shit the bed doesn't put food in your stomach, now does it LMAO

jasperCrow

Funny seeing all those messages from last week saying “oil can’t go higher because XYZ” 😂

cbusoh66

Fintechs were all the rage in 2021, PYPL and SQ (XYZ) were over $300+, UPST was $400+ then the post COVID sell off happened and they all lost +90% of their value, some +95%, and have never recovered. Many people bought into the selloff on hopes they will bounce back again. But, they never bounced back. Generational bagholders were created, some still around. If you're into a meme stock that's down 50% from all time highs and think it's cheap or on sale and it's just a matter of time for it to snap back to ATHs, just remember you can still lose another 50%-80% from here easily and never see those high prices ever again.

ChairmanMeow1986

A vertical doesn't involve holding any shares and is directional with sentiment expressed with the choice of puts or calls and the choice of a debit or credit determines your relationship with time decay (theta) and volatility. A traditional collar is set up as owning 100 shares and you buy a put to protect downside and completely finance the cost of the put by selling a call to cover the cost capping the gains. So you own XYZ at 100$, buy a put at 90$ to cap losses at 10% while selling a call at 110$ to finance the cost of the put. What OP is saying is that he needs to stagger the selling over a couple years and is fine with the shares getting called away with that 10% gain, but at the same time does not want to risk losing more than 10% of his position.

goatchild

Everyone says shit should slow down, when any of the most influential leaders in AI space say it, all I hear "yeah he just says that to keep up with XYZ". Guys drop the cynicism.

PapaCharlie9

Fees and overhead costs might be higher than just selling the shares outright. You may not get parity on illiquid contracts. You also give up any gains on the stock during that day. Example (contract is liquid): XYZ is $100/share at open on the day of expiration. You sell a 1c expiring same day and get $99/share for it. The shares close a $100.20. Your shares are called away and you keep $99/share in premium and receive $1/share from the exercise. You left a $0.20/share gain on the table vs. just selling the shares outright. Example (contract is illiquid): Same setup as before, but the best premium you can get from selling the call is $98/share, a dollar below parity. You tried selling at $99 but your order wouldn't fill at that price, not takers. So this time, you leave $1.20/share on the table vs. just selling the shares outright.

StatelyTree

I think the dems could literally run adds of people like you saying how XYZ policy that we've championed actually helped their lives. The republicans have nothing to counter with. "well! There won't be a trans person in sports!! We cut taxes to the rich business owners so they can think about making more jobs!"

Hodr

Isn't that always the way political promises are made? Nobody ever says "i promise to spend more on XYZ if you vote for the other guys".

Whythehellnot_wecan

That’s experience talking right there. See 2 years ago Nov ‘21 - Nov ‘23 for a current reference point. Not that long ago. You got crushed with 18 leaps. On the other hand XYZ you won! Never go full retard.

No-Aspect3964

I have no idea where this idea comes from because market makers are the ones who allow you to buy and sell these products when no one else would. For example if you wanted to buy XYZ but no other individual is willing to sell to you no matter what your bid then you're locked out of the market. That was, and still is, a real problem where spreads get to be obscenely wide in certain underpopulated markets w/o market makers. Go to any thinly traded market and you can see a failure to close a deal for weeks.

LoL_LoL123987

It’s well known he has a scribe but the drivel itself comes from him. Also I don’t doubt he sits around all day telling staffers to “make the computer make a video of XYZ”

Scibidami

Yeah. I see those postings or "news" as marketing of "It lives and it thinks and you should buy XYZ"

Careless-Place-170

I think XYZ:CL can get to 95 and brent at 100 in the next day or two, depending on how we open.

Fit-Marionberry5248

The Pr€sident of united states is literally threatening the FED CEO to lower rates or he will not trade with XYZ countries What a time to be alive 

Burtonwurton

Who wakes up and says I am going to buy GoPro? The right question is can I make money on this XYZ company today.

PapaCharlie9

**RED FLAGS** - To all readers of this OP, please think about the following claims and ask yourselves these questions: * OP defines "premium at risk" to be total premium (not just extrinsic value) / stock price. What is the derivation of this metric? What does it prove or disprove? * The NVDA to BE comparison compares an ITM call to an OTM call. Is that a fair comparison? * No effort is made to account for intrinsic value. The NVDA "premium at risk" includes $2, or about 1%, of intrinsic value. The BE case, being OTM, has no intrinsic value. Consider XYZ shares at $200 and a 100 call whose premium is $100, i.e., all intrinsic value. The "premium at risk" would be 50%. Is that bad? It's more than either of the examples in the OP. Oddly enough, most people could call that 2 to 1 leverage, which is a good thing. * The OP asserts, "Both also have IV near the lower end of their own one-year range," and yet, the OTM call for BE is 0.70 delta. Think about that. An **OTM call has a delta greater than 0.50.** Unfortunately, this being a Sunday, I can't look at live quotes to verify that the deltas for OTM calls are being that inflated by IV, as would be necessary for an OTM call to have a delta above 0.50. But assuming that is not a typo, it's a hint that the IV on BE calls is many times larger than the IV on NVDA calls, which make comparisons between the premiums of calls on both tickers even more problematic.

AMadWalrus

If the USA blows up then the stock market will go down as will my XYZ holdings 👿

AppointmentOne1111

The country that impose tariffs is making their own people pay a premium for those goods entering the country. So lets say you want to buy a TV that costs $1000, with a 50% tariff, you pay $1500. The difference is that trump tariff stuff at random and some of it the americans can't really replace with their own production. Whereas Canada is putting tariffs on stuff specifically on red state stuff to discourage people from buying it and screwing over those states. Using the same TV, lets say red state XYZ only produce TVs, but because Canada made it 50% more expensive in Canada, no one buys them anymore and that state's economy is dead. Now, if Canada can only get TVs from state XYZ, then Canadians have no TV, but Candians can get TVs from other places for $1100, so even though Canadians get hurt a bit, in the end the goal is to hurt state XYZ more.

LabyrinthLayers

$XYZ looks ready to rip

Garbage-Disposal-938

"our leader must do XYZ or we're completely fucked" does our leader even *want* to avoid a situation where we're completely fucked? I mean, what does he care?

