Sun Oct 18 Does the tail wag the dog? Hat-tip to @Signal_Sigma. I looked at Andrei’s intriguing finding (his tweet below) ... but confined my analysis to QQQ. I wanted to see if I could I duplicate Andrei's finding, could quantify its frequency, and then wanted to look at Friday's potential signal. Indeed, when GEX reaches extremely negative values and big buyers simultaneously step in through dark pools, QQQ has bounced. See attached table. (Worth your time.) Since 2022, only two cases (2024, 2025) when that confluence of indicators occurred. For each of those, an upside move in the Nasdaq followed ... greater than 5%, both at 10- and 20-days. Friday (Oct 16) was the third such confluence.👇 Does the tail wag the dog? Can heavy institutional buying and market maker positioning actually drive the market’s next move?

Sun Oct 18 Semi-Major Announcement For the past year I’ve been preoccupied with long-flat strategies for the equity indices. The idea is simple: stay long when a confluence of key data points line up, and step aside into cash ... or alternatives ...when it doesn’t. Part I of a Two-part Tweet: Why I’m moving from an S&P 500-centric workflow ... to a Nasdaq 100-centric one. 1/ Follow the force. The dominant driver of earnings growth and market leadership, now and for the foreseeable future, is technology, and AI above all. The Nasdaq 100 is that driver, nearly undiluted. 2/ The S&P 500 is a bag of a lot of stuff: utilities, staples, REITs, legacy industrials. Much of it isn’t likely to be going anywhere. Owning the whole bag means owning the drag along with the engine. 3/ The S&P’s leadership is already the same handful of tech names. So the question is simple: why hold the driver diluted when you can hold it directly? 4/ Cleaner signals. When one force moves the index, the flows that matter (options positioning, market maker hedging, dark-pool buying) read more clearly on QQQ than on a 500-stock blend. 5/ Less noise, less work. Fewer moving parts means less data to chase and more attention on what matters most. This year the Nasdaq 100 tactical strategy (image excerpt below) is up about 34% vs QQQ’s +16%, with a max drawdown of −6.2% vs −11.7%. Same engine (QQQ), less injury (DD stress). The portfolio imaged below has been live, locally, since Feb. In simplest terms, the signaling methodology looks at volatility based upon the NYU Vol Lab's APMEM volatility forecast research + @Signal_Sigma 's Pro Options and Dark Pools data selects. Of special note ... the sell QQQ signal (derived from the aforementioned) appeared on October 6. [For what might come next ... see xitter.cf/TailThatWagsDog/status…] Right ... soooo.... Long-flat strategies immediately raise the question: when the long QQQ model steps aside, how might that cash be safely employed? The answer to that question relies heavily on macroeconomics ... and that’s forthcoming in Part II.

Fri Oct 16 You know; the AI complex is in broad retreat: fourteen of fifteen paths are falling, with the selling heaviest among the companies supplying the build-out and lightest among the hyperscalers paying for it. ServiceNow is the only name rising on all three measures. Netlify Link (full report): radiant-melomakarona-167603.… Currently working on a target zero-correlation thematic basket to diversify AI risk. I think this will probably make a nice strategy (perhaps portfolio) addition to @Signal_Sigma ... and become one to follow. We'll see.