To The Moon

Nov 2 – Nov 6 | US Market Watch 1. This Week's Market Overview Tech is shifting from chasing AI growth to testing profitability, and defensive sentiment is clearly rising. Last Friday, the Nasdaq fell 2.86% and the S&P 500 fell 1.82%. GOOGL and INTC were sold off after earnings, showing the market is no longer satisfied with AI revenue growth — it cares more about capex, cash flow, and forward guidance. Options are turning defensive too. QQQ and SPY saw big Put buying, and both are in negative Gamma territory, meaning swings could get bigger if the market falls. This week's three big variables: the US midterm elections, Apple and semiconductor earnings, and Friday's nonfarm payrolls. High oil prices could also add inflation pressure. The short-term focus isn't guessing the bottom — it'

1. Expected Move Pricing The options market is pricing Apple's expected move this week at ±4.74%, a range of about $328–361. Current IV is 31.47%, with an IV percentile of 88.45%, meaning options are relatively expensive before earnings. Key trading levels: $355–361 is major upside resistance. $342 is the short-term bull/bear line. $328–330 is key downside support. If the stock breaks outside the expected range after earnings, the actual move was bigger than options had priced. 2. Gamma Analysis AAPL is at $344, slightly above the Gamma flip point of $342.2. Net GEX is about +$17.9M / 1%, still in positive Gamma territory, which normally helps soften short-term swings, but it's very close to the flip point. On the upside, $350 is max pain, and $355 is the main Call wall. After a break abov

AI Spending Isn't Peaking. Its Growth Is. Yesterday we looked at AMD into its print. Here is the spending wave it rides on. $201.9B. That is what Amazon, Microsoft, Alphabet and Meta spent in cash on capex in one quarter, Q3 2026. The usual question is whether that number has peaked. I think it is the wrong question. Spending and the growth of spending peak at different times, and markets have tended to care about the second one. TWO PEAKS, NOT ONE A boom has a level (dollars spent) and a growth rate (how fast those dollars rise). The growth rate can top out years before the level does. Goldman Sachs (24 Sep) noted that consensus has the big US cloud spenders at about $800B of capex in 2026 and about $1.1T in 2027, with growth roughly halving each year. UBS lifted its own forecasts in late

NeoClouds Biz Model. Neoclouds like NBIS and CRWV buys AI chips and rents out to hyperscalers like OpenAI and Anthropic. Their claimed forward revenues seems positive.  But I see problems with this biz model. Firstly, they borrow huge amount of cash to buy the chips.  Secondly, cost of capital is rising.  Thirdly, the chips they are bought are current or even past models. And technology is fast evolving with faster and better chips being developed every day.  Fourthly, the forward revenue, or order books, are mostly not guaranteed. The customers may not go ahead with the purchases.  This Is a bit like buying a piece of land, engaging a contractor to build a shopping centre, based on the promise that the entertainment operator will come and open a complex at your pr

An environmental screen would matter to me, but only after I understand what it actually changes in the portfolio. The interesting part of this ETF is not simply the “low carbon” label. It cuts the heavy concentration in Singapore banks and introduces greater exposure to REITs, industrials, technology and companies such as Sea and Trip.com. That diversification comes with a trade-off. The STI’s huge bank exposure has been a major advantage recently, which helps explain why the Low Carbon ETF has lagged badly in 2026 YTD despite performing well in earlier years. I would therefore compare long-term risk-adjusted returns, sector concentration and the 0.53% TER before choosing it over a cheaper STI ETF. A lower carbon intensity is a positive feature, but I would not accept materially weaker d

