Get started
NVIDIA Corporation Units Thailand Depositery Receipts Repr 0.01 ShNVIDIA Corporation Units Thailand Depositery Receipts Repr 0.01 ShNVIDIA Corporation Units Thailand Depositery Receipts Repr 0.01 Sh

NVIDIA Corporation Units Thailand Depositery Receipts Repr 0.01 Sh

No trades
See on Supercharts
OverviewFinancialsNewsIdeasDiscussionsBonds

NVDA06 trade ideas

NVDA SELLIf you have not SELL NVDA, than be prepare to SELL NVDA riding it back down to 93.00 to 77.00 as Profit Targets, Stop Loss will be determine later! If anyone likes long mumbo jumbo garbage analysis, than this is NOT for you. Also, if you are afraid of risk, failure, and want only a 100% sure thing, than run as fast as you can from the market, because the market is NOT a sure thing, so it is definitely NOT for you. WARNING: This is just opinions of the market and its only for journaling purpose. This information and any publication here are NOT meant to be, and do NOT constitute, financial, investment, trading, or other types of advice or recommendations. Trading any market instrument is a RISKY business, so do your own due diligence, and trade at your own risk. You can loose all of your money and much more.
NASDAQ:NVDAShort
by pstock123
NVIDIA NVIDIA Corporation is a leading American technology company headquartered in Santa Clara, California, renowned for designing and manufacturing graphics processing units (GPUs) that power gaming, professional visualization, and artificial intelligence (AI) applications. Founded in 1993, NVIDIA revolutionized the graphics industry with its GeForce series of consumer GPUs and expanded into AI computing, becoming a key supplier of AI chips globally. Key Aspects of NVIDIA in 2025: Dominates the discrete GPU market with approximately 92% market share. Powers more than 75% of the world’s fastest supercomputers, particularly in AI and machine learning workloads. Achieved a historic market capitalization exceeding $4 trillion in mid-2025. Continues to release advanced AI models and platforms, leveraging its GPU technology for sectors like autonomous vehicles, data centers, and cloud computing. Has a strategic partnership with Intel to jointly develop AI infrastructure and integrated CPU-GPU platforms. Strong innovation focus on AI edge computing, high-performance computing (HPC), and neural network acceleration. NVIDIA remains a central force in the global semiconductor ecosystem, driving advancements in AI, gaming, and professional graphics. #AI #STOCKS #NVIDIA
NASDAQ:NVDALong
by Shavyfxhub
Nvidia - The rally is still not over!🔌Nvidia ( NASDAQ:NVDA ) still heads much higher: 🔎Analysis summary: For the past decade, Nvidia has perfectly been respecting a major bullish rising channel formation. Currently, Nvidia is still far away from the upper red resistance trendline, which indicates another potential move higher. Just understand that the trend is your closest friend. 📝Levels to watch: $200 SwingTraderPhil SwingTrading.Simplified. | Investing.Simplified. | #LONGTERMVISION
NASDAQ:NVDALong
by SwingTraderPhilTV
23
NVDA at a Crossroads: Battle Between TrendlinesNVIDIA is currently consolidating in a tight range, locked between an ascending green trendline of support and a descending red resistance trendline. This setup signals that a breakout is near, with the next directional move likely to bring strong momentum. 🔍 Technical Analysis Current Price: 176.74 Structure: Triangle squeeze between rising support and falling resistance. The ascending trendline from June continues to provide strong bullish structure, but the red downtrend capping recent highs must be broken to regain upside momentum. 🛡️ Support Zones (with Stop-Loss): 🟢 170.85 | SL: 163.74 – 1H Support (Medium Risk) 🟢 144.78 | SL: 141.34 – 4H Support (Low Risk, strong base) 🔼 Resistance Levels: 🟥 Red downtrend line near 180 – Breakout above confirms renewed bullish impulse. 🧭 Outlook Bullish Case: Hold above 170.85 and break the red downtrend → momentum push toward 185–190. Bearish Case: Failure to hold 170.85 could trigger a deeper pullback into 163 or even 145. Bias: Neutral to bullish as long as price stays above the green trendline. 🌍 Fundamental Insight While NVDA remains a market leader in AI and GPUs, recent earnings have highlighted slowing revenue growth compared to prior explosive quarters. This has cooled investor enthusiasm, making technical levels even more important for short-term direction. ✅ Conclusion NVDA is at a decision point: stuck between trendlines, awaiting a breakout. Bulls must defend 170.85 while bears eye resistance around 180. A resolution here could set the tone for the coming weeks. ⚠️ Disclaimer This analysis is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or trading advice.
