Is protection on NVIDIA 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 NVIDIA settle? Updated after every close, with right and wrong judgments alike left on the record.
Data date 10.07 · close 238.94 (—) · −1.82% from the 52-week high
I
Where it stands today
One-year IV percentile0 / 100
Where one-month protection (30-day implied volatility) sits within its past-year range, 0 the cheapest and 100 the dearest. Protection on NVIDIA is now in the cheapest stretch of the past year.
30-day / one-year implied vol (%)30.21 / 37.88
The one-year sits 7.67 points above the 30-day, the usual shape: a longer policy covers more.
Expected move this week±1.7% ±4.11
Centred on the previous close of 239.24, option prices imply 235.13 to 243.35 at this week's expiry. A close outside it at expiry means the option sellers lose.
Put ÷ call (volume / open interest)0.66 / 1.06
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
243.35
+1.85%
Centred on the previous close: the implied top at this week's expiry.
Call wall
240
+0.44%
The strike with the most call open interest: an upside target someone has already made a down payment on.
Close
238.94
Expected move, low
235.13
−1.60%
Centred on the previous close: the implied bottom at this week's expiry.
Put wall
230
−3.74%
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 29.6, the 42nd percentile of 93 readings since 2000 (0 is the cheapest in that history, 100 the dearest; past readings are taken at quarter-ends). NVIDIA is compared only with its own past.
At the latest quarter-end: ROE 110.1% (2026.07.31), ROIC 94.6% (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 NVIDIA, none removed. Open one for the original filing.
14cases since 07.22
13settled
1open
09.18After the second and third hikes, what gets repriced is the farthest cash flow in the expensive group , not the cheap group .Also: SNDK, MSTR, INTC, GOOGL, GSOpen · est. 11.30
Original filing and test, archived verbatim in Chinese
09.30Nvidia calls expiring Nov 20 were the mid-September position rolling up, not new bullish betsWithdrawn by its test
Settlement Withdrawn by its test: it held only if, in October 1 morning settlement, the 230 and 275 calls each fell by more than 50000 contracts and the 245 and 295 calls each rose by more than 50000; any miss meant withdrawal. The 230 call went from 103083 to 61026 (down 42057) and the 275 call from 80576 to 33789 (down 46787), so neither old strike fell by 50000; the 245 call rose from 21327 to 92644 and the 295 call from 1774 to 71296. The positions did move up, but new positions exceeded closed ones by more than 50000, so this was not just a change of strikes
Original filing and test, archived verbatim in Chinese
09.24A new long-dated bet: the Nvidia Jan 2028 460 call traded 20388 contracts against 6463 open interest, a bet the stock doubles in just over two years, …confirmed
Settlement confirmed
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, AVGO, TSMconfirmed
Settlement confirmed
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, AVGO, INTC, AMDRight — 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
08.28 Settled (confidence: More likely) 市场买的是 08-26 这一个日期而不是一段波动:定价跳跃整个压在跨过财报那一档上,没有随期限铺开——终审 Test: ①08-28 那一档实际波动 vs 冻结带 207.82–231.66;②08-31 与 09-18 的 IV 在财报前是否追上 08-28(差距收窄到 0.03 以内则读法被削弱)。只引 09:09 盘前冻结那组读数 Result: 部分
08.17The gamma flip has stopped between 200 and 210 for three readings running, which says the market's center of gravity for pricing NVDA has not movedThe test itself was unfit, so no verdict is given and the ca…
Settlement The test itself was unfit, so no verdict is given and the case is refiled. Read literally it settled on 08-24 (flip at 199.09, leaving the band on the downside), but across four days it never left by more than $1.23: -0.91 on 08-24, -1.23 on 08-25, -0.20 on 08-26 and -0.05 on 08-27, and by the 08-28 pre-open it was back at 205.96, up 5.96. Over the same stretch the stock ran from 208.48 to 227.98 while the flip barely moved. For a reading that oscillates about a dollar around the boundary, "leaves the band" is not a decidable test.
Original filing and test, archived verbatim in Chinese
08.17In the same-day-expiry layer, the overwhelming majority of volume has nothing to do with directionAlso: SPY, QQQ, MU, META (13 names in all)Not determinable
Settlement Not determinable. The filing hard-coded its test as "only rows in the daily contract observation log whose source is the quote-screen OCR feed," and that source recorded nothing from 2026-08-18 through the settlement date — a direct check of 08-18 to 08-26 returns zero rows. The input the test required was never produced, so this case physically cannot be settled.
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.