$iShares Bitcoin Trust(IBIT)$   Prices to the US close on Fri 30 Oct 2026, the latest available. Over the last three months, Bitcoin rose 21.6%. Over the same three months, an equal-weight basket of nine AI-pivoting miners (IREN, Cipher, TeraWulf, Core Scientific, Hut 8, MARA, CleanSpark, Bitdeer, Applied Digital) fell 46.2%. If these were still Bitcoin stocks, that gap should not exist. So what are they now? Our answer, from the filings and from our own return data: they trade as AI-credit stocks. CoreWeave, not Bitcoin, sets their daily direction. 1) What the miners actually signed The seven miners we could check in filings have about 3.9 GW of AI and HPC capacity under contract. The chart lists each lease with its customer, value and

Coinbase’s biggest opportunity may no longer be simply riding Bitcoin’s next rally. Despite weaker industry trading activity, Q3 Adjusted EBITDA rose 60% QoQ to $333 million, while Subscription and Services contributed 49% of net revenue. Its crypto trading market share also climbed to 10.7%, marking four consecutive quarters of gains. More importantly, prediction markets have surpassed $200 million in annualized revenue. Stablecoins and derivatives could make Coinbase less dependent on retail trading cycles. However, investors should not confuse accounting profits with sustainable growth. Q3's $719 million net income included substantial crypto investment gains. My view: COIN deserves a bullish long-term outlook, but I would avoid chasing before recurring earnings confirm the recovery. T

$Alibaba(BABA)$  is attracting renewed attention after reports that Apple has selected Alibaba’s Qwen AI models to support Apple Intelligence features in China. Citi analysts view the partnership as a meaningful endorsement of Alibaba’s AI technology, with the potential to generate additional demand for Alibaba Cloud. Alibaba shares gained 3.23% in US trading, while its Hong Kong-listed shares also moved higher. I think this development is worth watching because the opportunity could extend well beyond a short-term share-price reaction. Alibaba has traditionally been associated with e-commerce, but its longer-term investment story is increasingly connected to cloud computing and artificial intelligence. The Apple partnership could help a

Intel Fell 28.58% in One Day: A Buying Opportunity or a Valuation Reset? Why the Crash Didn't Make Intel's Puts Worth Selling Written Monday 2 Nov, SGT, using Friday's US close. What happened Intel closed Friday at $65.76, down 28.58% from Thursday's $92.07. According to CNBC, it was the stock's worst day since 1974. The only worse session in more than five decades was a 29.9% drop on July 5, 1974. Volume hit 455.6 million shares, more than four times the 107.7 million average. Market value is now about $347.6 billion. The odd part is that the quarter itself was good: - Revenue: $16.5 billion, up 21% year over year - Adjusted EPS: $0.52, against about $0.41 expected - Non-GAAP gross margin: 44.1%, up 4.1 points The market sold the outlook, not the quarter. The guidance that broke it For Q4

$Intel(INTC)$ suffered a brutal 28.58% decline on Friday, closing at $65.76. The reported $11 billion paper loss on the US government’s investment adds another layer of concern. For investors, this raises a bigger question: has the market overreacted, or is Intel facing a more fundamental problem that government support cannot solve? I think this is a stock worth watching, but I would be careful about calling it a bargain simply because the share price has fallen sharply. 1. Government support has limits The US government’s investment in Intel reflects the strategic importance of domestic semiconductor manufacturing. Reducing reliance on overseas chip production is a long-term national priority. However, government backing does not guarantee

$INTC 20260717 122.0 PUT$ $INTC 20260717 122.0 PUT$ if only I held those puts or rolled till date...

Alphabet paid a US$5.2 billion EU fine, and it built up US$3.2 billion of chip systems it will sell to customers later. Even after adding both back, free cash flow is still slightly negative. Over the last 12 months it was US$19.7 billion, against US$73.3 billion for 2025.,the spending is not slowing. Alphabet expects US$195 billion to US$205 billion of capex this year, and says 2027 will “increase significantly” from there. That spending comes back as a cost later. About 65% of it went into servers and networking, which Alphabet writes off over six years. Depreciation was US$8.4 billion this quarter, up from US$5.6 billion a year ago. The chief financial officer said it will “continue to weigh on the P&L”. In plain words, today’s capex is tomorrow’s expense, and most of it has not sta