Stats

A study compared two approaches to handling dividends in automated trading. The question was whether a known cash distribution changes exits without equivalent business loss. The study used 20,000 paired scenarios, sampling data from 2021-24 in 5-day blocks, and normalized each price by the prior close. It started with a price of 49.21 on September 14, a stop loss of 46.51, and a target of 57.31. A dividend of 3.41 was deducted from subsequent prices on September 18, but only for those who held the stock the prior day. The dividend was included in the total payoff, but not reinvested before payday. The study compared two approaches: one with unchanged raw stop levels, and one with stop levels reduced by 3.41 on the ex-dividend day. The results showed that the unchanged approach had a stop loss rate of 87.78%, a target hit rate of 11.48%, and a timeout rate of 0.74%. The adjusted approach had a stop loss rate of 65.57%, a target hit rate of 31.89%, and a timeout rate of 2.55%. The mean wealth return was 0.96639% for the unchanged approach and 1.69409% for the adjusted approach, but the median return was -0.30194% and -5.59408% respectively. The study noted that this was a paired mechanics simulation, not a measured probability of profits, and ignored current market conditions, taxes, and other factors. The source prices used in the study can be found at https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/stock-bars, and the issuer terms for the dividend can be found at https://www.frontlineplc.cy/fro-declares-special-one-time-dividend-after-sale-of-two-vllcs/.

A fund manager started with $850.99 in an account and $153.18 in cryptocash, with a position venue cap of $212.75 and a fund cap of $153.18. The manager considered a hypothetical portfolio with $51.06 in major USD currencies and $38.29 in Ethereum, but did not place any orders. The manager used two premises to study risk: the first premise looked at a 48-hour book mean of -1.011511, a worst-case scenario of -15.532567 USD, and a P1 value of -13.055955. The second premise examined 20-day periods with 15-minute intervals, with a P1 value of -14.906163 and a worst-case scenario of -16.577630 USD, and 60-minute intervals, with a P1 value of -15.606363 and a worst-case scenario of -17.917748 USD. The manager found that a 3% equity breach occurred in 25.5297 out of 0 sample paths, but noted that zero sample breaches do not guarantee safety. The manager also probed a 20-day Ethereum scenario with a P1 value of -3.799714 and a worst-case scenario of -4.333579 USD, and found that a 30% gap in Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana prices could result in a loss of $45.95 USD, or 5.4% of the account on a full fund, and $11.49 USD, or 1.35% of the account on a quarter fund. This scenario exceeded historical bootstrap support. The manager concluded that correlated exposure should be capped and that half of the Kelly criterion should be derived from independently observed strategy returns. The manager also noted that an unconditional negative bootstrap mean alone supports a zero Kelly criterion, but cannot prove a conditional rule of zero. The current entry was absent, which set the actual size to 0, and a shortfall of $349.01 did not enter the formula. The data source was https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/crypto-bars.

A simulation called C91206 uses a set of historical data, specifically 15-minute log returns from March 1 to September 12, to test trading strategies for Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana. This simulation uses 18,744 calendar rows of data, but is missing some data for Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana. The simulation creates 10,000 two-day paths and 2,000 twenty-day paths to test how these cryptocurrencies perform together, taking into account how their prices are related within and between days. The simulation also tests a stop-loss strategy, where a trade is stopped if a certain loss is reached, and a target price is set to meet a net return of 3R. The target price is calculated using a formula that takes into account the volatility of the asset and the desired return. The simulation uses point prices at 15-minute, 30-minute, and 60-minute intervals, rather than the highest or lowest price within a given time period. The results of the simulation show that for Ethereum, the mean return over a two-day period is -0.67%, and the target price is 0%. Over a twenty-day period, the mean return is -0.39%, and the target price is 3.35%. The simulation also found that the return for Ethereum over a twenty-day period is -9.92% when using a 1-minute interval, compared to -10.47% when using a 60-minute interval. The simulation is useful for testing the size of potential losses, but it does not provide a reason to override the timing of trades. The data used for the simulation is available at https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/crypto-bars.

The primary lookback period, L20, remains fixed. The L10 and L40 lookback periods are used for sensitivity analysis only, with no selection of the best lookback period after reviewing the holdout data. The split-only analysis excludes dividends, so it only considers price performance, not total shareholder return. Changing the adjustment also changes the signal dates and exits. The analysis uses the same parameters: 2 ADR stop, 3R target, 40 sessions, 1 basis point fees, and 5/15 basis points lip. The vectorbt open, execution, and close marks are used, with training data from 2021 to 2024 and testing data from 2025 to September 11. The results, which exclude open marks from the win percentage, are as follows: a list of results with different lookback periods, adjustments, start dates, and slip values, including return, drawdown, win percentage, and number of trades. The source of the data is https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/stock-bars. All exact means, confidence intervals, and exit counts were recorded from 26226 to 26265. The test period is shared across variations, so the variations are not independent evidence.

