
Broadcom faces potential EU antitrust investigation and fines regarding its post-acquisition changes to VMware licensing practices and cloud provider restrictions.
| strategy | ticker | action | side | rationale |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | AVGO | ● enter | ▼ short | verdict FRESH, direction bearish -> short AVGO (regulatory: Broadcom faces potential EU antitrust investigation and fines regarding its post-acquisition changes to VMware licensing practices and cloud provider restrictions.) |
| S2 | - | ○ skip | — | no counterparty in universe |
| S3 | MSFT | ○ skip | — | direction unclear for MSFT → close +0.17% |
| S4 | AVGO | ○ skip | — | overnight drift: short AVGO at close, exit next close (regulatory: Broadcom faces potential EU antitrust investigation and fines regarding its post-acquisition changes to VMware licensing practices and cloud provider restrictions.) [skipped at close: outranked — mat 65 short lost to mat 65 long (decision 17976) for S4 AVGO exiting 2026-09-14] |
| strategy | ticker | side | qty | entry | exit | P&L $ | status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | AVGO | ▼ short | 2 | 362.88 | 361.81 | +2.14 | closed |
| ticker | mfe | mae | reflection |
|---|---|---|---|
| AVGO S1 | +0.25% | -0.97% | Signal: Direction was right, but barely — the bearish call produced only a ~0.3% drop, while the position sat as much as −0.97% underwater along the way, so conviction in the regulatory thesis wasn't rewarded with a meaningful move (whether the EU story ever materialized isn't determinable from this data). Timing: The move hadn't already happened — price was up +0.65% from prior close at decision time, so the short entered before any decline; entry timing wasn't the issue. Exit: The exit captured essentially everything available — realized ~+0.29% versus a best unrealized of +0.25% (the small discrepancy suggests the exit fill slightly exceeded the tracked peak, or the marks are inconsistent; the data doesn't settle which). Dominant factor: weak signal magnitude — the exit was near-optimal, but there simply wasn't much of a move to capture, and the trade risked ~1% adverse to earn ~0.3%. |