Is protection on Broadcom cheap or dear today, where has the money been placed, how did the past month play out, and how did the judgments we filed on Broadcom settle? Updated after every close, with right and wrong judgments alike left on the record.
Data date 10.07 · close 372.46 (—) · −24.64% from the 52-week high
I
Where it stands today
One-year IV percentile7 / 100
Where one-month protection (30-day implied volatility) sits within its past-year range, 0 the cheapest and 100 the dearest. Protection on Broadcom is now in the cheapest stretch of the past year.
30-day / one-year implied vol (%)36.6 / 44.33
The one-year sits 7.73 points above the 30-day, the usual shape: a longer policy covers more.
Expected move this week±2.4% ±9.19
Centred on the previous close of 375.81, option prices imply 366.62 to 385 at this week's expiry. A close outside it at expiry means the option sellers lose.
Put ÷ call (volume / open interest)0.34 / 0.71
Calls outtraded puts. It counts contracts, not direction: a put buyer may be insuring shares they own.
Levels from high to low, with distance from the close:
Expected move, high
385
+3.37%
Centred on the previous close: the implied top at this week's expiry.
Call wall
380
+2.02%
The strike with the most call open interest: an upside target someone has already made a down payment on.
Close
372.46
Expected move, low
366.62
−1.57%
Centred on the previous close: the implied bottom at this week's expiry.
The strike with the most put open interest: protection someone already paid for.
Data date 10.07. Updated once after each trading day's close; spot is the official close.
II
The last 30 trading days
Close, flip level, put wall and call wall, day by day: which side of the walls price is on, and whether the walls moved.
One-year and 30-day implied vol, day by day. The short line jumping while the long line holds means only the near-term event is being repriced; the long line rising too means the whole story is.
Shown: the last 30 trading days. Earlier records are in Chapter V (walls) and Chapter VII (implied vol) of the options page.
The latest P/E (2026.10.02) is 45.3, the 62nd percentile of 61 readings since 2010 (0 is the cheapest in that history, 100 the dearest; past readings are taken at quarter-ends). Broadcom is compared only with its own past.
At the latest quarter-end: ROE 43.9% (2026.07.31), ROIC 30.6% (2026.07.31).
As of 2026.10.03, updated weekly. Full profit, return, valuation and dividend charts are in the Tech stock view.
V
Every case we filed on it
Each judgment is written down with its test before the fact, settled by that test, and left standing when wrong. These are all the cases that name Broadcom, none removed. Open one for the original filing.
7cases since 08.17
7settled
0open
09.14The letter changed the overnight price and did not change the session's positionsAlso: SMH, MU, SNDK, AMD, INTC, QCOM, NVDA, ARMholds
Settlement holds
Original filing and test, archived verbatim in Chinese
09.14Protection sellers treated the bank guidance as new information and did not treat the letter as new informationAlso: GS, WFC, JPM, BAC, C, MU, SNDK, INTC, AMD, NVDA, TSMconfirmed
Settlement confirmed
Original filing and test, archived verbatim in Chinese
09.03Broadcom's event premium did not clear with the printRetired on its own test
Settlement Retired on its own test. The filing wrote both branches in advance; the one that fired was "30-day moves below the one-year, so the call retires", not "the gap widens, so it strengthens". Retired is not wrong: the reading on the filing day was real, it was simply cleared one session sooner than expected.
Original filing and test, archived verbatim in Chinese
09.02The fence around the earnings night was priced before the open at 343.16 to 396.20Right
Settlement Right. The close finished 14.73 above the lower edge and 38.31 below the upper one, so the price the market asked for in advance was not too high. Note this was won by the range holding, not by calling a direction.
Original filing and test, archived verbatim in Chinese
09.02The inversion of 50.4 against 46.76 is an event premium, not a shift in the levelPartly
Settlement Partly. Protection did get cheaper: 30-day implied fell from 50.4 to 48.72 and from the 67.1st to the 54.4th percentile of its own year. But it did not clear: 48.72 still sits above the one-year 45.88, an inversion of 2.84 against 3.64 the day before, and Broadcom remains the only one of the 21 names trading inverted. Earnings are over and less than a quarter of the near-dated premium has come out.
Original filing and test, archived verbatim in Chinese
08.1908-19 was not a risk-off day: the four hardest-hit names all traded lighter than usual , so the decline came from absent buyers rather than selling pr…Also: SPY, QQQ, MSTR, COIN, INTC, AMD, NVDARight — neither falsifying condition triggered
Settlement Right — neither falsifying condition triggered. First: "if 08-20 brings a comparable decline on 1.5x or more volume, the no-sellers half fails." On 08-20 the four hardest-hit names printed AVGO +0.43%, RDDT -0.92%, INTC -0.72% and AMD +0.65% — none came close to the 3.71% to 4.61% declines of 08-19, so the premise never appeared and that half stands. Second: "if the high-beta group gives it all back, the long-end-and-weak-dollar half fails." MSTR rose 7.81%, COIN 7.58%, CVNA 1.53% and MARA 15.54%, while HOOD slipped 0.70% — four of five kept rising, which is not a full give-back, so that half stands as well.
Original filing and test, archived verbatim in Chinese
08.17The term-structure inversions in AVGO and SPCX have different originsAlso: SPCXPartly
Settlement Partly. The SPCX half fails: the test triggered cleanly — the inversion went from +0.66 on 08-17 to -0.84 on 08-18, i.e. it was taken back, so under the filing's own terms 08-17 counts as a single point. The AVGO half is not determinable: the weakening condition presupposed that the underlying stops falling, and that never happened before settlement — AVGO fell 3.17% on 08-18 and 4.61% on 08-19, so the condition never had a chance to trigger (the inversion ran 1.38, 1.44, 1.13 through that window).
Original filing and test, archived verbatim in Chinese
How to read this page
· The one-year percentile and the 30-day and one-year implied vols come from two different sources; each is compared only with its own past, and the two are never spliced together.
· The 30-day and one-year vols are constant-maturity: interpolated between the two nearest expiries to exactly 30 and 365 days, read once before each close.
· A big-print row is one contract's full-day total, not a single trade. Without per-trade timestamps or aggressor side we state premium traded only.
· Every reading is cross-checked against two independent sources and updated once after the close. Raw data is not provided on this site.
· Valuation ratios, margins and returns are computed from the company's filed quarterly and annual reports, on the same basis as the sector stock view, and updated weekly.
· The P/E percentile compares the company only with its own quarter-end record, never with other companies, and is not spliced with the current readings above.
· Data and information only; not investment advice; no buy or sell recommendations.