The primary lookback period, L20, remains fixed. The L10 and L40 lookback periods are used for sensitivity testing only, with no selection of the best lookback period after reviewing the holdout data. The split-only method excludes dividends, so it only measures price performance, not the total return to shareholders. Changing the adjustment also changes the signal dates and exits. The same parameters were used for all tests, including a 2ADR stop, 3R target, and 40 sessions, with fees of 1 basis point and slippage of 5 or 15 basis points. The vectorbt open, execution, and close marks were used. The data was trained from 2021 to 2024 and tested from 2025 to September 11. The results, which exclude open marks from the win percentage, are as follows: a list of tests with different lookback periods, adjustments, start dates, slippage, returns, drawdowns, win percentages, and number of trades. The source of the data is https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/stock-bars. All exact means, confidence intervals, and exit counts were recorded from 26226 to 26265. The test period is shared across all variations, so the variations are not independent evidence.

A trading fund manager analyzed the stock STNG. Before running the analysis, the manager set rules: if the stock's price broke out from its prior 20-day close and 50-day Simple Moving Average, which is a calculation of the stock's average price over 50 days, the manager would buy the stock at the next session's open. The manager would set a stop loss, which is an order to sell the stock when it falls to a certain price, at two times the stock's prior 20-day Average Daily Range, which is a measure of the stock's volatility. The target price, which is the price at which the manager wants to sell the stock, was set at three times the initial risk. The manager would hold the stock for a maximum of 40 sessions, including the entry session. The manager also set a rule to sell a quarter of the stock if it reached a 2R return, which means the stock's price increased by twice the initial risk, and make the stop loss break even the next day. The manager tested this strategy using historical data from September 11, 2025, and found that the return was 36.36363636363637% for winning trades, excluding open outcomes. The manager also found that the strategy had 1 target, 7 stops, and 3 timeouts, and that buying and holding the stock would have resulted in a 74.95342579176152% return. The manager used a dataset from https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/stock-bars, which provides synthetic dividend-adjusted asset prices, not cash dividend payment timing or executable raw-price fills. The manager separated the data into training and test periods and found that the strategy had an uncertainty of -4.524399609507263% to 5.843595649618188% based on 10,000 bootstrap resamples. The manager notes that this analysis is not proof of a zero edge, which means that the strategy may still be profitable, and that the results should not be treated as an established stock edge due to holdout and stress weaknesses.

A trading fund manager's notes were analyzed. The manager used a system that froze certain settings before running the results. These settings included a breakout and a 50-day Simple Moving Average, which is a way to calculate the average price of a stock over a certain period. The system also used a stop-loss, which is a price level at which to sell a stock to limit losses, set at twice the average daily range of the past 20 days. The target price was set at three times the risk, and the maximum number of sessions was 40, including the entry session. The system was tested on the stock STNG. If the stock reached a certain level of profit, called 2R, the system would sell a quarter of the stock and make the stop-loss price equal to the purchase price the next day. The system used a 1 basis point fee and 5 basis points of slippage per side, which is a way to measure the cost of buying or selling a stock. The results showed a return of 44.44444444444444% and a mean bootstrap return of between -1.5149595070621042% and 8.708828524196868%. The system had 6 targets, 14 stops, and 7 timeouts. The data was retrieved from a website on September 12. The system's results are based on a model that adjusts for dividends, but does not reflect the actual timing of dividend payments or the prices at which trades can be executed. The test period was separate from the training period, but the test period had been previously inspected for other rules, so it was not completely unseen. The results show the payoff shape, but do not reflect the whole-share or 15-minute implementation. The holdout and stress weakness prevent the screen from being treated as an established stock edge.

A news scan found the results of a trading simulation for the stock STNG. The simulation was frozen before the results were generated, using a prior 20-day close breakout and a 50-day Simple Moving Average, which is a calculation of the average price of a stock over a certain period of time. The next session's open price was used, and the stop loss was set at 2 times the prior 20-day Average Daily Range, which is a measure of the average daily price movement. The target was set at 3 times the risk, and the maximum number of sessions was 40, including the entry session. The simulation used a prior 2020 warm-up period. The exits were fixed, with no discretionary trailing, which means that the exit points were predetermined and not subject to change. Gap exits used the open price, and ambiguous daily bars stopped at the first price, with entry day exits allowed, although none were observed. The costs included a 1 basis point fee and 5 basis points of slippage per side, with a stress test of 15 basis points of slippage. The vectorbt long-only fractional full-equity portfolio was reconciled to manual cash, including the entry fee, and the marks were ordered by open, execution, and close. The return included 1 open mark, with 11 losses and a win rate of 27.27%. The mean bootstrap of 10,000 independent and identically distributed resamples, with a seed of 91206, showed a 95% confidence interval of -5.20% to 5.85%, which indicates uncertainty and not proof of zero edge. The results showed 1 target, 7 stops, and 3 timeouts, with a buy and hold return of 74.95%. The data was sourced from https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/stock-bars, retrieved on September 12, with a timeframe of 1 day and an adjustment for all dividends. The adjustment all returns model used synthetic dividend-adjusted assets, not cash dividend payment timing or executable raw price fills. The training and test periods were separated, and the test period had previously been inspected for other rules, making this a chronological holdout for this frozen specification, but not globally unseen evidence. The results quantify the payoff shape, but not the whole share or 15-minute implementation. The holdout and stress weakness prevent treating the screen as an established stock edge.

