Trading Journal

"In investing, it's not about buying good things, but about buying them well. —— Charlie Munger"

📊 Trading Journal

Live US stock-options trading from Interactive Brokers: every trade leaves evidence. No simulated returns, no winners-only feed — real account results, strategy logic, risk exposure, and the price of every judgment, right or wrong. The numbers below trace back to IBKR activity statements and TWS snapshots.

Published Reviewsreading index
25
21 Closed4 In Progress
All 191 account fills → statement basis
Current HoldingsTWS snapshot
$RGTI$NOK
TWS sync snapshot (build time)
Account Real P&L (inception · NAV−deposits)NAV basis
-$3,113.07
Negative
realized -$233.66 · unrealized -$2,879.41 · NAV $7,875.49 · deposits $10,988.56
Basis: NAV − net deposits (same as terminal) · TWS snapshot 2026-10-14 23:10:16
🛡 Risk gaugeUnrealized -$2,879.41Leverage 1.08xMaint. margin 76%Excess liq. $1,887Cash $1,101snapshot 2026-10-14 23:10:16
📚 Account Ledger · 2026 Realized (statement basis)reconciledInterval: 2026-01-01 → 2026-10-12 (settled through 9/30 + Oct app-verified) · all 191 fills
Options (cash-flow)
+$2,117.60
143 trades · avg +$14.81
Stock
-$4,063.80
48 trades · avg -$84.66
Total (incl. FX)
-$1,906.68
191 trades
🔗 Closure: options + stock = -$1,946.20; plus FX +$39.52 = total -$1,906.68.
结论:正股贡献 -$4,063.80,期权贡献 +$2,117.60——正股目前跑赢期权,需复盘期权策略的选票与节奏,避免用期权给正股「接刀」。
Reviewed 21/191 trades (reading index, not a performance metric)options +$1,267.34 · stock -$3,239.06
Basis: realized P&L of every fill, aggregated from the IBKR activity statement (IBKR 活动报告逐笔成交归集:年度报告 2026-01-01→09-11 + 九月报告 09-01→09-30(成交级切分衔接,2026-10-11 F1 重建)+ 10 月券商 app 核正(10/1 +129.34、10/6 +107.94、10/10 −330.72)。). Curated posts, uncurated numbers — trades without reviews still count in the account ledger, reconciled monthly.
📡 Daily Trade Updates (fills basis · unreconciled)unreconciled
Trading day 2026-10-14 (TWS sync) · interval: through the latest TWS sync
Today's realized
+$0.00
Year to date (YTD)
-$1,946.20
⚠️ Not yet reconciled to the activity statement; the Account Ledger (statement basis) above is authoritative. FX excluded — adding FX +$39.52 closes exactly to the ledger.
📌 Open Positions (excluded from realized)TWS snapshotsnapshot 2026-10-14 23:10:16
Unrealized P&L (account · all open positions)
-$2,879.41
Premium collected (rent reviews · 2)
+$505.05
nok-put-ladder-2026-09-22 +$393.50 · 2026-05-19-daily-journal +$111.55
※ Different bases — do not add: unrealized = floating P&L of all open positions (TWS); premium = rent records from reviewed posts (not yet realized). Neither counts toward realized P&L.
🧭 Cash-flow system analysis (endowment lens)— account real P&L (inception) -$3,113.07 · options/stock realized -$1,906.68 (as of 2026-10-12) · expand ▸
⚠️ Historical upper-bound basis · not a return promise — the metrics below are "velocity" references; they ignore stock losses, tail risk and capital usage. The authoritative result is the "Account Real P&L (inception)" above.
Spend less than you earn — and the principal grows itself (Nobel Foundation lens)
Options engine · monthly cash flow
+$227
143 trades · YTD +$2,118
Cash-flow rate (on NAV)
2.9%/mo
≈35% ann. (upper bound) · 9.3 mo
Options contribution
52.1%
covers 52% of stock losses
Principal integrity
71.7%
NAV $7,875.49 ÷ deposits $10,988.56
Basis: monthly rate = realized options P&L ÷ current NAV ÷ months elapsed (9.3) ; annualized = monthly × 12, an "upper-bound velocity" that ignores stock losses, tail risk and capital usage — not a return promise. Options contribution = realized options ÷ |realized stocks|. Principal integrity = NAV ÷ cumulative net deposits; below 100% means the principal is still being repaired. Nobel benchmark: +7.7%/yr average over the past five years, annual spending ≈2.2% of assets (2025 return: +0.9%) — the math behind 125 years of perpetuity is "return > spending". Get the principal back to 100% first, then talk about compounding speed.
📌 Notes: ① top card Account Real P&L (inception) = NAV − net deposits, TWS snapshot (same basis as the local terminal) — the single account-level "net result"; ② Account Ledger = statement basis: all 191 fills aggregated from IBKR activity statements (settled through 9/30 + October app-verified, as of 2026-10-12); options + stock + FX close exactly; ③ Daily Trade Updates = internal fills-basis monitor (TWS; excl. FX — the exact gap to the ledger is FX itself; unreconciled — see ② for the authoritative figure); ④ Open Positions = unrealized P&L and premium collected, neither counted toward realized. "Published Reviews" is a reading index, not the full account; "Current Holdings" = TWS snapshot (build time). Skill = results + process discipline: the Q4 validation period requires positive realized, single-day loss <$500, and zero rule-breaking entries. The IBKR account is authoritative; reconciled monthly.