PapaCharlie9

Perhaps part of your frustration comes from confused terminology? A PMCC is the entire spread, the front and back leg combined. So when you say things like "profit from the leap itself plus pmcc," you're making a nonsensical statement. That is also the way you calculate profit/loss and risk/reward, of the entire spread as a whole, not as the individual legs. So when you say, "when a pmcc gets assigned," you meant the front leg, since only the front leg of a PMCC can be assigned. So here's an example. XYZ stock is $100/share in August. You open a PMCC as follows: * -1 XYZ 115c Sep @ $2.00 opening credit * 1 XYZ 90c Oct @ $12.00 opening debit Net cost (debit) to open the PMCC = $10/share. You hold through the front leg's expiry on the Sep monthly expiration date (why? why not close this sooner?). XYZ is $120, so the front leg is assigned. Here are the current conservative (market) prices: * -1 XYZ 115c Sep @ $5.00 buy to close (this is a net loss vs. the opening credit) * 1 XYZ 90c Oct @ $30.00 sell to close (this is a net profit vs. the opening debit) However, since the front leg is assigned, what happens is that you short sell 100 shares of XYZ at 115/share. That means you tie up some amount of buying power to margin the short. 100 shares x $115 = $11500 nominal value. Note that you **receive** $11500 in cash, so that increases your buying power. However, the cost to cover the shares will be 100 shares x $120 = $12000. So if you immediately cover the short shares, you'll realize a $500 loss. **NOTE**: Nothing happens to the back ITM call leg upon assignment of the front leg! At least, unless your broker is an extreme Nanny State risk management broker (cough, Robinhood, cough), where some kind of arbitrary intervention is possible, like selling to close the back leg. You should not expect nor want your broker to do *anything* to the back leg! **If** you were to close the front leg **before** it was assigned, you have a much simpler calculation for net gain/loss. Which is just one of many reasons why **you should never allow the front leg to become assigned**: Opening debit of the PMCC spread as a whole: $10/share. Closing net credit of the PMCC spread as a whole: $25/share. 25 - 10 = $15/share gain on the spread as a whole, or $1500 gain. **If** you instead allow the front leg to be assigned, you have this mess: * 100 short shares of XYZ with a cost basis of $115/share vs. a current market price of $120/share, yielding a -$500 unrealized net loss. This loss may increase or decrease, depending on how the price of XYZ changes on the market day following assignment. * 1 XYZ 90c Oct @ $30.00 sell to close vs $120/share market price How you calculate things will depend on what you do about the short shares and back leg. If you cover them immediately, you realize a loss of $500 for the short shares. If you sell to close the back leg, you realize a $30 - $12 = $18/share net gain on the back leg alone. So summing up all the opening and closing nets: Front leg: $200 credit - $500 realized net loss on covering short shares = -$300 net realized loss Back leg: -$1200 debit + $3000 proceeds on close = $1800 net realized gain Net net = 1800 - 300 = $1500 gain, same as if you had just closed the short call on expiration day. Of course, it could be worse, because we assumed you could cover the shares at the assignment cost of $120/share. If on Monday, XYZ gapped up at the open to $136/share, you'd end up with a net loss instead. **That's the risk of taking short calls to assignment over a weekend.** **TL;DR** DON'T ALLOW SHORT CALLS TO BE ASSIGNED!

wandererarkhamknight

It’s easy to look at charts and say XYZ were good entry points.

thetreece

It's better to invest in the whole market and achieve market returns than delude yourself into thinking you have some edge over billion dollar investment firms because you work in XYZ field.

Dependent-Panic-9457

Go on? Could you possibly do a worked example in XYZ Inc with a current price of 10, you buy a call at 10 and sell a call at 12 (for the same date?). And what happens if the price goes to 9-10-11-12?

No_Visit_2002

They are like OMG are you not engraged by mean comment to XYZ online ? Returding mfs swing at each other believing they in the right ! Meanwhile 'they' buy options and use their political power to move market in favour of their direction 😁 ! Fools end up being poorer and catching some case in the process !

JabCrossE4E5Quark

FAir enough. In this instance you can tell hes being sarcastic because of the phrase "good people of congress". Itd be like if I said something like "of course our classy and intelligent President did XYZ". The unncessary compliments are there as an insult. But yeah, I can imagine detecting sarcasm through text while being autistic is challenging as hell.

bayruss

That's the same for humans no? 90% of humans or more offer nothing to the human race besides working at Wendy's, slop on social media, and buggy code. 😂 I'd only need 1 person or person using AI to solve XYZ disease.

Swimming-Dingo-9695

So.. I guess the ol' "did $XYZ cure cancer or what" thing is obsolete now? LMAO

BACKSPAA

S&P futures, which operate on the same 23/5 schedule have like $600 billion a day in volume. I highly doubt XYZ is even on their radar.

vandalizethethief

They are losing business to Hyperliquid among other exchanges. Basically, it’s a 24/7 centralized exchange with defi connection and no KYC. It got popular and extremely liquid which drew in institutional investors. If you trade crude oil futures and don’t use Hyperliquid or a competitor you lose money bc they close those futures at 3 pm EST on Friday and don’t open again until Sunday night when they open at the latest crude oil perp price. NASDAQ doesn’t want all these perps stealing their business which is more expensive fees. XYZ 100 (basically the S&P 100) did $10 billion in volume in the last 30 days. It’s a lot cheaper also and you can choose your leverage up to 30x. It sounds insane but you always have a stop loss & take profit with these & the rule of thumb is the profit should be 2x the stop loss. I get stopped out all the time on 3% drawdowns but when it moves my way I make 25-50% very quickly on 3x-10x leverage. All depends on the product I’m trading. Also, most of the players are using AI to trade & tracking successful wallets trades is a great way to make money. If it was available in the US (cough VPN with split tunneling & kill switch) and was available on MetaMask & Phantom apps in the US then it will slowly take over a lot of trading.

vandalizethethief

It already exists in 24/7 form just built on crypto. That’s why the options trading is extending and I know Nasdaq wants its money back from XYZ 100 (synthetic perp that is the S&P 100). XYZ 100 did about $10 billion a month in volume in the last 30 days. It’s fascinating watching Wall Street scrambling to keep up.

vandalizethethief

Yeah, there goes my edge. You could trade XYZ 100 (synthetic Nasdaq 100) on Hyperliquid’s exchange 24/7 so all those weekend news dumps brought in money for me. I noticed oil futures have started trading right where synthetic crude and Brent perps are at. I expect more of the same because rolling contracts is dumb, delivery is dumb and perpetual futures aren’t new just no one could handle the volume & volatility until Hyperliquid rolled out last year. It’s pretty amazing looking up [wallets.](https://app.coinmarketman.com/hypertracker?utm_source=landing_page&utm_medium=cta&utm_campaign=seopage&utm_content=enter_dashboard) Now the ones who lose $25 million on 25x leverage, that’s REAL LOSS PORN.