A trading fund manager analyzed the stock STNG from 2021 to 2024. The manager used a fixed exit strategy, which means they decided when to sell the stock before the results were known. The strategy was based on the stock's prior 20-day closing price and its 50-day moving average, which is a way to smooth out price changes. The manager also set a stop-loss, which is a price at which to sell the stock if it falls, at 2 times the stock's average daily range over the past 20 days. The target price was 3 times the risk, and the manager limited the trade to 40 sessions, including the day the stock was bought. The manager used a long-only strategy, which means they only bought the stock, and they reconciled the portfolio to manual cash, including the entry fee. The return on investment was calculated, excluding open outcomes, and the win rate was 46.15384615384615%. The manager also ran a simulation 10,000 times to estimate the uncertainty of the results, which showed a 95% confidence interval of -0.6130553619346064% to 10.616290391886833%. The results showed 6 targets, 12 stops, and 8 timeouts, and the buy-and-hold return was 377.8375088751394%. The data used was from the website https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/stock-bars, retrieved on September 12, and the adjustment used was all, which means the returns were adjusted for dividends and other factors. The training and test periods were separated, and the test period was previously inspected for other rules, so the results are not necessarily representative of the whole market. The manager notes that the results do not prove a zero edge, but rather quantify the payoff shape, and that the holdout and stress weakness prevent treating the screen as an established stock edge.

A trading fund manager's notes were frozen before the results of this run. The notes show that the fund used a prior 20-day close breakout and a 50-day Simple Moving Average, which is a calculation of the average price of a stock over 50 days. The next session's open price was used, and the stop loss was set at 2 times the prior 20-day Average Daily Range, which is a measure of the average daily price range of a stock over 20 days. The target was set at 3 times the risk, and the maximum number of sessions was 40, including the entry session. The fund also used a prior 2020 warm-up period. On a surviving day when the fund reached 2 times the risk, it sold a quarter of the position and made the stop loss breakeven the next day. The fund tested the full stop loss and target first, so intraday ordering and 15-minute management were not reconstructed. Gap exits used the open price, and ambiguous daily bars stopped first. Entry day exits were allowed, but none were observed. The fund had costs of 1 basis point fee and 5 basis points slippage per side, and a stress test of 15 basis points slippage. The vectorbt long-only fractional full-equity portfolio was reconciled to manual cash, including the entry fee, and marks were ordered open, execution, and close. The return included 1 open mark, and the fund had 18 losses and a win rate of 44.44444444444444%, excluding open outcomes. The mean bootstrap of 10,000 independent and identically distributed resamples with a seed of 91206 showed a 95% confidence interval of -2.240298785942834% to 8.466477223104828%, which is a measure of uncertainty, not proof of zero edge. The fund had 6 targets, 11 stops, and 1 timeout, and the buy and hold return was 280.5877803557618%. The data source was https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/stock-bars, retrieved on September 12, and the adjustment all returns model used synthetic dividend-adjusted assets, not cash dividend payment timing or executable raw-price fills. The training and test periods were separated, and the test period was previously inspected for other rules, so this was a chronological holdout for this frozen specification, but not globally unseen evidence. The result quantifies the payoff shape, not the whole-share or 15-minute implementation. The positive result retains the watch, but the upcoming raw stop distribution mechanics must be resolved.

A news scan found the report of an automated trading fund manager for the stock FRO. The manager's rules were: if the stock's price breaks out above its prior 20-day close and 50-day Simple Moving Average, which is a calculation of the stock's average price over 50 days, then buy the stock at the next session's open. The stop loss, which is the price at which to sell the stock to limit losses, was set at 2 times the stock's prior 20-day Average Daily Range, which is a measure of how much the stock's price typically moves each day. The target price, which is the price at which to sell the stock for a profit, was set at 3 times the amount risked. The manager also decided to sell one quarter of the stock if it reached a 2R profit, which means twice the amount risked, and to make the stop loss break even the next day. The manager tested these rules using historical data from September 11 to September 12, and found that the strategy had a return of 42.42424242424242% excluding open outcomes, with 33 losses and 7 targets reached out of 24 stops and 2 timeouts. The manager also found that buying and holding the stock would have resulted in a return of 191.44447020635292%. The manager used a mean bootstrap of 10000 resamples to estimate the uncertainty of the results, and found that the 95% confidence interval was between -1.7832491318441552% and 5.371609867705768%. The manager retrieved the historical data from https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/stock-bars on September 12 at 23:40Z.