NASDAQ:NVDA
by husseindergham
2
NVDA Trying to Find a Floor – Sept 18 Trade Levels to Watch Here’s my take on Nvidia heading into Wednesday’s session, based on the 1-hour chart and current GEX data. 1️⃣ Price Action & Market Structure * Trend check: NVDA is still in a short-term downtrend after last week’s selloff, but buyers stepped in near $168–170, which lines up with prior volume support. * Key level: $172.5 is a near-term pivot. Price is testing it now; a sustained push above could start a relief bounce toward $175–177. * Resistance overhead: The descending trendline around $174.8–175 is the first real test for bulls. Above that, $178.5 and $182.5 are next supply zones. 2️⃣ GEX (Options Flow) Read * Call/put balance: Calls only about 25% of flow—puts still dominate, showing cautious sentiment. * Put walls: Big put interest at $170 and $165 creates a “magnet” if $172.5 fails. * Call side: Not much until $177.5 and $182.5, where gamma clusters could help a squeeze if buyers surprise. 3️⃣ Trading Thoughts * Conservative long scalp: If NVDA closes an hourly candle above $172.5–174, a pop toward $177–178.5 is on the table. Tight stop under $170. * Short setup: If price rejects $172.5 and slips back below $170, expect a quick test of $167.5, maybe $165 on momentum. 4️⃣ Option Angle * Directional play: Debit spreads (e.g., $175/$180 calls) are fine for a bounce if price confirms over $174. * Income angle: Credit spreads selling $165 puts or $180 calls fit a range-bound view if you expect more chop. 5️⃣ My View Nvidia is oversold enough to bounce, but the overall tape is still heavy. I’ll wait for an hourly close over $174 to trust the long side. Otherwise, any fade below $170 keeps the short trend alive. Disclaimer: This analysis is for educational discussion only and does not constitute financial advice. Always do your own research and manage risk before trading.
NASDAQ:NVDA
by BullBearInsights
Global Green Energy Trading Trends1. What we mean by “green energy trading” “Green energy trading” spans several related but distinct markets: Physical electricity markets where renewable generation competes in wholesale power markets. Corporate offtake markets / Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) — long-term contracts linking buyers (often corporates) and renewable project sellers. Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) / Guarantees of Origin (GOs) — unbundled instruments that represent the environmental attribute of 1 MWh of renewable generation. Carbon markets — both compliance (cap-and-trade) and voluntary carbon markets (VCM) for offsets/removals. Trade in low-carbon fuels and commodities — early and fast-growing markets for green hydrogen, ammonia, and derivatives intended for shipping, industry, and storage. Cross-border electricity and capacity trades, enabled by interconnectors and regional power pools. Each sub-market has its own liquidity dynamics, price drivers, participants and integrity issues. Treating them as a connected ecosystem — where PPAs, REC supply, carbon pricing and hydrogen exports all interact — is essential to understanding modern green energy trading. 2. Market scale & capital flows: momentum, but uneven progress Investment into clean energy technologies remains large and growing worldwide. Multiple 2025 trackers show record or near-record levels of investment in renewables and associated infrastructure, even while investment patterns differ by region. BloombergNEF and other trackers documented strong capital flows into solar, wind and storage in recent reporting, while public reports by the IEA and REN21 confirm renewables’ rising share of global generation. Still, important caveats exist: while installed capacity is growing fast, investment is increasingly focused on solar PV plus associated storage; grid and transmission investment lags; and some regions face investor retrenchment owing to policy or market risk. That re-risking shows up in slower PPA volumes or higher financing spreads in specific jurisdictions — the headline number (global investment) masks significant regional divergence. 3. Electricity trading and PPAs: corporates and utilities reshape demand Corporate demand for long-term PPAs has been a major growth engine for green trading. Large companies continue to sign deals to meet procurement and net-zero goals, supporting project finance. In 2024 corporates signed tens of gigawatts of PPAs globally, and while volumes fluctuate quarter-to-quarter, 2024–2025 figures still show hundreds of terawatt-hours of contracted renewable energy across major markets. The PPA market has also diversified — shorter tenors, virtual PPAs (financial-only), sleeved structures, and hybrid PPA + storage deals are now routine. LevelTen and market reports highlight these shifts in price discovery and contract structure. Market implications: PPAs reduce merchant risk for developers, unlocking capital for new projects. Financial PPAs (VPPA) allow companies in non-renewable grids to buy green attributes without physical delivery. The combination of PPAs and REC purchases makes an increasingly liquid “corporate demand stack” that supports project economics, particularly in markets with weak or absent compliance instruments. 