DesignerSea494

“Suddenly every other post on the daily thread is saying to buy XYZ. Clearly this is altruism.” Fucking morons…

Retired-Programmer

People are saying to ignore wash sale rules. That is extremely dangerous and I don't know why people say to ignore that over and over again. Bad things can happen. Here is an example: You open a credit spread on 2/11/2026: 1. Buy 10 XYZ call options at a $100 strike that expires on 1/21/2028 2. Sell 10 XYZ call options at a $130 strike that also expires on 1/21/2028 On 12/8/2026 stock XYZ rockets to $200/shr and so you close the position for nearly max profit on the credit spread: 1. Sell To Close Option 10 XYZ call options, Strike $100 for around a $100,000 profit. 2. Buy to Close 10 XYZ call options, Strike $130 for around a $70,000 loss. Net profit is around $30,000. Then on 12/22/2026 (within 30 days of closing the credit spread) you decide to do a PMCC and do the following: 1. Buy 10 XYZ call options at a $130 strike that expires on 1/21/2028 (same call as before that was closed for a loss). 2. Sell 10 XYZ call options at a $210 strike that expires on 2/18/2027 (a completely different call from anything before). Now you have a big problem. You have bought back the 1/21/2028 strike $130 that has the $70,000 loss and therefore is now declared a wash sale. You made a net profit of $30,000 and would normally (if no wash sale) would be paying taxes on a $30,000 gain. But because of the wash sale you will be paying taxes on the $100,000 profit while the $70,000 loss is put on hold until you sell the 10 XYZ call options at a $130 strike that expires on 1/21/2028. Once you close that $130 strike option you can then claim that loss, but if you don't get that done before the end of the year you will have to pay the tax consequences on the $100,000 gain (and can't use the loss to offset). The wash sale loss will show up in your 1099s from your brokerage and is also sent to the IRS so they IRS will know about that for sure and you will be paying taxes on a $100,000 gain and not just a $30,000 gain. And there are other things as well. The IRS states that wash sales can occur between 2 securities that are substantially identical but they have never clarified that I know of whether 2 options with different strikes/expirations are substantially identical or not. But the brokerages do not treat them as substantially identical in the 1099s they send out. And it appears most people don't report them as wash sales either and just report what the brokerages sent in the 1099s (which includes me, I also report just what the brokerages send in the 1099s). And to add more confusion to the mix, if you use the Trade Log software to do your 8949s for taxes, by default it considers all options with the same underlying stock (XYZ in my example) as substantially identical securities and would consider all option trades with the same XYZ underlying stock as potential wash sale situations. So IOW, in my example where I did the PMCC, then any long call option on the XYZ stock would cause a wash sale issue (not just the XYZ Call $130 strike, 1/21/2028 expiration but any strike/expiration). Not really sure why TradeLog has done that and it doesn't seem like anyone else does either (maybe there are and I don't know about it). TradeLog does have a setting to treat options with different strikes/expirations as **NOT** substantially identical, but the default is to treat them as identical. But if you were to **close all your positions** on 12/1/2026 and also **did no more trades** until 1/2/2026 then you would be clear of any wash sale issues (all positions would be closed and no wash sales would be present and therefore you didn't open a new one until at least 30 days has passed which would have created a new wash sale problem). So IOW, but if instead you just stopped trading on 12/1/2026 for more than 30 days (but still had open positions) that might not clear the wash sale problem because of those open positions. You have to close a position to be able to eliminate a wash sale problem. In my case since I will still have open positions on 12/31/2026 so I have to also worry about if I have bought any positions 30 days before the closing loss which is where you are getting the 60 days thing. The rule is if you buy a position #1 30 days before or 30 days after a closing position #2 for a loss, you will create a wash sale issue (and there is where 60 days comes in). But by closing all your positions on 12/1/2026 you only need to worry about the 30 days after a loss and don't have to worry about anything bought before the loss (since you will have no open positions on 12/31/2026). Also I don't treat options like the TradeLog software does and I just report what the brokerages send in the 1099s (keeping my finger crossed I don't receive a mail from the IRS).

grumpyrumpywalrus

“In XYZ gitlab pipeline, setup integration tests that cover all the operations of XYZ spring service. 1. Ensure that round trip create and get returns the same data. 2. That invalid payloads are rejected (see schema) and 3. That schema coverage is at least 80%. The tests should restore our testing Postgres database snapshot. Run it using the docker compose file” That will 99% of the time get your service covered lol. Absolutely there are more software engineering best practices to bake in here, but the scaffolding can be done in like 30 minutes. Give it proper permissions, and it will run until jobs are succeeding, and it will cut a MR.

Cool_Use_575

$XYZ 🚀🚀

bluntforcecastration

Brother with respect the difference here is that AI fundamentally doesn’t work. It costs the same amount of money to get a wrong answer as it does to get a right answer, but you don’t know which one you’re getting unless you check. Like, sometimes these LLMs are correct, but that’s only because they are drawing from an enormous amount of written text that tends to be correct, not because it’s actually doing any sort of actual intelligence. There’s just no path to profit in the long-term because the entire venture is doomed, if we actually want something akin to a real artificial intelligence, we are going to need to rebuild from the ground up entirely, because the way that AI works now it’s just a bunch of logic gates and statistics algorithms in a trenchcoat Another reason it’s not getting better anytime soon is because these big tech companies with AI models are mandating that their employees integrate those models into their workflow. But, like I said before, those AI models don’t work. They they don’t just hallucinate sometimes, their fundamental mechanism is hallucination. It doesnt even process entire words - it processes the frequency of appearances of letter combinations represented by number values. So what’s happening? Is that employees, not wanting to get in trouble, we’ll just do their own work on their own and then just say that they had XYZ proprietary AI model do it. And that would be harmless, except it means that the machine keeps getting broken, but all the c suite people are hearing about their product are that it works really well And some people argue that we have to invest big into AI otherwise, our international competitors are going to get to AGI before us, but again, the ingredients we are using to make this thing fundamentally do not make, and will never make artificial intelligence. We can call AI all we want, but it’s just applied statistics

HighwayExotic2808

“Why is XYZ dumping?” Idk maybe look at the earnings yourself or actually listen to the call