Trade Records

A curated selection, not the full record: 25 published reviews (21 closed · 4 in progress; in-progress not counted in realized P&L) out of 191 account fills. Account performance follows the full ledger; each case study explains execution, risk control and the review process.

$RGTIPartial CloseBuy-to-Close + Sell-to-Open

RGTI Deep-Water Roll: Took In $84 to Push Assignment from Friday to January

RationaleRGTI slid six sessions straight to $12.12, leaving the 14.5P deep in the money (Δ −0.98) with 2 days to expiry. Doing nothing meant a 200-share assignment ticket: $2,900 cash, position becoming 400 shares ≈ 60% of NLV. The account cannot hold that "default outcome".
Trade resultAt 10:03 ET on 10/14, a single BAG order: bought back 14.5P×2 @ $2.34, sold 14.0P JAN 2027×2 @ $2.76 — net credit $84 (cash +$80.98). Old leg settled at −$390.74; the $552 new premium covers 141% of it. Obligation downgraded from "Friday at 14.5" to "January at 14.0"; time extended from 2 days to 93.
Hunter's reviewA roll is not a recovery — it trades a longer lock-up and higher assignment odds for cash and time. This one also paid a "one-day-late" tuition: the hard deadline passed unexecuted, RGTI fell another 5%, and the buy-back cost about $114 more than the plan.
-$390.74
broker realized P&L basis (old leg settlement)
cash basis +$80.98 (BAG net credit, incl. fee difference)
Interactive Brokers·Deep-water roll: buy back 14.5P (OCT16) + sell 14.0P (2027-01-15), single BAG fill·2026-10-02 → 2026-10-14
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

On 10/14 RGTI fell to $12.12, leaving the 14.5P two days to expiry and deep in the money (Δ −0.98). Assignment meant 400 shares ≈ 60% of NLV plus negative cash — the accident line. At 10:03 ET, a single BAG order: bought back 14.5P×2 @ $2.34, sold 14.0P JAN 2027×2 @ $2.76 — net credit $84, old leg settled at −$390.74, obligation downgraded and pushed 93 days out. The cost, stated plainly: the new leg is still ~15% ITM with Δ −0.58, so assignment remains the base case. Includes the three-path comparison and the follow-up trigger lines.

Two coexisting calibers: headline -$390.74 (broker realized P&L basis (old leg settlement)), also cash basis +$80.98 (BAG net credit, incl. fee difference). Both are true, they answer different questions — cite with the caliber; full ledger in the review.

Full review
$NOKClosedSell-to-Open → Buy-to-Close

NOK Twin-Call Harvest: Down to 20–30% of Premium Left, and No Reason to Wait

RationaleNOK fell to $10.08 (−2.7%), pushing both the 12 and 12.5 strikes further away; the premium left shrank from $0.44/$0.163 to $0.10/$0.05 — 70–80% of the profit already locked, and the last 20–30% was not worth 11 more days through an earnings event.
Trade resultTwo limit buy-backs on 10/12 morning (ET): 12C×5 at $0.10 (+$162.82) at 09:53, and 12.5C×10 at $0.05 (+$107.31) at 11:47 — +$270.13 in total. Both short legs cleared; the account enters earnings week with a cleaner structure.
Hunter's reviewThe point of harvesting is not the last few cents — it is exchanging something that has not happened yet for money that already has. The residual-value ledger asks one question: is the money left worth the risk left?
+$270.13
broker realized P&L basis (both legs, incl. fees)
12C +$162.82 · 12.5C +$107.31
Interactive Brokers·Early harvest of covered-call legs: 12C×5 + 12.5C×10 bought back (pre-earnings / pre-expiry)·2026-09-18 → 2026-10-12
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

On 10/12 NOK fell to $10.08 (−2.7%), compressing the time value of two covered calls — the 12C×5 sold on 9/18 shrank from $0.44 to $0.10, and the 12.5C×10 sold on 10/3 from $0.163 to $0.05. The pre-earnings exit window was planned for 10/15–21; the conditions arrived early. Two limit buy-backs at 09:53 and 11:47 ET on 10/12: +$270.13 total (broker realized P&L, incl. $9.49 fees). Last 20–30% of premium converted into cash — before the 10/22 earnings and 10/23 expiry.

