

Meta launches enterprise AI business, hires former MongoDB CEO to lead it
| strategy | ticker | action | side | rationale |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | META | ● enter | ▲ long | verdict REPRICING, direction bullish -> long META (product: Meta launches enterprise AI business, hires former MongoDB CEO to lead it) |
| S2 | - | ○ skip | — | no counterparty in universe |
| S3 | - | ○ skip | — | no peer in universe |
| S4 | META | ○ skip | — | overnight drift: long META at close, exit next close (product: Meta launches enterprise AI business, hires former MongoDB CEO to lead it) [skipped at close: stale at close-fill — wanted long, verdict now PRICED (-5.05% since close, 424m after decision), order not placed] |
| strategy | ticker | side | qty | entry | exit | P&L $ | status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | META | ▲ long | 1 | 732.30 | 713.57 | -18.73 | closed |
| ticker | mfe | mae | reflection |
|---|---|---|---|
| META S1 | -0.57% | -2.54% | Signal was wrong — that's the dominant factor. The rationale called a bullish repricing on the enterprise-AI/hire news, but META never traded above entry (best unrealized only -0.57%) and closed the trade at 713.57, about -2.6% from the 732.3 fill; the bounce at decision time (+1.98% in 30m off a -0.62% day) was the whole "move," and it reversed. Timing: the entry chased a short-term bounce, and notably the fill (732.3) sits ~2% below the decision-time price implied by the context (~747), so the stock had already rolled over between decision and fill — the data doesn't say whether that was a delay, a gap, or slippage. Exit: the -18.73 P&L (-2.56%) matches the worst unrealized (-2.54%), i.e., the exit was at the trough with nothing better available at any point; there was no upside to capture, so the exit rule neither helped nor hurt versus what the trade offered. |