A trading fund manager made notes about a trading strategy. The strategy was frozen before the latest results came in, based on a prior 20-day close breakout and a 50-day simple moving average, or SMA, which is a way to smooth out price changes. The next session's open price was used, and the stop loss was set at 2 times the prior 20-day average daily range, or ADR, which is a measure of how much prices move. The target was set at 3 times the risk, and the maximum number of sessions was 40, including the entry session. The strategy was backtested using data from 2020 as a warm-up period. The strategy used full fixed exits, with no discretionary trailing stops, which means the stop loss was not adjusted manually. Gap exits used the open price, and ambiguous daily bars stopped at the first sign of trouble. Entry day exits were allowed, but none were observed. The strategy included costs of 1 basis point fee plus 5 basis points of slippage per side, which is a measure of how much prices move when a trade is made, and stress tested with a 15 basis point slippage. The portfolio was reconciled to manual cash, including the entry fee, and marks were ordered by open, execution, and close. The return included 1 open mark, and the win rate was 47.05882352941176%. The mean bootstrap return, which is a way to estimate uncertainty, was calculated using 10,000 independent and identically distributed resamples with a seed of 91206, and the 95% confidence interval was -1.3523231382960088% to 10.722254655961946%, which is a measure of uncertainty, not proof of zero edge. The strategy had 7 targets, 9 stops, and 1 timeout, and the buy and hold return was 280.5877803557618%. The data source was https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/stock-bars?symbols=FRO&timeframe=1Day&feed=sip&adjustment=all, retrieved on September 12 at 23:40Z. The adjustment all returns model used synthetic dividend-adjusted asset prices, not cash dividend payment timing or executable raw price fills. The training and test periods were separated, and the test period had previously been inspected for other rules, so this was a chronological holdout for this frozen specification, but not globally unseen evidence. The strategy quantifies payoff shape, not whole share or 15-minute implementation. A positive result retains watch, and the upcoming raw stop distribution mechanics must be resolved.

A trading fund manager has written notes about a training program for the stock FRO. The program uses a fixed exit strategy, which means it sells stocks at a set price. The strategy is based on two things: the stock's price compared to its average price over 50 days, and its previous day's closing price. If the stock's price is higher than these two things, the program buys it. The program also sets a stop loss, which is a price at which it automatically sells the stock if it starts to lose value. The stop loss is set at twice the stock's average daily range over 20 days. The program aims to make three times the amount it risks, and it limits the time it holds a stock to 40 sessions. The program was tested using data from 2020 and 2021. The test included costs such as a 1 basis point fee and 5 basis points of slippage per trade. The results showed a return of 33.33333333333333% of winning trades, excluding trades that are still open. The program used a statistical method called bootstrapping to estimate its uncertainty, which showed a 95% confidence interval of -1.9720576853637237% to 6.135799986935027%. The program had 9 successful trades, 21 stopped trades, and 3 trades that timed out. The stock FRO had a return of 191.44447020635292% if it was bought and held. The data used for the test was retrieved from a website on September 12. The program adjusts the stock's price to account for dividends, but it does not account for the timing of dividend payments or the actual price at which trades are executed. The test was done in two parts: a training period and a test period. The test period was not used to develop the program, but it was used to test other rules. The program's results are positive, but it needs to be improved to handle stop losses in a more realistic way.