Two coexisting calibers: headline +$270.13 (broker realized P&L basis (both legs, incl. fees)), also 12C +$162.82 · 12.5C +$107.31. Both are true, they answer different questions — cite with the caliber; full ledger in the review.

Full review
$NOKClosedBuy-to-Open + Sell-to-Close

A 24-Hour NOK Day Trade: Bought the Panic, Sold the Rebound, Handed the Structure Back to Discipline

RationaleA sector-wide pullback (AI/tech broadly down, no company-specific news) knocked NOK down 4.5% — $2.050 for the LEAP is a price only panic offers; adding 10 pulled the average cost from 2.816 down to 2.563.
Trade resultThe next day NOK rebounded +3% and the new lot was +12% in a single day. But 30 LEAPs ≈70% of NAV, $775 cash and 69.9% margin all crossed their risk lines. Sold back in full at $2.24: cash basis +$175.05; settlement basis −$330.72.
Hunter's reviewEntries are given by the tape; exits are demanded by discipline. A day-trade lot exists to repair the structure, not to maximise the P&L — the +12% mark will leave; the restored cash buffer, margin and concentration stay.
-$330.72
-12.9%settlement basis
cash basis +$175.05
Interactive Brokers·Day trade: short-term LEAP 10C add + full sell-back next day (concentration and leverage reset)·2026-10-08 → 2026-10-09
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

October 8, US session — a sector-wide pullback knocked NOK down 4.5%, not one headline of its own; at 14:01 I bought JUN 2027 10C ×10 at $2.050 in four clicks. The next day NOK rebounded +3% and the new lot was up 12% in a day — but cash at $775, maintenance margin at 69.9% and LEAP concentration at ~70% had all crossed their lines. Under the risk rules the lot went back at $2.24: cash basis +$175.05, settlement basis −$330.72. A 24-hour round trip — entries are a gift from the tape; exits are a demand from discipline.

Two coexisting calibers: headline -$330.72 (settlement basis), also cash basis +$175.05. Both are true, they answer different questions — cite with the caliber; full ledger in the review.

Full review
$NOKPartial CloseClose + Sell-to-Open

One Close, One Open: NOK 10P Banked +$107.94 as 13C Completes the 20/20 Lease

RationaleNokia was up over 5% and the old puts sat at a 15% residual ($0.263 → $0.04) — carrying a $5,000 assignment obligation for $20 of loose change is the wrong trade.
Trade result11:17 buyback banked +$107.94 (82.1% of the premium realised); 32 minutes later the new 13C sold for +$156.20 — 20 short calls against 20 LEAPs, fully leased.
Hunter's reviewA seller realises profit not by waiting it out, but through one comparison: is the residual still worth the risk budget it occupies?
+$107.94
+82.1%realized
Interactive Brokers·Sell Put Buyback (Close) + Covered Call Sale (Open) — Re-Gearing on a Rally, 20/20 Leased·2026-09-22 → 2026-10-06
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

October 6, US Eastern — a big-up day for Nokia, and two clicks 32 minutes apart: at 11:17 the OCT 9 $10 puts ×5 came back at $0.04 ($0.263 → $0.04, net banked +$107.94); at 11:49 the NOV 20 $13 calls ×5 went out at $0.32 (net $156.20 collected). One old lease redeemed at a 15% residual, one new lease written at the 13 strike with a 21% cushion — and from today, all 20 LEAPs are leased, 20/20. This entry covers why a pure seller closes before opening, the pricing on both legs, and what the board looks like now.

Full review
$NOK + RGTIClosedClose

Two Legs Pulled Before NFP Night: NOK 10P and RGTI 18C Bought Back, +$129.78 Banked

RationaleResiduals down to 27.8% and 21.3% ($0.05 / $0.10) — with NOK expiry landing on NFP night and the RGTI review line on the same 10/2, better to take both answers off the table tonight.
Trade resultNOK 10P ×5 and RGTI 18C ×2 bought back for +$129.78 net; the $48.85 early exit price returned about $1,378 of margin, a data release that no longer needs attending, and full discretion over the RGTI shares.
Hunter's reviewA seller realizes profit through one comparison, not by waiting it out: is the residual still worth the risk budget it occupies? Board cleared before NFP night — the next card is on the calendar.
+$129.78
+70.5%realized
Interactive Brokers·Sell Put + Covered Call Double Buyback (Board Cleared Before NFP Night)·2026-09-17 → 2026-10-01
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

October 1, US session — two buyback clicks. 10:39 AM ET: NOK Oct 2 $10 puts ×5 back at $0.05; 11:34: RGTI Oct 9 $18 calls ×2 back at $0.10. Combined net banked: +$129.78. One leg came from the September 22 three-tier put sale; the other was the covered call sitting on the RGTI shares. This entry covers the full life of each leg, the $48.85 price of leaving early, and what remains on the board.

