

TSMC reported a 44.7% year-over-year increase in July revenue and raised third-quarter revenue guidance, signaling continued strong demand for advanced-node AI chips.
| strategy | ticker | action | side | rationale |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | TSM | ● enter | ▲ long | verdict FRESH, direction bullish -> long TSM (earnings: TSMC reported a 44.7% year-over-year increase in July revenue and raised third-quarter revenue guidance, signaling continued strong demand for advanced-node AI chips.) |
| S2 | NVDA | ○ skip | — | direction unclear for NVDA → close -0.77% |
| S3 | AMD | ○ skip | — | inferred long: materiality 65 below floor 75 → close -0.69% |
| S4 | TSM | ● enter | ▲ long | overnight drift: long TSM at close, exit next close (earnings: TSMC reported a 44.7% year-over-year increase in July revenue and raised third-quarter revenue guidance, signaling continued strong demand for advanced-node AI chips.) |
| strategy | ticker | side | qty | entry | exit | P&L $ | status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | TSM | ▲ long | 2 | 418.36 | 417.08 | -2.56 | closed |
| S4 | TSM | ▲ long | 2 | 417.08 | 426.96 | +19.76 | closed |
| ticker | mfe | mae | reflection |
|---|---|---|---|
| TSM S1 | +0.01% | -0.31% | Signal: Wrong, at least over the holding window — the bullish thesis never materialized; the stock drifted down and the best the position ever showed was +0.01%. Timing: The data doesn't show a pre-entry run-up (only +0.21% since prev close at decision time), so this wasn't a case of chasing a completed move — though whether the news was already priced in from an earlier session can't be settled from what's here. Exit: The -0.31% loss matches the worst unrealized exactly, meaning the exit hit the bottom tick of the trade's range, but with a max upside of +0.01% there was essentially nothing available to capture. Dominant factor: signal failure — the predicted bullish move simply never occurred. |
| TSM S4 | +3.00% | -0.02% | Signal: correct — the earnings-driven bullish call played out, with the position gaining +2.37% (417.08 → 426.96). Timing: the move had not already happened; price was only +0.21% off the prior close at decision time and entry was essentially at the prior close, with worst unrealized of just -0.02% confirming near-zero adverse drift. Exit: solid but not perfect — the trade captured +2.37% of a +3.00% peak, giving back roughly 0.6 points to the mechanical next-close exit; the dominant factor here is simply a correct signal with clean timing, and the exit left only a modest amount on the table. |