A test of ten issuer-dated scheduled AMC earnings from March 2024 to June 2026 showed a median absolute change of 4.700378% and a signed mean change of -3.027709% in daily pre-release close to next-session close prices. As of September 11, with an S2.53 stock price, buying a call option for $0.21 or a put option for $0.16, plus $0.05 per share in roundtrip costs, would require a 9.090909% increase or a 9.486166% decrease in the stock price. Both of these requirements are below 40% and are based on a 1/10 probability, which is 10%. The old frozen N9 remains at 1/9, with a median of 5.494505%, and will be preserved separately. There is no documented expected option payoff of three times the investment. The source of this information is the option contracts and the website https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/stock-bars and https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/option-bars. The issuer announced on August 25 that it will release its third fiscal quarter 2026 financial results after financial markets close on Monday, September 14, 2026. The October 16 option expiry is 32 days after this announcement, and the default September 11 exit has already passed. The hurdles to overcome are higher than the new median of 4.390531% and 4.785788%, and there is no exception to hold the position. The conclusion is to retain the current $102.12 in cash, as the premises of the current account and fund, with no own trades or holdings, and the mandatory signed gate of 10%, with no three times exception, support this decision. The logic is valid given the mandate, but its soundness is limited by the data, costs, and non-stationarity of the market. There is no account shortfall with a probability input of 349.01. The near-at-the-money October 16 K2.5 call and put options fit a normal premium cap of 25.5297, but affordability is not eligibility. The existing collector receipts for NOK, CAG, LW, GIS, and BB were reviewed, and no new validated candidate was found elsewhere. The cash is bounded to the examined candidates, not by an assertion that there is no edge worldwide. There are no crypto or stocks outside the long option mandate. The due 314 was resolved, and all five jobs are healthy and retained. A new 32208 UTC handoff was accepted, and the 221 September 15 outcomes will be preserved, comparing old N9 and new N10, and regular-session-only execution. The TLX primary status is unknown, and there is no recovered decision or new contract study, and no delay claim. Eight kinds of quantitative and fundamental work were recorded, and there is no FUND proposal.

A test was done on ten scheduled AMC earnings from March 2024 to June 2026. The test found that the median absolute change in the stock price was 4.700378% and the signed mean change was -3.027709%. On September 11, the stock price was $2.53. To make a profit from buying a call option or selling a put option, the stock price would need to increase by 9.090909% or decrease by 9.486166% by October 16. This is because the cost of the call option was $0.21 and the cost of the put option was $0.16, plus an assumed $0.05 per share in roundtrip costs. The old frozen N9 remains at 1/9, with a median of 5.494505%, and will be preserved separately. There is no documented expected option payoff that is three times the cost. The source of this information is the option contracts and the website https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/stock-bars and https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/option-bars. The company High Tide Inc announced that it will release its third fiscal quarter 2026 financial results after the financial markets close on Monday, September 14, 2026. The October 16 expiry is 32 days after this announcement. The hurdles to make a profit from the options exceed the new median of 4.390531% and 4.785788%, and there is no exception to hold the options. The stock closes are not executable asks, and the intrinsic value is not the actual option profit or loss. There are four points to consider: pre-announced German volume is up 33% from the previous quarter, the goal is to capture financially the earnings surprise at a qualifying option cost, the binding constraint is a 10% coverage and no three times expected option payoff, and the source of this information is the company's website. The first order hypothesis is that direct procurement could raise Remexiang gross profit, the second order effect is that inventory and receivables may grow with tonnage, and the third order effect is that financing pressure could reduce equity upside. A strong counterargument is that one cash catch-up quarter could produce a large positive jump despite a weak median. However, there is no evidence to assign a required probability to this possibility, and actual collections and incremental guide are required.

A test of earnings announcements from ten issuers, including High Tide Inc, found that the median absolute change in stock price on the day of the announcement was 4.700378%. High Tide Inc is scheduled to announce its third quarter 2026 financial results after markets close on September 14, 2026. To profit from this announcement, the stock price would need to increase by 9.090909% or decrease by 9.486166% from the September 11 closing price of $2.53. The company's previous quarterly report showed record revenue of $179.3 million and adjusted EBITDA of $13.9 million. The company also announced preliminary guidance for the third quarter, including a minimum 30% increase in revenue and 27% increase in gross profit. However, this guidance is already known and not expected to be a surprise on September 14. The company's cash flow and working capital will be important factors to watch, as evidence of strong cash flow and a positive surprise could change the view on the stock. A news scan found the headline 'High Tide to Announce Third Fiscal Quarter 2026 Financial Results' on the company's website.

The automated trading fund manager performed an edge test on ten issuer-dated scheduled AMC earnings from March 2024 to June 2026. The test found that the median absolute change in stock price was 4.700378% and the signed mean change was -3.027709%. As of September 11, the stock price was $2.53, and the October 16 call option was priced at $0.21, while the put option was priced at $0.16. To break even, the stock price would need to increase by 9.090909% or decrease by 9.486166%. The manager also considered an old frozen position, which had a median return of 5.494505%. The manager did not find any documented expected option payoff. The source of the data was option_contracts and https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/stock-bars. The issuer announced that it would release its third fiscal quarter 2026 financial results after markets close on September 14, 2026. The manager simulated various scenarios, including a NumPy seed of 91206 and 100,000 paths each side, and found that the hurdles exceeded the new median. The manager also found that the closes were not executable asks and the intrinsic value was not the actual option profit and loss. The manager ran three scenarios: a call option with a mean intrinsic value of $0.213531, a put option with a mean intrinsic value of $0.571515, and a scenario with full residual 32-day option value and IV spreads absent. The manager found that the call option had a maximum return of 1.588571 times the premium and the put option had a maximum return of 2.155093 times the premium. The manager also found that the worst-case scenario for the call option was a loss of 72.988% of the book and the worst-case scenario for the put option was a loss of 22.568% of the book. The manager approved a size of 0 for the trade and had a monthly shortfall of $349.01. The fund had $102.12 and the account had $850.99. The normal size for the trade was 3% of the fund, which was $25.5297, and the conviction size was 5% of the fund, which was $42.5495.

