

When Palantir's CEO and the Chart Say the Same Thing, Pay Attention
| strategy | ticker | action | side | rationale |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | PLTR | ○ skip | — | primary long contradicts tape: PLTR -1.18% since prev close → close +1.04% |
| S2 | - | ○ skip | — | no counterparty in universe |
| S3 | - | ○ skip | — | no peer in universe |
| S4 | PLTR | ● enter | ▲ long | overnight drift: long PLTR at close, exit next close (guidance: When Palantir's CEO and the Chart Say the Same Thing, Pay Attention) |
| strategy | ticker | side | qty | entry | exit | P&L $ | status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S4 | PLTR | ▲ long | 4 | 208.65 | 200.30 | -33.40 | closed |
| ticker | mfe | mae | reflection |
|---|---|---|---|
| PLTR S4 | +0.65% | -4.24% | Signal was wrong. The rationale called for upward overnight drift on a bullish-sentiment article, but PLTR fell from 208.65 to 200.30 (-4.0%), with the best unrealized gain only +0.65% against a worst of -4.24% — the stock was essentially never meaningfully in the money. Timing cannot be cleanly judged: the stock was already down -1.18% on the day at decision time, so entry was not chasing a completed rally, but the data here does not indicate what move the article anticipated or whether it had already occurred. Exit roughly matched what was available for a mechanical next-close rule. The exit at -4.0% landed close to the -4.24% worst unrealized, so the fixed close-to-close exit did not leave gains uncaptured — there were none to speak of (the +0.65% peak was negligible). The dominant factor is a failed directional signal, not exit mechanics. |