저자: 미상 · 외국인
요약 보기
마이클 버리가 엔비디아, 테슬라, 캐터필러, 어플라이드머티리얼즈, 반도체 ETF에 풋옵션 매수 방식으로 베어리시 포지션을 잡았다고 소개하며, 현 시장이 닷컴 버블과 유사하다는 그의 주장을 전한다. 출연자들은 어떤 종목이 먼저 꺾일지 논의하고, 내재변동성과 스큐를 근거로 풋옵션 비용 구조를 설명한다. 다만 개별 종목에 대한 명확한 방향 예측은 제시되지 않고 'Wait for confirmation'(확인 후 진입) 입장이 우세하다.
다듬은 글
Now we have a math test that we are going to pass. Uh , and yeah, we saw headlines a few weeks ago that Michael Burr was buying long positions in Microsoft, and that pushed that thing higher. Uh, he's still trying to catch the bet, but he's back. He bets against the biggest winners in artificial intelligence.
He sells shares of Nvidia, Tesla, Caterpillar, Applied Materials and the Semiconductor ETF, saying that today's market is very much like a dot-com bubble. Applied Materials and Caterpillar shares have soared about 130% and 86% this year, respectively, and both are now trading above their own average Wall Street price targets.
Nvidia is an outsider. Despite leading the way in AI trading, it has fallen from recent highs and is trading at its lowest forward valuation. A group that makes it the most controversial Boar short. The biggest takeaway is not just that he is short selling, but how he is buying long put options instead of short selling the stock right away, determining the maximum risk, giving himself time to close the deal.
The question is, if this rally finally cracks, which of these names will break through first? So, a few names here. Uh, and I think when we look at, uh, the implied volatility of all of them, I'll just be blunt. I think if you buy put options, it's, uh, easier to do in lower IV environments than high IV ones, simply because you're paying less for that contingent exposure.
Uh, same with upward call options . As with any time you have the opportunity to get into a low IV environment, you can make more if your direction is right than if you are in a high IV environment because you are paying less and that multiplier can really play its part much more easily. Yes, true. Uh, I mean, I'm curious.
I'm not crying...I don't mean such a sin. I did n't pay attention to guys like him anymore. I used to pay. I mean, I definitely paid. And these days, uh , I don't know if it's because I've been in this world or because I've perfected my trade, but I'm always curious when we delve into the positions that these guys are placing or what they're doing.
And again, people want to follow their example. That's one of the reasons why, like signal versus noise, we talk about flows and, uh, what's happening and what we see in these kinds of deals . So, this guy is buying a short position. If I had to guess, you know which one of them is breaking through first?
I mean, by breakout, you mean which one will drop 20%? This is really very difficult to guess. I would say the ones that are already weaker, which, to be honest , are Nvidia and Tesla. Uh, I could imagine that one of them might have an even bigger weakness. Well, you know, again, it doesn't look very weak, seeing Tesla's movement over the last two days , but overall a great chart.
Yes, it was kind of weaker, wasn't it? As if Tesla is not at its peak. Nvidia is not at its peak, considering the market is not that far from historical highs. So this amazes me. But again, these guys, they have a big thesis, you know? They, they, they always do that. I mean, that's how he made a name for himself.
He had this huge thesis in 2008, and it worked. Of course, many people have seen this movie. Look. You'll see there are a few movies about it, of course, but I, um, I don't know. I, you know, would I go after these guys and make these deals? No, not necessarily. I would wait for confirmation, to be honest .
Um, and maybe they're right on the same thesis he has on why he thinks these names will disappear. But I'm just curious when you see AAT stock. Wow. I mean, this is one of those tech companies with high implied volatility right now. Much higher. You talk about high V tracks, V – that 's amazing and that story has been crazy watching the stock move the way it's moving.
I mean $1,000 right now. So, um , but I think, um, just to your point , I would probably try to play, if I'm going to try to play them, I would probably go with the ones that have the most liquid options, which I would say is either Tesla or Nvidia, and probably a lower score. Yes. Of all these. I agree.
And if we look at, I think I've pulled them all out here . So, the materials used. Uh, if we look at the actual materials used, this is the only one I didn't make interesting enough. Hmm. Uh, in terms of just throwing away the January 2027 options , uh, just looking at the skew. So, a lot of them have call skew, which I think is good for buying put options if you're trying to buy put options because again, you're paying less to get the same equidistant nominal exposure.
Uh , with that in mind, we're looking at a price of about 720, uh, or 700, where it's trading right now. You're looking at a difference of $500, $900 here, $5,500 versus $ 12,000. Yes, all of these have a skewed path or, sorry, skewed. Well, the materials used are much more common than the putties. Caterpillar is much more common than moth.
When traded much richer than puts. Equidistant. Nvidia is the same story. Er , double the price. And then Tesla, the same story. What is it? Double price. Yes. So, I think in this thesis you have the opportunity to hedge the price downward, I think, if you want. If you are playing for a decline in any of these products, they are cheaper to sell on a decline than on a rise.
But then again , we've talked about this before. If you get a directional move down, you can certainly still make money, especially with a long put option, but you won't make as much as you would on an uptrend because the stock price is depressed, which reduces all the external value around those strikes.
So it's just something to keep in mind, but it's definitely a better scenario than if we saw put options with a difference in price. If we were to see a skew of put options in these products, the multiplier would actually be much smaller because now you're paying... you're paying a lot to get that exposure relative to the nominal, and that's always going to hinder your, uh, multiplier if you have the right direction.
Absolutely. But that's all, uh, for mathematical verification. Share your thoughts in the YouTube chat, er , in the comments. Like and subscribe to Tasty Live if you haven't already .
Comments 0