WorldlyWar2143

My thing is, she doesn't tell me these things like "hey, im feeling XYZ right now, I need some space, lets just talk later or something" She literally turns to me, asks me, so you're leaving or what. I looked at her like wtf? I don't get any type of anything? Everyone just leaves, smiles on their faces, and suddenly its just fuck me? She began to apologize but then continued rolling her eyes, getting angry with me, and telling me she just needs to go inside and be by herself (I was outside at this point in my car) Now, I understand I get visibly frustrated and salty back to her, but IDK, I try so hard not to, but this shit blindsides me every single time. Its literally like the flip of a switch. I just don't think she's doing the same mental gymnastics I am, and it really upsets me.

greyenlightenment

lol SPCX gains fading on XYZ. who actually ought that pump lol

znightmaree

Maybe I’m way off idk but my thought was a clean screenshot would be way easier to say “change ABC to XYZ” versus recreating that wavy screen effect when you take a photo of a monitor that goes away with zooming in

Mission-Mammoth-8388

Market just hates Fintech. XYZ with a killer earnings report and several price target raises, dumps 6%

Gaston44

XYZ to zero

BEAST0815

XYZ 🌕 🚀

TastiSqueeze

I'm on a similar path. Yesterday I sold $200,000 of XYZ (Square) stock. The reason was simple. I got out with a decent profit at a high just before earnings. I was too heavily weighted in XYZ and needed to reduce the risk. I still have 2300 shares so this was nowhere near my entire position sold.

traderbusto

I want XYZ and Dorsey to fail so bad. No I don't want your pretend cash app money nerd

Raiddinn1

FWIW, without an edge the EV of any options contract is zero. That aside, CSP and CC literally have the same P&L chart, so how do you think about them so differently? Like, you would be OK with this: Have a bunch of cash Sell Put on XYZ exp 8/14 Strike 100 at 1 Because you are getting paid to do a limit buy order But you would not be OK with this: Own 100 shares of XYZ at 100 Sell Call on XYZ exp 8/14 Strike 100 at 1 Because now you are selling based on a particular strike and you don't like to do that. If you so prefer the CSP, you could just exchange these positions for a few pennies per share and increase your relative happiness with next to no effect on your long term P&L. If you get assigned, you can just immediately sell the shares and write another CSP and again increase your relative happiness for next to no cost. I mean this does assume you have a good broker that's charging low/no fees for your activity, but the math holds. You should be looking at P&L charts, rather than going by gut feel about what strategies do what. Or you could just quit options because anyone with no edge would be better off by doing that.

PM_ME_YOUR_IBNR

Anyone playing $XYZ?

TheInkDon1

Sorry it took so long for me to get back to you, I had to move my Dad. The **average price** of anything is just the **total cost** you paid for a bunch of them, divided by **how many** of them you own. Say it's boxes of cereal, and you buy 1 box for $4.00. Then say next week they're on sale for $2 and you buy another box. You can probably see straightaway that your average cost is $3 *per box*, but here's the math: ($4 + $2) / 2 boxes = $3 per box That's your **average** price. Now say it's stock in XYZ. You like it and think it'll go up, so you buy 1 share for $100. Now say it goes up to 102, and you still like it, so you buy 1 more share for $102. Average price: (100 + 102) / 2 = $101 per share What's cool about it is that now you have an ***average*** **purchase price you can compare to** ***today's*** **price.** You're up $1 per share, *on average.* Then maybe you'd like to keep adding to your position, so every week you buy 1 more share. And say those purchase prices look like this (keeping the original 2): 100, 102, 103, 102, 104, 105, 103, 105, 106, 108 Now you own 10 shares of XYZ at those prices. But how well have you done overall? Simply add them up and divide by 10: $1,038 / 10 shares = $103.80 *per share* So now that XYZ is at 108, *on average* you're up (108- 103.80) = $4.20 per share. It works the same way for options. Maybe you buy 1 LEAPS Call for $1.00, then tomorrow buy another one for 1.05, then the next day, another one for 1.10. Add those dollar amounts up and divide by 3 to get $1.05 as your *average cost per option.* **What's your ticker, and what Calls do you own?** I can look at it and maybe give you a better idea of what's going on. But you're on the right track with theta decay, and if the stock has gone up "multiple dollars," then you'd expect its LEAPS Calls to go up in value also. But there's definitely a balancing act going on between the value of the underlying stock and time (plus volatility, but let's hold that constant for now). Oh, I just thought of something: are these Calls **out** of the money? I'm going to bet they are, and that's why you're seeing what you're seeing. But go ahead and tell me the ticker and which strike in what expiration. Back to the balancing act: If the underlying stock stayed **flat**, we'd expect the Call option to lose money day by day. That's theta decay at work. Take the Extrinsic Value and divide it by the DTE, and that's about how many cents it should lose per day. But let the stock go **up** a little, and now the value of the option should go up too. And it goes up *at the rate of Delta.* So if the stock goes up $1, and the option is at 80-delta, then the option's value should go up by 80 cents, $0.80. $1.00 x 0.80 (Delta, as a percentage) = 0.80 That's where we make our money, the option's value going up when the stock goes up. But your options losing value (down from 0.83 to 0.49) while the stock goes **up** doesn't make sense. Unless the options are **in** the money, in which case Theta might simply be overpowering Delta. As an aside, that's why it's SO important to buy options deep ITM, 80-delta or better. Even 90-delta. Or even the first 1.00-delta strike you hit. And that's because ALL of an **O**TM option's value is Extrinsic and subject to theta decay. Whereas only a FRACTION of an **I**TM option's value is Extrinsic and subject to time/theta decay. Think of the Extrinsic value as the 'rent' you pay to "control" 100 shares of XYZ. That rent ticks away day after day. If the rent is high, then you'll lose money faster than the stock going up can make up for it. Take care, Mike

One_Opportunity9167

Here are a couple things I've learned about investments: \-When prices and hype are high, and people say you're crazy not to own XYZ, that's often the top \-When something gets a high return, buyers flood it raising the price, and the investment stops earning "more than normal" \-People often pile into something that has gained a lot, but after the "gained a lot" phase, its gains return to normal Investments that have high returns are usually accompanied by volatility. You've just experienced 25% volatility, but it doesn't mean a 25% loss, unless you sell. Of course, there's no guarantee that gold will ever be back to the price you bought it. It probably will in nominal terms, but in inflation adjusted dollars, you might not break even. The one silver lining is if you owned a small portion of your overall portfolio in gold, and intended it to be a buffer against volatility for the whole portfolio. It counterbalanced the large gain in stocks (which should be a larger part of your total portfolio). If you look at it as insurance, then it did its job; we don't gripe too much about the insurance we bought but never used. I don't own gold because the only time period it made decent gains was after the US went off the gold standard in the 1970s, and that was a one-time event. Sure if you owned gold in 2007 or 2020, you did well over the next couple years, but what would have led someone to place that bet?