A test was done to see if there was an edge in trading based on earnings announcements from ten issuers with scheduled announcements from March 2024 to June 2026. The test looked at the daily close before the announcement and the close of the next session, and found a median absolute change of 4.700378% and a signed mean change of -3.027709%. On September 11, the price of S was 2.53, and on October 16, the call option price was 0.21 and the put option price was 0.16, with an assumed roundtrip cost of 0.05 per share, which would require a change of +9.090909% or -9.486166% to be profitable, but both of these are below 40%. The old frozen N9 remains at 1/9, with a median of 5.494505%, and will be preserved separately. There is no documented expected option payoff of three times the investment. The source of the data is option_contracts and https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/stock-bars and https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/option-bars. The issuer announced on August 25 that it will announce its third fiscal quarter 2026 financial results after the financial markets close on Monday, September 14, 2026, which is 32 days before the October 16 expiry. The hurdles to be exceeded are 4.390531 and 4.785788, which is higher than the new median, so there is no exception to hold. The closes are not executable asks, and the intrinsic value is not the actual option profit and loss. The test also looked at the following: 1. The daily SIP baseline on September 11, which had a 20-session return of 9.051724%, an RSI of 56.263135, and an annualized return of 36.111156%. The indicator history begins in January 2023, and was computed prior to each AMC event without any event response input. 2. The Spearman correlation over ten event responses, which found a correlation between RSI and momentum, but no significant correlation. The comparisons were exploratory and did not claim significance. The test also found that the current positive 20-day trend cannot be converted into an earnings call win probability, and that the new German mix may change the future jump distribution, but there are only three post-2025 year-end events and one pre-announced 2025 comparison, which is insufficient to measure it. The regime division is descriptive, not causal regression or a new entry rule.

The automated trading fund manager performed an edge test on ten issuer-dated scheduled AMC earnings from March 2024 to June 2026. The test compared the daily pre-release close to the next-session close, with a median absolute change of 4.700378% and a signed mean of -3.027709%. As of September 11, the S2.53 and October 16 K2.5 call at $0.21 and put at $0.16, plus assumed roundtrip costs of $0.05 per share, require a return of +9.090909% and -9.486166% respectively. Both of these returns are below 40%. The old frozen N9 remains at 1/9, with a median of 5.494505%, and will be preserved separately. The source of the data is from option contracts and websites including https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/stock-bars and https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/option-bars. High Tide Inc announced that it will release its third fiscal quarter 2026 financial results after financial markets close on Monday, September 14, 2026. The October 16 expiry is 32 days after this announcement, and the default September 11 RTH exit has already elapsed. The hurdles exceed the new median of 4.390531 and 4.785788, with no hold exception. The closes are not executable asks, and the intrinsic value is not the actual option profit and loss. The manager performed a successful single 15-minute probe before a 10-session batch with 2 workers, recovering 260 out of 260 expected RTH 15-minute bars. The manager mapped current costed percent hurdles onto each historical pre-close and inspected 15-minute opens. The underlying diagnostic is not an option quote. The call hurdle hits at any sample 1/10, and the put hurdle hits at 2/10. None of the sample hits establish an option 3R target or fillable quotes. The actual venue 15-minute check phase is unverified. The daily versus intraday aggregation differences are retained, and the frozen mandate uses daily bars. The current S2.53 is above the SMA20 of 2.501 and SMA50 of 2.3244, with an ATR20 of 0.08099. The pre-event positive level does not justify failed signed option coverage, and no exits were moved because the results were flat.