Full review
$NOKClosedClose

NOK 11C Buyback: $0.03 Never Filled, $0.04 Did — +$114.80 Banked

RationaleA RED account allows only one move — reduce the obligation; the 11C sat at a 25% residual ($0.158 → $0.04) and four more trading days plus an NFP release is not worth holding for.
Trade resultBought back 10 contracts at $0.04, $43.20 all-in, banking +$114.80 (72.7%); an $11,000 notional obligation cleared and the margin reading eased from 79.2% to 76.28%.
Hunter's reviewA bargain price is a bonus; getting filled is discipline — the order had exactly one KPI: take the obligation off the books. The Oct 2 board keeps only 10P ×5.
+$114.80
+72.7%realized
Interactive Brokers·PMCC Top-Leg Buyback (De-risking)·2026-09-28 → 2026-09-28
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

On September 28 (US Eastern), 11:15 — 23:15 Beijing — I bought back the last 10 contracts of my NOK Oct 2 $11 call. The $0.03 limit never got a seller; the fill came at $0.04, $43.20 all-in including fees, banking +$114.80. This entry covers why "clearing an obligation" is the only right move in a RED account, what the gap between $0.03 and $0.04 is really about, and what is left on the Nokia board.

Full review
$NOKOpenOpen

NOK Three-Leg Put Sale: $393.50 in Rent, and a Ledger That Must Be Managed

RationaleDaily swings of ±10% in NOK pushed IV to 56%–66%; the three puts sat 5%–10% below the tape, and effective assignment costs of 9.82 / 9.73 / 9.14 were cheaper than any price seen in September.
Trade resultThree tranches of 5 puts, 15 in total, netted $393.50 in premium; full assignment would need $14,750 against $3,762 of cash, and margin occupancy rose from 30.4% to 63.4% — a position given a management calendar on day one.
Hunter's reviewSelling a put is a written promise to take delivery: do the assignment math first, then collect the rent. The rent is small; the discipline is big — every expiry node needs someone in the room.
+$393.50
+2.7%premium
Interactive Brokers·Sell Puts (3-Leg Ladder)·2026-09-22
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

On September 22 (US Eastern), mid-session — just past midnight Beijing time — I sold 15 NOK puts across three expiries: 10P OCT 2, 10P OCT 9 and 9.5P OCT 23, netting $393.50 in premium. This entry covers why I sold, what the assignment ledger looks like, the margin bill (30.4% to 63.4%), and why this position got a management calendar from day one.

Full review
$TRONClosedExit

TRON Final Exit: All 2,300 Shares Sold — The Inventory Era Ends, Capital Moves Fully into Options

RationaleClosing a fourteen-month inventory battle: the last 2,300 shares sold at $1.542, clearing a liquidity trap and 36.6% concentration in one order.
Trade resultTRON -$1,246.43, both NOK puts closed the same night +$95.47; cash -$81 to +$3,368, leverage 0.82x; fourteen-month net about -$819 (lending fees included).
Hunter's reviewDropping the wrong position matters more than finding the right one; the upgrade starts with admitting failure — with only 200 RGTI shares left, capital moves fully into options.
-$1,246.43
-26.0%realized
Interactive Brokers·Full Stock Exit (End of the Inventory Era)·2025-07-17 → 2026-09-21
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

In the early hours of September 22 Beijing time (midday September 21 US time), the last 2,300 TRON shares were sold at $1.542 — closing the books on an inventory battle that began in July 2025. The same night, both NOK put positions were closed (settled +$95.47). Account leverage dropped to 0.82x and cash swung from -$81 to +$3,368. With +$693.86 of stock-lending fees earned over the holding period, the fourteen-month net narrows to about -$819. This was not an ordinary stop-loss — it was a system upgrade: except for 200 RGTI shares, all capital now goes to options.

