

World's largest contract chipmaker TSMC sees August revenue surge over 53% to record high
| strategy | ticker | action | side | rationale |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | TSM | ● enter | ▲ long | verdict FRESH, direction bullish -> long TSM (earnings: World's largest contract chipmaker TSMC sees August revenue surge over 53% to record high) |
| S2 | - | ○ skip | — | no counterparty in universe |
| S3 | NVDA | ○ skip | — | verdict REPRICING, direction bullish -> long NVDA (earnings: World's largest contract chipmaker TSMC sees August revenue surge over 53% to record high) [skipped: duplicate theme — already queued S1 long NVDA exiting 2026-10-06] → close -0.93% |
| S4 | TSM | ● enter | ▲ long | overnight drift: long TSM at close, exit next close (earnings: World's largest contract chipmaker TSMC sees August revenue surge over 53% to record high) |
| strategy | ticker | side | qty | entry | exit | P&L $ | status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | TSM | ▲ long | 2 | 484.80 | 482.45 | -4.70 | closed |
| S4 | TSM | ▲ long | 2 | 482.84 | 473.29 | -19.10 | closed |
| ticker | mfe | mae | reflection |
|---|---|---|---|
| TSM S1 | +0.05% | -0.65% | Signal: wrong — the bullish call on the TSMC record-revenue news did not play out; the stock drifted down from 484.8 to 482.45 and never rose more than +0.05% while the trade was open. Timing: the data doesn't settle whether the move had already happened — pre-entry drift was flat (-0.04% vs prev close, -0.08% last 30m), but note the entry fill at 484.8 was already ~0.26% below the 486.05 prev close used in the rationale, so the stock was slipping into the fill. Exit: the -4.70 USD loss (~-0.48%) sits between the +0.05% best and -0.65% worst unrealized, so the exit neither captured upside (there was essentially none) nor hit the floor; the dominant factor is simply a wrong-direction signal on a headline that produced no bullish move. |
| TSM S4 | +0.24% | -2.38% | Signal (dominant): Wrong. The thesis was positive overnight drift on the record-revenue headline, but TSM fell ~2% from entry to the next close; the best it ever showed was +0.24%, so the predicted direction simply didn't materialize. Timing: The data doesn't show a prior run-up — at decision time the stock was flat vs. the previous close (-0.04%) — so the move hadn't "already happened" in the usual sense. However, the fill at 482.84 was ~0.66% below the ~485.85 decision-time price, meaning the stock was already sliding into the close between decision and fill; whether the revenue news had been out for hours or days (and thus priced in) isn't determinable from this material. Exit: The mechanical next-close exit realized -1.98%, close to the -2.38% worst unrealized and far from the +0.24% best; with only +0.24% ever available, the exit rule left little on the table — the loss is a signal failure, not an exit failure. |