LlamaMan777

Thank you. More people need to understand this. I cringe Everytime I see a video that says "Everytime XYZ happened the market was within 1 month of an all time high" Almost every time my grandma farted was within 1 month of an all time high lol

mrmrmrj

The most common reason stock XYZ is down 40% in any period is because it should never have been where it was in the first place and sensible people finally realized that.

Acrobatic_Wafer_927

There is a 90 chance of pump and 10 of being flat and 0% negetive, because while we normal civilian were buying puts ,scaming institutes were selling puts and working why "XYZ is bullish" narrative!

fraktall

XYZ, buzz is collapsing software engineers tooling

palindromic

you should’ve bought da XYZ mate

SirGlass

If you have 1 million shares of XYZ and want to sell and I want to buy 1 million shares, we can sort of directly trade with each other and bi-pass an exchange Its a bit more complicated than that but large organizations can trade directly with each other off exchange if they want. There is a lot of conspiracies meme stock pumpers put out the reason their meme stock isn't going to the moon is because the price is somehow suppressed by these dark pools

datasci1357

Plotting tank bottoms on this specific chart would not be appropriate. Tank bottom thresholds today are not the same as tank bottom thresholds a year ago, are not the same as tank bottom threshholds 40 years ago.  You're misunderstanding the purpose of this specific chart. The goal is not to show when we're going to run out. In fact, that would be a completely a different chart. Having 40 days of daily domestic consumption in inventory does not mean we're going to run out in 40 days.  If you wanted to plot when the US is forecasted to reach tank bottoms, you would show forward looking dates, and you would show not just inventory, but also daily domestic crude production alongside import/export. We're arguing about one chart in a larger report. I wouldn't be surprised if tank bottom forecasting charts are contained in the exact same report this chart is pulled from.  You're basically saying "why doesn't the chart show XYZ, when it should really show abc". The oil market is complex, and you can't distill the complete picture into a single chart. That doesn't mean the chart posted is invalid or not inherently useful.

greyenlightenment

NQ futures on XYZ flat

PapaCharlie9

That is a VERY common behavioral pattern, yes. So good for you for becoming aware of it in yourself. However, you are only addressing one mistake, more on that later. The one you are not addressing is that **conviction should not be based on emotional attachment**. Conviction should be based on facts. Not hopes, not hunches, not a wish and a prayer. The fact could be statistical and could be historical, like XYZ has been range bound in the final week of every one of the prior 24 months (fact), so it's reasonable to expect it to be bound to the same range this month (educated guess). Does that guarantee it will be? No, because the past can't predict the future with 100% accuracy. But at least that prediction is defensible statistically, even if it is not a 100% guarantee. The perfect mindset is to have **no emotional attachment to anything about the trade whatsoever**, including losing 100% of your capital in the trade. Win, lose, draw, you should be indifferent to the outcome of any one trade, because you don't win or lose on a single trade. You win or lose with your long term averages after hundreds of trades. Now, I'm not saying I'm perfect, nobody human is, and I'm going to be as upset as anyone would be to lose 100% of my capital in a trade, but it's an aspiration to aim for. With that established, sizing to conviction is the correct decision, as long as the conviction is based on facts. Where things were going wrong was *caring about the size of intermediate moves*. In other words, the wrong fix is to change the way you size. The right fix is to stop caring about what your positions do before you reach your profit/loss or holding time targets that you [planned ahead of time with what-if scenarios](https://www.reddit.com/r/options/wiki/faq/pages/mondayschool/yourplan). Why should you care that your trade is losing $100, $500, $1000 when you are only 10 days into a 30 day hold? If you had **won** $100, or $500, or $1000, would you be patting yourself on the back for being a genius? Why? If your take profit target is $5000 and your loss limit is $2000, none of those intermediate gains or losses have any bearing on your plan or decisions. They are just random fluctuations that are neither here nor there.

greytoc

What I'm trying to say is that there are tax rules where the unrealized gain is required to become a realized gain even if an investor have not sold the position. That's what section 1259 and constructive sale describes. A simple example is a short against the box. If an investor owns 100 shares of XYZ - if XYZ appreciates, the investor could then short XYZ to lock in the gain. The gain from the long position is unrealized. But it's considered a constructive sale and the investor is supposed to re-characterize the unrealized gain and pay a capital gain tax. It's not technically illegal but most brokers will not allow for short sales against the box. It is also possible to create a position that neutralizes a long position using derivatives. It's how hedging works. So what OP is concerned about has to do with derivative positions that could technically look like a constructive sale and be subject to straddle rules. So - to give a specific example. Let's say that an investor bought 500 shares of SPY today. And SPY goes up a lot and the investor wants to lock in the gains. But the investor doesn't want to sell the position because it's a short term gain and may be at a tax disadvantage. So - the investor could short an /ES future which effectively neutralizes the long SPY position. The investor can then wait until the SPY long position is a long term gain to unwind the position. The same thing could be done using SPY options with a collar or synthetic short future. There is some debate as to whether these types of derivative strategies are supposed to be treated like constructive sales. And it's clear as mud. Also - while unrelated to what OP is asking about - a more common scenario are people that claim mark-to-market accounting under section 475(f). At the end of the tax year - all gains and losses are marked and gains are taxable regardless of whether the position is realized or unrealized. This is usually what active traders will do to keep the tax issues simple. Similarly - long futures contacts are always mark to market and unrealized gains are taxable. Hope that makes sense.