Full review
$NOK已平仓中性

The 10C Roll, Filed at the Deadline: -231 to Close the Old Leg, +220 to Open the New — and an Earnings Calendar We Almost Missed

RationaleNine hours before the deadline, five 10C SEP18 were about to become an accidental short of 500 NOK shares — one combo filled: buy back at $0.66, sell 12C OCT23 at $0.44.
Trade resultThe old leg realized -$231; netted against the $220 of new premium the cycle lands near -$11 — $11 short of covering the buyback cost.
Hunter's reviewTwo checklists before every roll, in order: money (new premium ≥ buyback cost), then calendar (expiry clear of earnings). The order cannot be reversed; the calendar cannot be missed.
-$231.00
realized
盈透证券·Short Call Roll·2026-09-18 → 2026-09-18
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

At 2:51 pm ET on Sep 18, nine hours before the deadline, one combo order filled: bought back the 10C at 0.66, sold the 12C OCT23 at 0.44. Rolling has two iron rules — the new premium must cover the buyback cost, and the new expiry must avoid the event calendar. We nearly nailed the first. The second, we nearly missed.

Full review
$TRONClosedNeutral

TRON Seal Lifted: All 17× 5C Bought Back, +$109 — the Final Piece of a Nine-Month Liquidity Trap

RationaleThe 17 JAN'28 5C legs locked 1,700 of my 2,300 shares for nine months; the account was fixed and IV cooled — buyback average $0.488 against a $0.548 sell average.
Trade result7 @ $0.50 + 10 @ $0.48 bought back: $101.66 gross, +$109.16 settlement basis; all 2,300 shares free for the first time in nine months.
Hunter's reviewThe real cost of a liquidity trap is time, not loss — and unlocking costs cash that a RED-state account does not have the right to spend. Fix the account first.
+$109.16
+11.7%realized
Interactive Brokers·Short Call proactive buyback (liquidity-trap unlock)·2026-09-18
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

On September 18, two buy orders took back all 17 TRON JAN'28 5C short legs: 7 @ $0.50 and 10 @ $0.48, averaging $0.488 against a $0.548 sell average — a +$109.16 settlement-basis exit. The seal that locked 1,700 shares for nine months is gone. This review is about one idea: the real cost of a liquidity trap isn't the loss — it's the time. And unlocking costs money that a RED-state account doesn't have the right to spend.

Full review
$QUBTClosedNeutral

Phased Stock Exit Day 1: QUBT Sold Outright, RGTI Covered with 18C Rent (+$92 Premium)

RationaleOn a rally day, execute the exit plan: QUBT paid only $0.22 ($22) of CC rent — not worth a 29-day lock, sold outright; RGTI paid triple, so 18C Calls carry the exit.
Trade resultQUBT cleared 300 shares at $8.423 (-$371.16) and RGTI 18C sold for $92; account cash -$1,758 → +$860, leverage 1.55x → 1.29x.
Hunter's reviewA rally day is not a greed day — it is a plan-execution day: thin premium outright, thick premium via Calls, traps dismantled slowly.
-$371.16
-12.8%realized
Interactive Brokers·Phased stock exit (outright sale)·2026-09-17
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

On a quantum-sector rally day, step one of the phased stock exit: QUBT's 300 shares sold outright (a $0.22 CC premium isn't worth a 29-day lock), while RGTI's 200 shares got 2× 18C Calls sold against them ($0.47 premium, three times QUBT's). Full trade ledger, the premium-thickness test, and the three-step exit framework.

Full review
$NOKClosedNeutral

On the Day NOK Jumped 7%, I Bought Back Two Groups of Puts I Had Sold: +$91 Surfing With the Tide

RationaleNOK jumped 7% on the Microsoft news and both sold Put groups bled their residual fast — SEP18 down to $0.04, SEP25 down to $0.10; holding 8 more days of direction risk for that is not worth it.
Trade resultFour puts bought back — SEP18 ×2 at $0.04, SEP25 ×2 at $0.10 — banking +$91.20 (76.5% of premium captured).
Hunter's reviewPut profits should not depend only on waiting for expiry: when the residual is thin, buy back and take money already earned out of the next wave gamble.
+$91.20
+76.5%realized
Interactive Brokers·Sell Put proactive buyback (rally-day profit taking)·2026-09-14 → 2026-09-17
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

On September 17, Nokia expanded its Microsoft partnership and NOK rallied 5% pre-market, 7% intraday. Three days earlier, on the crash day, I bought back Calls I had sold. Today, on the rally day, I bought back Puts I had sold — the mirror image of the same muscle memory. Trading is like surfing, but smart investors aren't surfers. They're helmsmen: never betting on any single wave, just making sure every wave that passes leaves a little momentum in the boat.

