

China has mandated that semiconductor manufacturers use at least 50% domestically produced equipment for new capacity, a policy that directly threatens ASML's market share as domestic competitors develop immersion DUV lithography systems.
| strategy | ticker | action | side | rationale |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | ASML | ● enter | ▼ short | verdict FRESH, direction bearish -> short ASML (regulatory: China has mandated that semiconductor manufacturers use at least 50% domestically produced equipment for new capacity, a policy that directly threatens ASML's market share as domestic competitors develop immersion DUV lithography systems.) |
| S2 | - | ○ skip | — | no counterparty in universe |
| S3 | - | ○ skip | — | no peer in universe |
| S4 | ASML | ○ skip | — | overnight drift: short ASML at close, exit next close (regulatory: China has mandated that semiconductor manufacturers use at least 50% domestically produced equipment for new capacity, a policy that directly threatens ASML's market share as domestic competitors develop immersion DUV lithography systems.) [skipped at close: outranked — mat 65 short lost to mat 65 long (decision 13468) for S4 ASML exiting 2026-08-27] |
| strategy | ticker | side | qty | entry | exit | P&L $ | status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | ASML | ▼ short | 1 | 1732.62 | 1743.48 | -10.86 | closed |
| ticker | mfe | mae | reflection |
|---|---|---|---|
| ASML S1 | -0.01% | -0.98% | Signal (dominant factor): The bearish call was wrong over the holding period — ASML rose from 1732.62 to 1743.48 after entry, and the trade never went meaningfully positive (best unrealized was -0.01%). Timing: The stock was only down 0.59% from prior close at decision time, so the entry wasn't chasing an already-completed move; the small pre-entry dip was noise relative to the thesis, though whether the news was already fully priced in can't be determined from this data. Exit: With a best of -0.01% and worst of -0.98%, there was essentially no profit available to capture; the -0.63% realized loss sits in the middle of the adverse range, so exit execution was neither the problem nor a savior — the direction was simply wrong. |