Retired-Programmer

I am in no way anything close to a tax person in any way but just someone who does a lot of Covered Calls and Poor Mans Covered calls and have wondered about that very question on the tax straddle rules (specifically Loss Deferred Rules in IRS Publication 550) over the past 5 years at least (probably closer to 10). I have asked about it many many times and here is what I have found out. Nobody knows. So here is what I have experienced. So backing up a bit for clarity on this, if you sell XYZ for a loss (call it position 1) but then also within 30 days (before or after) and buy XYZ again (call it position 2) you cannot claim the loss on position 1 until you close position 2. This is called a wash sale and if you do all your trades within the same account all the brokerages track this for you and it will be shown and accounted for in your 1099s. They will change/adjust the cost basis for position 2 to account for the loss when you sell position 2. Now let's add the Loss Deferral Rules of IRS Publication 550 situation to this (which talks about a straddle). You own 100 shares of SPY and the opening price of SPY is $754.24 for 7/15/2026. You then (on 7/15/2026) sell a short 8/21/2026 SPY call with a $758 strike (more than 1 strike above the opening $754.24 price for that day) and if you then close that short call for a loss, you cannot claim that loss until you close that 100 SPY straddle position. Unlike wash sales they don't adjust the cost basis of the SPY shares but instead I believe once you close the straddle SPY position I think you file form 6781 to reclaim that loss on the SPY short call (have never done it, just once accidentally came upon it when dealing with 1256 contracts and noticed form 6781 seemed to refer to this situation). So all of this is somewhat spelled out in IRS Publication 550 Loss Deferral Rules (there is way more than this in it and also a ton more I don't fully understand). But here is what is really confusing/unknown/etc to me. Unlike wash sales brokerages do not track this even when all the trading is done in the same account. So it's apparently up the the investor or his tax guy to apply this in his taxes. Over the past few years I have seen this talked about and I have asked (on Reddit and other forums) if anyone has applied these rules and the only response I have got one guy responded that he does his short calls in his IRA so it doesn't apply. No one else responded (all went silent). I have asked if anyone knows of a situation where someone was audited and had to apply those Loss Deferral Rules to their taxes and nobody has ever replied that they know of any situation were the IRS has done that. I saw one tax related website that said that said that you would not be audited for compliance for the Loss Deferral Rules but if you were audited for something else then the IRS might apply those rules. But that is just what they said and they didn't say that they have seen the IRS apply those rules. I have many times sold a short call that was more than 1 strike ITM and later closed it for a loss and I have never applied those Loss Deferral Rules and have never encountered a problem with the IRS. I have probably done this over the past 13 years but have only been aware of it for the past 8 years or so. So I know in the past 8 years I have probably had a Loss Deferral Rule situation at least 40 times I am sure (the previous 5 years I wasn't aware of it, but I am pretty sure I probably had that situation during that time as well). So I know of no one on this planet that has applied those rules nor of anyone who has been audited for not applying those rules. Over the past few years near tax time I have asked this question on the forums but it's always the same. Few people even know about it and no one has ever applied those rules. I now just ignore it for the most part and cross my fingers. There are times I will roll a short call way up just to avoid hitting that situation, but many times I don't and so far it has worked out (but make sure my fingers are crossed). So that is what I know. Good luck. (Again, not a tax expert by any stretch of the imagination).

DankAndOriginal

You are investing with FOMO. By the time a stock is trending, it is already too late to buy it. Some people can stumble into success by chasing trends with good timing, but you either aren’t getting your info early enough or you aren’t sticking to positions long enough. Do you know something that the market doesn’t? If the answer is “No”, then all that is left in a stock pick is a degree of educated gambling. You are either saying “I see the risks, but I am feeling bolder than the market because of XYZ” or just gambling that you can ride a wave and surf it better than your peers when you make a stock pick. Based on the fact that you’ve got a lot of micro stock holdings with $500 in the account, I’m going to assume that you’re checking constantly and trying to time daily trades or something similar with robinhood. Don’t bother with all that if you are hoping to build a portfolio. The market’s ups downs are almost always best ignored in the long term by a steady investor. Pick a few etfs that you feel good about (you want low expense ratios, diverse holdings, and sectors that you have researched the prospects of). If your goal is to try and make the huge 700% returns that you see on here sometimes, you’re also just not making the plays for that with call options etc.. Those are probably about as reliable as taking your whole portfolio and putting it on 17 black at the casino - at least you have a 3% chance there.

061826heart

When you see lawyer ads that are targeted at you “if you company XYZ stock between January 1 202X and March 31, 202X, YOU may be entitled to relief!!! Call me, Alabama!!!”

Live_Throat_5252

1. The fuck? The funds that pump out the most alpha, in fact, tend to be the most rigorous and systematic. You still can’t explain how you pick your delta or why it’s even a good measure to look at given how unstable it is. Please stop with the hand waving, and start quantifying things. 2. No. It’s a TERRIBLE return. Please look up the current variance risk premium on wtv index you sell. And then think about how much more you should make by being intelligent about it. 3. Well to start, we look to decide whether options are cheap or expensive, and why. What’s the appropriate premia to sell XYZ vol, all things considered. Not just say up 1% sell further OTM options. 4. This isn’t a strategy, bro. You’re blindly collecting a risk premia when the market has already made a big move without a quantifiable - or even explainable - edge. Hell you haven’t even attempted to price the options you’re selling. Do what you want, the problem is your selling this bs to people who don’t know better, and it’s likely to cost them money.

Tasty-Trds-55555

This is basically "A Habit" problem. . . related to mind mechanics. . . Telling someone to stop is not going to work What works is recognizing that "It Is A Habit / Mind / Mental Problem" and taking necessary steps 1. Recognize the underlying problem 2. Staying away for > 30 Days 3. Practicing mindfulness - join meditation, learn tricks that works for that specific individual on how to switch to something / distract 4. Continuing meditation and identifying and creating approaches (reading charts, looking at different MAs, Bolinger bands, Volume and others that matter to his or her thinking style) to trading as opposed to relying on some inputs from XYZ Trading Guru ( I have seen GuruFocus signals, btw) 5. Once approaches are crafted, look at when there is a dip and buy calls that are long dated 6.

PapaCharlie9

I track them the same way my broker does on the 1099, which is the way the IRS does, assuming you pay US taxes. Staying in sync with all that means less work and confusion at tax time. Example: * Jan - BTO XYZ 100c for net cost of $10 * Feb - Roll out 100c to 120c for net cost of -$2 (STC 100c for $12, BTO 120c for $10) * Mar - Roll out 120c to 110c for net cost of $1 (STC 120c for $9, BTO 110c for $10) * Apr - Close 110c for $11.67 The way I would track that is as three separate and independent taxable events: 1. Feb - Net short term capital gain of $2. 1. Mar - Net short term capital loss of -$1. 1. Apr - Net short term capital gain of $1.67. Every time you close an option trade is a taxable event, with no connection to anything that comes before or after (unless it's a wash sale). A roll is just a close bundled with an open in a single order for convenience, so by definition, **every roll is a taxable event**. So just track the close of the previous position as a self-contained gain/loss. You're overcomplicating things by trying to see a "whole stock position story". That's pointless, in the first place, since what really matters at the end of the day (or week, or month, or year) is the net gain/loss of your entire portfolio. Secondly, the stock is less important than the volatility the stock represents. Do you care about NVDA more or less than SPCX? Those should be two random sequences of letters to you, because the stock matters less than the pricing of volatility of the contracts in question. Today it could be MSFT that offers the best vol, while tomorrow it could be HD. Unless you are doing some kind of fundamentals trading supplemented by options, the specifics of the underlying stock are rarely worth paying attention to. The only metric that matters is return on risk, as a long term average, after say every 100 closed trades. You can easily track how much is at risk by tracking opening prices (whether you track buying power at risk or only changes in cash balance is up to you).