Full review
$NOK + RGTIClosedNeutral

On the Day NOK Plunged 13%, I Bought Back Two Short Calls: $166 Banked Early

RationaleNOK fell 13.30% in a day, cutting both short Calls to a third of their premium — carrying about $91 of residual 11 more days into an FOMC was not worth it.
Trade resultTwo buybacks minutes apart banked +$166.41 early: NOK 12C ×10 at $0.06 (+$108.70) and RGTI 18C ×2 at $0.155 (+$57.58) — 66% of max profit.
Hunter's reviewProfit-taking on short calls comes from comparison, not waiting: is the residual worth the risk? On a crash day the first move is opening the ledger, not panicking.
+$166.41
+66%realized
Interactive Brokers·Covered Call buyback (banking profit early on a crash day)·2026-09-08 → 2026-09-14
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

On Sep 14, NOK fell -13.30% under a triple hit — an AI-infrastructure repricing, the confirmation of Nokia's near-total China exit, and a collapsed Modulate Space deal. While everyone watched how badly the put sellers were hurting, I did something else — bought back 10x 12C at $0.06 (sold at an average of $0.179) and 2x RGTI 18C at $0.155 (sold at an average of $0.453), a combined +$166.41 banked early. This review is about one idea — profit-taking on short calls should not come from 'waiting for expiry' but from a simple comparison: is the premium left on the table worth the event risk?

Full review
$NOKClosedBullish add

Scaling NOK to 10 PMCC Lots: I Sold One Ticket Wrong — Here Is Why I Am Not Worried

RationaleTaking the PMCC from 6 lots to 10: +4 LEAPs at $2.88 to lower the blend, plus the old 11P bought back at $0.31 to lock +$265.
Trade resultFour fills in one afternoon; one ticket sold the 10.5P instead of the 12C, corrected 8 minutes later. Realized +$292.35 on the day; leverage 1.36x to 1.512x.
Hunter's reviewThe ceiling on a mistake is set by the underlying: the same slip is an incident on TRON and merely an early CSP on NOK.
+$292.35
realized
Interactive Brokers·PMCC Expansion (LEAP add + Covered Call cover + Put buyback)·2026-09-11 → 2026-09-11
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

Four fills on Sep 11 took my NOK PMCC from 6 lots to 10 — buying back the 11P at $0.31 for +$265, adding 4 LEAPs at $2.88, selling 4x 12C for $72 to complete the cover, and one ticket where I sold a put instead of a call. This review is about why a wrong-direction fill on NOK is merely an ungraceful accident, while the same mistake on TRON would be a disaster — the quality of the underlying sets the ceiling on your errors.

Full review
$RGTIClosedNeutral-Bullish (unwinding a stuck position)

Quantum Surge Day: Closing the 15.5P, Hanging the 18C — Three Moves Under a RED Account

RationaleOn 9/8 up to $100M in CHIPS funding from the Commerce Department ignited the quantum sector — RGTI +12% intraday, IV 105% — and under a RED account I did not chase, only worked off the stuck position.
Trade resultBought back the 15.5P at $0.20 to lock +$38.74 and defuse the assignment crisis; 18C ×2 collected $92, NOK 12C ×6 collected $114 — +$244.74 in total on the day.
Hunter's reviewA surge day is a window to work off stuck positions, not a signal to add; an OTM put is not cash but luck not yet banked — cash it in while it lasts.
+$38.74
+0.5%realized
Interactive Brokers·Close short put + Covered Calls at highs·2026-08-24 → 2026-09-08
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

On September 8 the US Commerce Department offered RGTI up to $100M in CHIPS Act funding and the quantum sector exploded — RGTI +12% intraday. With every risk line in my account flashing red I did not chase: I closed the 15.5P expiring in 3 days at a low-cost $0.20 (locking +$38.74), hung an 18C against my 200 shares into IV 105% ($92), and covered the NOK LEAP with a 12C ($114) — the self-rescue of a stuck account on a surge day.

Full review
$TRONClosedClose

Closing TRON 7.5C: Freeing the Stock to Sell at a Better Price

RationaleWith the 7.5C open, 600 shares sat pledged — selling the stock meant unwinding the leg first, while the $0.68 → $0.45 time value kept thinning.
Trade resultSix contracts bought back at $0.45 for +$129.17 (+32%); the pledge released, 2,300 shares free, and the remaining 17 5C keep collecting rent.
Hunter's reviewOptions are tools, not shackles: giving up the flexibility of the shares for a little remaining time value is the wrong trade. Opportunity cost first.
+$129.17
+32%realized
Interactive Brokers·Covered Call Buyback·2025-12-19 → 2026-08-31
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

On Aug 31 I bought back 6 TRON JAN 21 28 7.5C at $0.45, banking +$129.17 in realized P&L. The pledge is released and the stock is free — I will sell when the price is right. The remaining 17 5C keep collecting premium under the same strategy: timed exits.