An edge test was conducted on ten issuer-dated scheduled AMC earnings from March 2024 to June 2026. The test found that the daily pre-release close to next-session close had a median absolute change of 4.700378% and a signed mean change of -3.027709%. As of September 11, the S2.53 and October 16 K2.5 call and put prices were.21 and.16, respectively, with assumed roundtrip costs of.05 per share, requiring a 9.090909% and -9.486166% change, respectively. Both of these changes are below 40%. The old frozen N9 remains at 1/9, with a median of 5.494505%, and will be preserved separately. There is no documented expected option payoff. The source of the data is option_contracts and https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/stock-bars and /data/option-bars. The issuer announced on August 25 that financial results will be released after financial markets close on Monday, September 14, 2026. The October 16 expiry is 32 days after this date. The hurdles exceed the new median, and there is no hold exception. The closes are not executable asks, and the intrinsic value is not the actual option profit or loss. The test used a vectorbt926SIPallbarsJan2023–Sep11 2026, buying at the T-2/3/5 US session open and exiting at the T-1 close before the AMC date, with an initial investment of 1000, fees of 10 basis points, and slippage of 10 basis points each side, and stress of 30 basis points lippage. The results of the test are as follows: the T5 train had a return of 3.867305%, a drawdown of 11.915644%, and a win rate of 42.857143%, while the holdout had a return of -2.631698%, a drawdown of 5.363985%, and a win rate of 66.666667%. The stress holdout had a return of -3.793140% and a win rate of 33.333333%. The corrected train T3 now has the highest return of 4.438587%, but the holdout has a return of -4.762379% and the stress holdout has a return of -5.898406%. The model selection is unstable. The T2 train had a return of 3.842905%, the holdout had a return of 2.134481%, and the stress holdout had a return of 0.916186%. The required CLI momentum 20/days 1000 diagnostic had 685 bars, with a return of 26.210635%, a drawdown of 44.737554%, and a win rate of 29.629630%. The buy and hold return was 55.246914%. There is no historical option return, drawdown, or win rate available, and there is no options order from stock proxy. The costs are assumed rather than measured, and the daily close execution proxy does not validate 15-minute option stops.

An automated trading fund manager performed an edge test on ten issuer-dated scheduled AMC earnings from March 2024 to June 2026. The test found that the daily pre-release close to next-session close had a median absolute percentage change of 4.700378% and a signed mean of -3.027709%. On September 11, the price of S2.53 and the cost of an October 16 call option of $0.21 and a put option of $0.16, plus assumed roundtrip costs of $0.05 per share, required a percentage change of +9.090909% or -9.486166% to be profitable. However, both of these percentages were below 40%. The manager also reviewed old frozen data from N9, which had a median percentage change of 5.494505%, and decided to preserve it separately. The manager found that the issuer, High Tide Inc, announced that it would release its third fiscal quarter 2026 financial results after financial markets close on Monday, September 14, 2026. The manager also reviewed prior observations from N9, which skipped September 2025 without a recovered exclusion rationale. The manager added a new observation, N10, and retained the frozen N9 forecast. The manager also reviewed training data from 2024-25 and holdout data from 2026, and found that the results did not meet the mandatory gate, resulting in a rejection. The manager noted that the sample size was small and non-stationary, and that the data was limited to US listing data and stale put marks. The manager also noted that there was no population-wide calendar claim, and that the premise of the test was that residual time value could make options profitable, but there was no priced or executable evidence to quantify this exception.

The premises are as follows: 1) dated issuer booked rates support tight near-term vessel utilization; 2) contracts have different terms and ballast costs; and 3) capital returns and replenishment change assets and liquidity. This valid conditional chain is sound only within dated disclosures and does not prove that a war will last. The first order is that longer voyages can raise vessel demand and Time Charter Equivalent (TCE), which is a measure of revenue, benefiting owners while cargo buyers absorb freight. The second order is that owners lock term charters, spend on fuel, crews, and newbuilds, and distribute cash; supplier and shipyard counterparties can capture part of the rent. The third order is that new deliveries or route normalization can compress future rates; a sale-funded dividend leaves fewer earning assets unless replacements offset. The strongest counterexample is cargo destruction: fewer shipped barrels can outweigh longer routes, making congestion harmful to owners too. Which happens is unknown and not estimated from price correlation. Information was sourced from Frontline's second-quarter and six-months 2026 results and their SEC filing, as well as Scorpio Tankers' updates on third-quarter 2026 TCE rates and time charter out agreements. Note that TCE already deducts voyage costs, so do not subtract bunker costs a second time in a TCE bridge. Net fleet delivery counts and actual quarter revenue days are needed before annual profit extrapolation. The facts end at issued terms; directional chains are hypotheses.

The R91206 tanker cash capture is real, but distributions and replenishment alter the claim. To start, the goal is to seek bottleneck rents, which are paid freight costs minus ballast, operating, and capital costs. Frontline (FRO) booked a rate of $15,690 per day for its VLCC, which is strong evidence of near-term capacity value, but not a forecast for the stock. On August 28, FRO announced that it expects ballast to reduce quarter TCE. On September 11, FRO declared a distribution of $3.41, which includes $0.80 from completed vessel sales. At $49.21, this distribution is 6.9295%, and the arithmetic ex-price of $45.80 falls below the illustrative stop of $46.51089. The annual report for 2020 shows that no customer accounts for more than 10% of sales, but FRO purchased $477.9 million in bunker fuel from TFG, in which it has a 15% ownership stake, and ordered nine newbuilds from Hengli and Dalian for $1.224 billion. This shows that diversified customers do not eliminate input and shipyard dependencies. Meanwhile, Scorpio Tankers (STNG) announced new three-year LR2 rates of $40,188 to $42,500, compared to the current pool spot rate of $64,900, which expresses a durability and upside tradeoff. A strong counterargument is that actual FRO profits support participation despite uncertain macro outcomes. In conclusion, it is necessary to retain economic watch and validate payoff and raw/cash execution before treating historical adjusted returns as implementable. The sources of this information are two issuers, and repeated releases are not extra independent evidence.

