TSLA Tesla

Signal (dominant factor): The bullish call was simply wrong — TSLA fell ~1.2% from entry, and the position never gained more than +0.27% while open. Timing: The move had not already happened; price was slightly down on the day at entry (-0.47%), so this wasn't chasing a stale rally. Exit: The -8.20 exit (~-1.16%) landed between the best (+0.27%) and worst (-2.32%) unrealized, so the exit salvaged roughly half the drawdown, but with a max upside of only +0.27% there was essentially nothing to capture. The trade failed because the directional signal didn't play out, not because of timing or exit execution.

Signal: right. The bullish call on the robotaxi permit news played out — price rose ~2% after entry with minimal adverse excursion (-0.30% worst).

Timing: mostly fine. Price was only +0.15% on the day at decision time, though the fill at 347.84 was ~0.6% above prior close, so a small slice of the move preceded entry — not enough to say it was chased.

Exit: strong. The +13.82 (+1.99%) captured nearly all of the +2.26% best unrealized. Dominant factor: a correct directional signal, executed cleanly on both ends; nothing here suggests a problem with any leg of this trade.

Signal: wrong. The long overnight-drift bet failed — TSLA fell from 350.18 to 345.60 (-1.31%), and the best unrealized gain while open was only +0.33%, so there was essentially no favorable move to capture. Timing: the stock was already +1.45% off the prior close at entry, so the trade bought after an initial pop, but the data can't confirm whether that pop was news-driven or that the news was already priced in — only that entry came after a run-up. Exit: the mechanical next-close exit landed at -1.31%, between the best (+0.33%) and worst (-2.01%) marks, so the exit gave up little; the dominant factor is simply a wrong directional signal, not exit execution.

Signal: After entry, the direction was wrong — the stock never advanced more than +0.83% and drifted down; whether the news would have repriced TSLA longer-term isn't determinable from this data.

Timing: The trade chased a move already underway: entry at 353.90 was ~1.4% above the prior close, after the +1.45%/+0.74% run-up cited at decision time, so much of the anticipated repricing was likely already in the price.

Exit: The exit at -1.03% captured nearly the full worst unrealized drawdown (-1.07%) and none of the modest +0.83% peak — the dominant factor here is timing (late entry into an extended move), compounded by an exit at effectively the low of the holding period.

Signal: wrong. The bearish call never played out — TSLA rose after entry, with only +0.29% max favorable move versus -1.26% adverse, so the loss stems primarily from a bad directional read, not stale timing (price was only +0.48% off the prior close at decision time, so the anticipated drop hadn't already occurred; it simply didn't occur at all).

Exit: administrative, not signal-driven. The trade was closed early because it was netted out against a conflicting long-TSLA decision, and the exit landed near the worst of the range (-1.02% realized vs. -1.26% worst), so little was left on the table — but the exit tells us nothing about the strategy's own exit logic.

Dominant factor: the bearish signal was simply wrong. Whether the Cybertruck news was genuinely fresh at entry can't be settled from the data here.

Signal: right. Bearish call on the recall news played out — TSLA fell after entry and the position was never meaningfully underwater (worst unrealized was still +0.13%).

Timing: mostly fine, with a caveat. At decision time the stock was only down -0.38% with a flat last 30m, so the move hadn't already happened; however, the fill at 358.94 is ~1.1% below prev close versus the -0.38% context, a gap the data here doesn't explain (slippage or delay between decision and fill).

Exit: good capture. P&L of +8.74/share (~2.4%) took roughly 83% of the +2.93% best unrealized. Dominant factor: a correct, timely signal executed cleanly — this trade worked as intended.

Signal: Right — the bullish repricing call played out, with the stock rising steadily after entry (worst drawdown only -0.58%).

Timing: Some of the move had occurred by entry (+1.35% from prior close), but the bulk clearly had not — the position went on to gain up to +4.79%, so entry was not chasing an exhausted move.

Exit: Good capture — the +3.84% realized gain took roughly 80% of the +4.79% peak available. The dominant factor here is simply a correct signal executed reasonably well on both ends; nothing in this data points to a meaningful flaw.

Signal/timing: The predicted bearish move had already occurred before entry — the 12% drop cited in the rationale was history (price was only -0.32% since prev close at decision time), so this was a stale signal labeled FRESH. Post-entry, direction was wrong: TSLA rebounded ~2.9% against the short.

Exit: The exit at 349.83 captured essentially the worst of it — the -2.91% max drawdown versus a briefly available +1.02% gain — so the exit gave back everything on offer, though the small +1.02% best suggests little was ever available.

Dominant factor: Timing — the trade shorted a move that had already happened, then rode the mean-reversion bounce to near its worst point.

Signal: Right — the long call paid off with a +3.84% move from entry to exit.

Timing: Not chased; the stock was actually down 0.94% from prior close at decision time, so entry came at a slight discount rather than after the move had already run.

Exit: Near-perfect capture — the +3.84% realized gain equals the best unrealized level while open, and the trade rode through a -3.50% drawdown to get there. Dominant factor: a correct directional signal with an exit that happened to land at the peak; whether that peak-capture was skill or the mechanical next-close rule getting lucky can't be determined from this single trade.

Signal: Wrong — the bullish call didn't play out; the stock drifted down and the trade closed at -0.37%. Timing: Not the issue — entry at 338.0 was slightly below the prior close (-0.41% on the day, only +0.42% in the prior 30m), so the trade wasn't chasing a move that had already occurred. Exit: Middling — the exit at -0.37% sat between the best (+0.64%) and worst (-0.81%) unrealized, so a small gain was briefly available but the exit neither captured it nor took the full drawdown.

Dominant factor: signal failure — the news-driven bullish thesis simply didn't produce upward movement during the holding period. (Whether the catalyst was stale or already priced in before the day shown can't be determined from this data.)