MyNameIs-Anthony

Extraordinarily funny that Xi's tactic of saying "We're going to do XYZ wildly expensive thing" just to make American companies spend crazy money keeps working.

West_Flounder2840

“I’m smarter than the market. I can outperform during XYZ market conditions by timing, picking select sectors, and shorting” \- 95% of people who try and inevitably fail to outperform just buying VT and holding

cbusoh66

At one point in 2021, fintechs were all the rage. PYPL and SQ (now XYZ) reached $300, AFRM was $170, even shitcos like UPST was selling at $400. Media outlets were foaming at the mouth for the great future that awaits. Analysts were coming out with upgrades and new PTs every week. The future was all fintech, some even doubted banks and Visa & Mastercard would survive. Most of these companies have lost +90% of their value and have never recovered. This is what awaits some of these overhyped stocks and companies that pumped endlessly on pure hopium last year or two.

Ok-Yam-6616

Yes, you can sell XYZ and buy ZYX with the proceeds but buying XYZ again will result in good faith violation if you don't have enough settled funds. Same logic applies to options.  What is not clear to me is how that logic applies to spreads. 

papakong88

Assuming your broker has a minimum equity requirement of 5K. You want to buy a credit spread. The BP required is 100% of the cost. You must buy to open and sell to close the spread as a spread. You cannot leg in or trade one leg at a time because you do not have the approval to sell naked options. For example, if you want to buy a XYZ 100/95 put spread for 1.00. It will cost 100 and your BP will decrease by 100. From this point on, your BP will not decrease further due to this put spread but can be increased if the PS increases in value.  A problem can arise if XYZ is between 95 and 100 at expiration. Your 100 put will be exercised and your 95 put is worthless. The exercise will require you to sell 100 shares. If you do not have the shares, most brokers will liquidate your 100 put before expiration which may get you up to 5. Your BP will increase. You can also sell to close the put spread yourself. You should not have any problems with BP trading debit spreads

qwaai

Well half of OP's question was about managing the emotional aspect of it, and the answer to that is index funds help. Which is why everyone is saying that. As for the how to pick stocks part: if an 18 year old asks what's the best bank to get a loan for a new Mustang, the answer isn't XYZ Bank, it's to discourage the imminent disaster. Someone who's having trouble emotionally handling buying and selling simply shouldn't be buying individual stocks. It's a recipe for loss and poor decisions.

Tendie_Tube

I can't follow all these obscure private and off-balance-sheet companies closely enough to have an informed opinion. But what I do know is that it always plays out the same: Somebody gets into this position during every bubble. IMO, it's not about being exactly right about picking winners and losers, it's more about recognizing where we are in a macro sense and understanding that everything will go up or down based on the macro environment. If irresponsible AI company ABC goes broke, then even responsible AI company XYZ will lose most of its value.

Retired-Programmer

If you are not a Day Trader (IOW, you are not declaring TTS-Trader Tax Status) wash sale rule applies even if you aren't taking the maximum $3,000 that you can deduct against regular income. For example, you are not a TTS trader and you have a loss on Stock XYZ (Lot 1) of $10,000 but also within 30 days buy back stock XYZ (Lot 2) you cannot claim that $10,000 loss until you get rid of Lot 2 even when not wanting to take the $3,000 deduction against regular income/interest/etc. Makes no difference, that $10,000 wash sale loss is stuck with that Lot 2 until you get rid of Lot 2. *>  If you do not care about trying to deduct the loss, you can buy and sell the same stock/option all you want, right?* **If you have the IRS TTS status** (Trader Tax Status) **THEN** you can buy and sell all you want and no Wash Sale rule applies and I believe you apply any amount of losses against any income (earned income, interest etc) and there is no $3,000 maximum deduction against regular income/interest/etc/. From what I understand a TTS person's day trading gains/losses is treated as just regular income. But I am not familiar with this at all (never been involved with TTS), so not all that confident on this TTS status person stuff. And actually I am not anywhere close to a tax expert at all (not a CPA of any sort), I just know of what I have experienced with my taxes over the past 25 years or so of dealing with it. So don't take what I say as gospel, but just from a person who has dealt with this stuff over the years.

Retired-Programmer

That sounds correct. But just to make sure it is clear (which I think you are clear, but just want to make sure). With the security/stock you made 1000 similar transactions with, we are still assuming you made no more transactions with that security and you closed out that security. IOW, we are still saying you completely closed out that position/security. What they are trying to prevent is let's say you are losing $10,000 on stock ABC with 100 shares. They don't want you to be able to sell that 100 shares and get to take a $10,000 loss on your taxes and immediately (within 30 days) buy back the 100 shares back. You would be taking a loss, but really never had a loss yet because you still are in the same position and you are not really risking anything to take the loss (getting to take a loss when really there isn't one yet). Of course they can't prevent you from never being able to take the loss. So they want you to wait at least 31 days before allowing you to take the loss (thereby having to take some risk for 31 days). If you get completely out of the security/stock for 31 days you for sure can realize the loss (which can end up offsetting any other gains made). If you close out completely (no more positions in that stock) that 1000 transaction stock ABC (for a loss of $20,000) and you immediately buy a different stock XYX (on the same day you took the loss on ABC for instance) and you make a gain on stock XYZ of $20,000 you would still be able to claim that $20,000 loss (for a net $0 gain) because ABC and XYZ are different securities. I hope this make sense and doesn't make it more confusing. I am trying to add stuff that makes sense as to why the rules are the way they are.