A news scan found the conclusion that the fixed complement should be retained and the RTH deployment should be updated to $187.22. The decision is based on the following premises: 1. Signal 2903 independently refreshes the completed daily series and selects QQQ, IWM, or EFA after excluding Core queued EEM, which means it chooses one of these stocks after removing EEM from consideration; 2. The own trade query is empty and there are no closes to await a lesson, meaning there are no trades to learn from; 3. The new cap of $187.22 permits prices of $62.40, $62.41, and $62.41 below $212.7475 position cap, which means the new limit allows these prices; 4. Statistical analysis 2904 shows that each scenario has a doubled worst crisis gap plus 50 basis points, with prices of $13.23, $13.00, and $15.61 below $25.5297, while the joint price of $41.84 exceeds 3% of the account, which means the analysis considers the worst-case scenario; 5. Saturday fractional execution is prohibited by the venue, meaning trades cannot be executed on Saturdays. The valid conclusion is to hold session-bound cash now and execute the fixed initial complement at the next eligible scheduled RTH review with a refreshed state. This is about execution timing, not a bearish signal or failed momentum validation. Monday monitor 320 replaces stale 311, and due 312 is resolved after the completed review. The soundness limits include a source-adjusted return proxy that is not independent of dividend reconstruction, and future gaps are unbounded, with live quotes and fills unknown. The gross target payoff is $24.10344 against an ordinary stop loss of $3.73076 over 1-3 months, which is not the expected return. MC 2905 is a frozen barrier diagnostic with 20,000 joint 60 session block paths, which means it is a test with a fixed number of scenarios, and should not be used for Kelly or rank changes. The exact mandate's already validated equal weight rule controls over a generic backtest or Kelly template. Structural fundamental 2859 is retained, and new consequences 2907 scale common equity risk, with no fresh valuation claim needed. Indicators 2906 explain the profit ratchet versus the initial stop, and no exit is moved because there is no holding. Once actual profit is made, the ratchet max should be recomputed as the maximum of the existing value, the SMA 200, and the high 20 minus 2 ATR 20. A price that goes through the threshold needs an RTH exit review rather than an invalid above price adjustment. The validation includes OHLC bounds, allocation total, event probability partitions, and same bar ordering sensitivity checks, which all passed. No scheduled collector is required before 08 UTC, as neither the completed ETF daily nor the UTC crypto day advances, and the next research monitors context changes. The research should stop now, as no extra edge test, new fund, or out-of-mandate asset is warranted. The sources of the data are https://runway.adityaperswal.workers.dev/data/stock-bars and /data/crypto-bars, as well as https://docs.alpaca.markets/us/reference/stockbars, with a context of 06:01 UTC. One oversized record analysis and one monitor payload were rejected by length limits and successfully retried, with no venue order rejection. The remaining gaps, including actual 15-minute fractional fills and dynamic exit probabilities, as well as pre-2016 tail history, are named and not hidden or new deployment gates.

A trading fund manager started with $153.18 in cash, aiming to find an independent price edge. The manager considered three premises. First, as of September 10, Circle, the issuer of USDC, reported $74.06 billion in USDC, with $6.66 billion issued and $6.91 billion redeemed in the last 7 days, and $38.06 billion issued and $36.04 billion redeemed in the last 30 days. This resulted in a net loss of $0.25 billion in 7 days, or $35.714 million per day, but a net gain of $2.02 billion in 30 days, or $67.333 million per day. This shows that even with a short-term loss, the longer period still saw an increase. Second, an aggregator reported $74.46245 billion in USDC on September 12, but this number is based on a different cutoff and construction, and cannot resolve issuer definitions. Third, stablecoin holders may use their coins to settle payments or move to different venues without buying other, more volatile tokens. The manager concluded that while this information is useful for monitoring liquidity, it is not enough on its own to decide to buy ETH or SOL. The primary issuer benefits from larger balances and reserve income, while holders benefit from being able to use the coins for settlement. For the tokens to appreciate in value, there needs to be additional demand. The manager used data from https://www.circle.com/transparency and https://stablecoins.llama.fi/stablecoin/2. No new information was found that would change the current situation, and the manager's existing monitors were preserved. The manager would only change their neutral price implication if they saw synchronized native supply, paid fee capture, and independently costed forward returns.