Full review
$TRONClosedTrim

Trimming TRON on the Surge: 2,000 Shares Sold, Leverage & Concentration Both Down

RationaleEvery risk line was red (concentration 77.2%, leverage 1.93x, REDUCE_ONLY) and TRON ran from $1.50 to $1.69 on 8/19 — a rare exit window for a thin name, used for a full 2,000-share cut.
Trade resultFIFO settlement basis -$25.07 (avg-cost view -$780), cash recovered +$3,373; concentration 77.2% → 44.3%, leverage 1.93x → 1.55x.
Hunter's reviewA surge in a downtrend is a trim window, not a buy signal; when every line is red, trimming is itself the strategy — risk control beats P&L.
-$25.07
-0.7%realized
Interactive Brokers·Stock Trim (Deleveraging)·2025-07-17 → 2026-08-19
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

On Aug 19 TRON spiked intraday and I trimmed 2,000 shares at $1.69 (4,300 → 2,300). FIFO-settled realized loss was only -$25.07 (avg-cost view ≈ -$780), but concentration fell from 77.2% to 44.3% and leverage from 1.93x to 1.55x — in an account where every risk line was flashing red, cutting is itself the strategy.

Full review
$QUBT + RGTIClosedClose

Closing Both Calls on the Same Day: QUBT & RGTI Buyback Review

RationaleQUBT shares at $8.70 had already broken the $8.92 stop line, and the RGTI 20C had 3 days left with IV at 92% — with FOMC minutes due the next night, gambling the last $18 of theta on an event made no sense.
Trade resultBoth calls bought back on the same day: +$147.75 banked, 72% of the premium kept; the 300 QUBT shares and 200 RGTI shares became free positions again, with full upside intact.
Hunter's reviewAct the day a stop line breaks, not later; before events, high-IV sellers cut risk; banking 72% beats playing for 100% — options are tools added to a position, not locks put on it.
+$147.75
+72%realized
Interactive Brokers·Covered Call Buyback (Two Legs)·2026-07-21 → 2026-08-18
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

On Aug 18 I bought back QUBT 10C and RGTI 20C in the same session, banking +$147.75 in realized P&L (after fees). Stop-loss already broken, FOMC minutes ahead, IV at 92% — proactive defense beats gambling on the last few dollars.

Full review
$TRONClosedClose

A Clean TRON Trade: Unlock the Options First, Wait for the Stock Later

RationaleLiquidity is poor in both the stock and the options, and capital sat locked inside a long-dated Covered Call — a $0.15 / $0.35 quote and a few cents of premium are not worth the trapped capital.
Trade resultNo chasing: a $0.20 limit filled all 20 contracts — $0.43 → $0.20, +$455.28 broker-settled, and 2,000 shares freed.
Hunter's reviewOptions trading is not only direction: the order book, liquidity and fill price are part of the strategy — opportunity cost outranks the last cents of premium.
+$455.28
+53.8%realized
Interactive Brokers·Covered Call Buyback·2025-12-23 → 2026-07-29
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

Bought back 20 TRON $5 calls at $0.20 for a broker-settled $455.28 profit. Position management beats directional bets — capital efficiency matters more than squeezing the last penny of premium.

Full review
$RGTIClosedTwo-way

Made +$22 Scalping, Statement Shows -$424? — Unrealized Loss, Realized Loss & Cost Illusion

RationaleBought 100 RGTI at the 7/23 dip for a T — about +$22 in my head; after the 7/27 sale the statement showed -$424.15, because IB settled the oldest lot at a $20.02 cost under FIFO.
Trade resultThe T made $22 while the statement lost $424, and the blended cost "fell" from about $18.50 to $16.26 — accounting comfort bought with a $424.15 realized loss; the same move on 7/9 had crystallized -$288.05.
Hunter's reviewThe most expensive thing is never the commission but not knowing which book you are reading — before any T, walk through which batch FIFO will dig out first.
-$424.15
—realized
Interactive Brokers·T Trade (FIFO Crystallization)·2026-07-23 → 2026-07-27
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

A scalp that actually made money exploded into a -$424.15 realized loss on the statement. Breaking down FIFO matching, the unrealized-to-realized conversion, and the accounting illusion behind 'lower cost basis.'