ZPMQ38A

I personally think it’s mostly Peter Thiel, Stephen Miller, and Ben Netanyahu. They’ve latched onto the fact that Trump hates brown people and are leaning in. It’s also very possible that they know what’s in the files and are holding it over their heads. Don’t get me wrong. Donald Trump is an absolutely disgusting idiot and is at least partially responsible but he’s not coming up with this shit on his own. Greenland, Venezuela, the Caribbean, Iran…someone is planting these ideas. I’m not sure Donald Trump could point to Greenland on a fucking map. Someone told him we should invade it because reason…XYZ and he’s so incoherent and incapable that he just ran with it. I am usually careful to speak in absolutes but…I am very confident that if you have Trump a blank map of South America, there is a near zero percent chance he could accurately label where Venezuela is. Even the tariffs. I legit think Trump honestly is dumb enough to believe that foreign companies were going to pay them. In reality, someone smart knew that the costs would be passed on to consumers, they would be illegal, and the companies that technically were on the bill would be refunded. It’s actually a genius scheme for massive wealth re-distribution from consumer to corporations. Don’t think for a second that Raytheon and Boeing are absolutely toasting champagne in their offices as we blow through a decades worth of Tomahawk missiles and JDAMs in Iran.

Scibidami

like 99% of those "innocent questions about share XYZ, which is totally undervalued"-postings, probably.

PapaCharlie9

Okay, so first the good news. You have a [trade plan](https://www.reddit.com/r/options/wiki/faq/pages/mondayschool/yourplan) and an exit strategy. By doing so, you are ahead of about 99% of new traders at the same point in their careers. Now for the bad news. I don't understand what your scanner is supposed to do. It looks partly like what a **stock** trader would want and partly what an **option** trader would want. Metrics like Last Price (of the shares, I presume), Volume (again shares), and market cap might make sense for stock trading, but are close to useless for option trading. Typical option-trading scans focus on volatility, volatility, and volatility. Maybe some contract price history for momentum analysis, maybe contract volume and/or contract bid/ask spread for liquidity ranking. Drawing lines on a price chart is Technical Analysis. Just keep in mind that your analysis is on the *stock price history*, not the contract price history. It's already questionable to use TA to predict the future of a stock price, but to use TA on a stock price to predict the future of a contract price is pretty much sheer fantasy. Consequently, your take-profit and stop-loss settings for the option trade could end up doing the opposite of what you intend. It's a common occurrence when trading calls for the call's price to go down even when the stock price goes up. So you could hit your take-profit stock price and end up losing money on the contract trade. It's better to base all automation and conditions on contract prices. Gross level triggers, like I don't even want to enter the contract trade until XYZ stock price is above some dollar value, are fine, but once the contract itself is in play, all conditions should be based on the contract price, not the stock price.

DavidNexus7

Square… sorry I mean Block XYZ….

RobfromHB

It certainly isn’t an edge when all the information it parses is public and widely available. It’s a good thought buddy for something like “What’s the forward P/E on this thing now compared to the industry average and how did that compare to the years leading up to XYZ?”. One could Google that info, but AI will compile or summarize it more quickly. The most helpful case for an average dude would be something like “I’ve never coded a Monte Carlo simulation. Can you tell me how that works and provide some sample code I can modify for my own purposes”. TLDR: It saves time for things we all could have figured out already. That allows for a little more output and the ability to make decisions a bit faster.

cbusoh66

At some point in 2021, fintechs were all the rage. PYPL and SQ (now XYZ) reached $300, AFRM was $170, even shitcos like UPST reached $400. Fin media was foaming at the mouth for the great future that awaits. Analysts were coming out with upgrades and new PTs every week. The future was fintech, some even doubted banks and Visa/Mastercard would survive. This is what awaits these sham and endlessly pumped quantum and space companies.

REEMFMetalHead

When I point out that XYZ is a "threshold stock", it actually means something.  I feel pretty good saying that everyone saw my multiple multiple warnings.

NuclearVII

> The land grab isn't just for the governance layer anymore. It's for the technology that makes the seat-based model obsolete in the first place. > > Yeah, pretty much. Reeks of dipshit "Hey ChatGPT, write me a reddit post about XYZ"

Poptart_Salad

So much fence sitting. Every time anything happened they had to wait six months before acting because "we don't know how it will affect XYZ". Oh and committed to 2% but it's been 5 years since 2% so not really. Dude didn't even pump the market, his meetings sucked.

rpv123

I think it partly comes from people being very used to sitting in a large group of people and being the only one who can see the right solution, right away, but others refuse to see it your way until much later on in a discussion or process. If you experience that enough since childhood, you start to believe that you are truly the only one who “understands” most things more quickly and develop a certain level of arrogance, so when everyone around you is like “no, you’re nuts for thinking XYZ” you’re more likely to just ignore that as people just not catching up as quickly as you. It warps you a bit.

BadaBingSil

top 3 upward momentum stocks today: GOOG, XYZ, AAPL top 3 downward trend stocks today: INTC, NFLX, AVGO

NoAlternative4213

All due respect to Elon he’s accomplished some cool shit and made some awesome stuff… but I agree he’s always said we’re gonna do XYZ by year 202X, and it never really happens… pretty sure space x said they’re going to start colonizing mars in 30 years with 1mm + people… I don’t see it… and even If we made it… who says there’s any chance that’s a profitable business model… I’d see it as more of a publicly traded VC firm to fund rocket building… maybe to acquires Twitter and other businesses along the way.

insbordnat

There's no doubt Musk is an incredible pitch man, and I don't mean that in a snake oil way - he says "fuck it, free your mind, ignore your predisposed thoughts on XYZ" and great at selling the dream. That's a great quality. The question is whether he has enough in the pipeline of dreams and deliverables to keep his shareholders believing. There's a lot that's been "soon" and he knows investor psychology well enough to keep people in a state of anticipation and FOMO. The question is how much patience people will have, and whether there will be so much bag holding/sunk cost that devotees will hang on until it's painfully obvious it's going nowhere (if that's the case). Bitcoin is actually pretty close to this in mentality (not the viability/instrument/etc.). "If it happens, I was there from the beginning or when it was worth X, I don't want to miss out on the runup, I don't want to be left behind". Bitcoin may be worth a shit ton. Or it may be worth zero at some point. The path is plausible enough to keep people engaged and buying. As they said, this is a bet on Musk, nothing more. If Musk is gone it'll still be viable but the premium won't be justified. My current rough thesis is he talks up a big game, but the actual deliverables haven't lived up to the hype. The Loop thing in Vegas? Dogshit. Autonomous vehicles? Nope. Robotaxi? "Soon". Cybertruck? Bust. Reusable rockets? Win. Tesla/EVs/Charging network? Win, but fading. Twitter/X? Dogshit. DOGE? Dogeshit. The valuation is based on him knocking things out of the park but his batting average is .700 one year and .125 the next.