Leaderboard

Yes, they are. The SEC announced the change on April 16, and allowed brokerages 18 months to implement it .This link from Schwab explains the change. In short: "...Under the new rules, traders will no longer be required to maintain a minimum account balance of $25,000 to engage in frequent margin day trading. Instead, eligible margin accounts of more than $2,000 will gain access to intraday margin buying power set by individual brokerages based on current positions and maintenance margin requirements. Currently, under the old rules, four or more day trades in five business days triggers a "pattern day trader" designation and the $25,000 requirement. Under the new framework, the pattern day trader designation will be eliminated, and day trades will no longer be counted...."

A 90% win rate on a naked put — what the probability doesn't tell you One of the things I hoped for in this beta was that testers would find uses of the tools I hadn't spelled out myself. This week one of them did — and it turned into a good illustration of why a high probability of profit, on its own, can be quietly dangerous. The workflow a tester found A beta tester was hunting for naked-put entries using Forecast by Options (the implied-probability tool). The steps: Pick a ticker and an expiry Set the target to Probability, with a lower threshold (he used 85%) Turn backtest validation on Read the implied-probability curve across strikes, and choose a strike sitting at a comfortable distance in the left tail (he anchored around the 15% line) It's a disciplined way to enter: instead of guessing a strike, you let the options market's own implied distribution tell you how far out you are. I liked it enough to want to share it. But it also surfaces the limit of choosing a strike on probability alone — so here's the second half of the workflow I'd add. Probability is not the whole story The implied-probability curve tells you how likely the spot is to reach a strike. It says nothing about how much you lose if it does. For a naked put, that downside is open-ended — the loss can run to many times the premium you collect. A strike that looks safe at "85% it won't get there" can still carry a heavy left tail. So I took a representative trade through Trade Doctor: a short AMD put near the money, ~10 days out, take-profit 30%. Here's what comes back: POP: 90% — looks great Expected P&L: +$6.93 — positive IV Rank 92%, liquidity good, no earnings before expiry — all green And then the line that changes the picture: Loss profile: open-ended risk — average loss ~$33, worst-5% tail ~$74 — roughly 3× the credit collected What that means A 90% probability of profit is sitting on a tail that, when it bites, gives back about three times the premium you took in. You win often and small; you lose rarely and large. That's not automatically a bad trade — plenty of people sell premium in high IV on purpose — but it's a profile you want to see before you size it, not discover afterward. This is the same lesson I keep coming back to: a win rate tells you how often, not how much. On a defined-risk spread the damage is capped. On a naked put it isn't, and the only honest way to judge the trade is to put a number on the tail. That's what the new Loss profile does — it shows the average loss and the worst-5% (CVaR) side by side, so the gap between them tells you how fat the tail is. When they're close, the loss is contained. When the tail is several times the average — as here — the downside is the thing to respect. Two tools, one decision The point isn't that Forecast by Options is wrong and Trade Doctor is right. They answer different questions, and they're meant to be used together: Forecast finds you a strike; Trade Doctor tells you what that strike risks. Probability picks the entry; the loss profile sizes the position. Used in sequence, you get a trade you've actually stress-tested rather than one that merely looked good on a single number. Try it This is all live in the OptionBench beta — free through the summer. If you sell premium, the Loss profile on naked and uncovered positions is the piece I'd most want your eyes on. And as always: tell me where I'm wrong. The best feedback in this beta has come from testers using the tools in ways I didn't anticipate — this post exists because of one of them. Launch waitlist: https://www.optionbench.com

Apologies if I am asking about something super obvious, but how is it possible to get an average return of about 22.7% if the TP is set at 10%? Is it because many days option prices will simply gap up in the morning and you get higher than the TP fill?

FDX is because they split the company to FDXF and stopped options data for FDX (atleast for now).

Maybe this chart will help