Full review
$NOKClosedClose

NOK Daytrade Deformed: From "Grab a Quick Spread" to Cutting 8 Days Later

RationaleBought 100 NOK at $12.625 on 7/9 for a quick intraday spread — no exit that day, and the slide turned the daytrade into an eight-day holding.
Trade resultCut at $9.885 on 7/17: -$298.34 realized (broker settlement basis); the 13P bought back in the same window lost -$337.02 — a -$635 week.
Hunter's reviewA T is an intraday thing; overnight it is no longer a T. Three locks — time, price, reason — keep a plan from deforming silently.
-$298.34
-23.6%realized
Interactive Brokers·Failed Stock Daytrade·2026-07-09 → 2026-07-17
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

Bought 100 NOK at $12.625 on Jul 9 for a daytrade, watched it slide to $9.89 within a week, cut on Jul 17 — realized -$298.34. The 13P sold in the same window lost -$337 too: the full picture of a -$635 week in NOK.

Full review
$NVTSClosedClose

NVTS Assignment: The Decision I Should Have Made on Assignment Day, Delayed 15 Days

RationaleOne NVTS 16P sold on 6/30 for $17 in premium; assigned at $16 for 100 shares on 7/2 — the problem was not the assignment, but doing nothing after it.
Trade resultThe decision was delayed 15 days: cut at $10.9353 on 7/17 for -$491.76 (-31%, settlement basis); the +$202 the option legs earned was wiped out, plus another $290.
Hunter's reviewAssignment day is decision day: delay is itself a decision that defaults to holding. Write the assignment script before selling the put.
-$491.76
-31%realized
Interactive Brokers·Sell Put Assignment + Stock Cut·2026-07-02 → 2026-07-17
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

Sold 1 NVTS 16P on Jun 30 for $17 premium, got assigned 100 shares at $16 on Jul 2, and held until Jul 17 when I cut at $10.94 — realized -$491.76. The +$202 the option legs made was wiped out by 15 days of stock procrastination, plus another $290 on top.

Full review
$QUBTClosedClose

QUBT Averaging Down x3: From $11.70 to $7.68, Then Cutting the Most Expensive Lot

RationaleAfter buying at $11.6993 on 5/28, three rounds of averaging down: $9.625 on 6/30 and $7.68 on 7/17 — none because QUBT deserved to be held.
Trade resultOn 7/17, averaging at $7.68 in the morning and cutting the most expensive lot at $7.90 in the afternoon: realized -$382.15 (-32.7%, FIFO basis); the +$241 from options was eaten.
Hunter's reviewAveraging down is investing more into a mistake: a $94 error became $382. The only legitimate reason to average is that the original thesis still holds.
-$382.15
-32.7%realized
Interactive Brokers·Stock Averaging Down + Cut·2026-05-28 → 2026-07-17
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

Bought at $11.70 on May 28, averaged down at $9.63 on Jun 30, again at $7.68 on Jul 17 — then cut the most expensive lot at $7.90 the same day, realizing -$382.15. The +$241 the QUBT option legs made in the same period was eaten entirely by stock averaging.

Full review
$RGTIClosedNeutral-Bullish

Weekly Trading Journal — May 21, 2026: Rollover Rescue & Covered Call Recovery

RationaleRGTI spiked over 28% at one point on news of $2B in US government funding, leaving the short calls deep ITM — waiting for expiry would let the shares get called away at a low strike and lock in a hard loss.
Trade resultA loss-free rollover: bought back the deep-ITM 17C, realizing a -$697.06 loss, and sold a new $25 call 120 days out for $768 premium; week net on RGTI +$167.09, unrealized gain about $700.
Hunter's reviewHaving a way out matters more than any judgment call: a rollover trades time for room — buy back the losing near-month call first, then sell the far-month call, and even a wrong direction keeps a 120-day buffer.
+$167.09
Unrealized gain ~$700realized
Interactive Brokers·Covered Call + Rollover Rescue·2026-05-18
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

RGTI surged 28%+ on $2B government funding news. Rollover strategy moved strike to $25, extended 120 days, collected $768 premium for a loss-free roll.

Full review
$RGTI / NOKOpenBullish

SilentXx Options Trading Journal — May 19, 2026

RationaleDuring the RGTI pullback, sold the 16/15.5 puts ×2 for premium; on the NOK PMCC base, sold 1 short-dated call against the 2 LEAPs to collect rent.
Trade resultPremium on the day +$111.55 — RGTI sell put $97.7 plus NOK short call $13.85 — both positions under active management, harvesting time and volatility.
Hunter's reviewEvery trade is not a bet on direction but a business in time: a seller does not need to guess the direction right, only not be wrong by too much.
+$111.55
+1.9%premium
Interactive Brokers·Sell Put + PMCC·2026-05-19
📄 Full summary & caliber notes (click to expand)

RGTI Sell Put collected $97.70 premium + NOK PMCC front-line rent $13.85 — active management harvesting time decay and volatility.

Full review
📝

Real Records

Live IBKR trades, no simulation

🔍

Full Logic

Strategy · Parameters · Decision process

📈

Continuous Review

P&L analysis + lessons extracted