4. REC, GO and attribute markets: unbundling clean electrons REC markets (called GOs in Europe, I-RECs in some markets) are maturing and expanding. Demand drivers include corporate procurement, renewable portfolio standards, and voluntary claims verification. The size of REC markets has ballooned where corporate offtake meets supportive policy; where policy is weak, VPPAs coupled with RECs are common. Key dynamics: Price dispersion — REC prices vary enormously across geographies depending on policy support and renewable penetration. Unbundling vs. bundled — growing debate over whether simply buying RECs (without matching delivery) is sufficient for claims of “using renewable energy.” Many corporates now aim for time-matched and location-matched procurement to reduce “additionality” questions. Market innovation — “time-tagged” or “hourly” certificates and blockchain pilots for traceability are becoming more common. This market still faces integrity questions: standardization of vintage, additionality, double-counting avoidance, and the interplay with compliance regimes require ongoing governance. 5. Carbon markets: compliance growth and voluntary market reform Carbon pricing and trading remain central to the economics of green energy. The World Bank’s 2025 carbon pricing report shows that carbon pricing covers an increasing share of emissions and is mobilizing fiscal resources — but coverage and price levels are highly uneven. Two parallel trends matter for green trading: Expansion and strengthening of compliance markets. More jurisdictions are adopting or tightening ETS (emissions trading systems) and carbon taxes, increasing demand for high-quality credits and driving corporate hedging strategies. Reform of voluntary carbon markets (VCM). After volatility and integrity scandals, the VCM is undergoing standardization — improved registries, stricter methodologies, and a market tilt toward removals and high-integrity nature-based or engineered solutions. Ecosystem Marketplace’s 2025 SOVCM documents this transition. Impacts: Carbon prices (and the existence of credible compliance markets) materially affect the levelized cost calculus for low-carbon fuels (e.g., hydrogen) and for investments in add-on abatement technologies. The VCM’s reform will shape corporate net-zero strategies — companies increasingly seek verifiable removals rather than cheap, low-integrity offsets. 6. Green hydrogen & traded molecules: the next frontier Green hydrogen (electrolytic H₂ powered by renewables) and its derivatives (ammonia, e-methanol) are moving from pilots to nascent global trade. IRENA and other analysts highlight strong potential for cross-border hydrogen trade, with resource-rich, low-cost renewable regions set to become exporters and industrial consumers (EU, Japan, Korea) as importers. IRENA’s 2025 analysis maps techno-economic potential for hydrogen and derived commodities, showing realistic export/import corridors emerging by 2030–2050. Why hydrogen trade matters for trading dynamics: Hydrogen opens a new commodities market with different logistics (electrolyzers, compression, shipping of ammonia or LOHCs) and new price formation mechanisms tied to electricity costs, electrolyzer capex, and shipping. Early trade will be bilateral and project-based (offtake contracts, tolling arrangements), transitioning to more liquid spot/forward markets as infrastructure and certification (low-carbon hydrogen certificates) develop. Countries with cheap renewables + coastal infrastructure (Australia, parts of the Middle East, North Africa, Chile) are positioning to be exporters; heavy industrial demand centers (EU, Japan, Korea) are positioning to be importers. Risks: cost trajectories for electrolyzers, the timeline of dedicated shipping/port infrastructure, and the need for an international certification framework to avoid greenwashing. 7. Cross-border electricity trading and grid issues As renewable shares rise, regional interconnections become more valuable: geographic smoothing of supply, optimized dispatch across time zones, and better utilization of variable renewables. Projects to expand interconnectors (Europe, Africa-Europe links, emerging interregional links in Asia) are gaining priority, but progress is constrained by permitting, financing and political coordination. Market design consequences: Larger, interconnected markets can reduce curtailment and lower system costs, but they also require harmonized market rules, congestion management and mechanisms to allocate transmission costs. High penetration of renewables increases the importance of ancillary service markets (frequency, inertia, fast reserves) and the monetization of storage services through trading platforms. 8. Technology & digitalization shaping trade Trading infrastructure, data and software are changing how green energy trades are executed: Hourly / granular attribute certificates. Time-matched RECs and hourly settlement help link generation and consumption more credibly. Trading platforms and marketplaces. Platforms for PPAs, RECs, and carbon credits (including tokenized assets and marketplace aggregators) improve liquidity and price discovery. Advanced forecasting and AI. Better wind/solar forecasts reduce short-term imbalance costs and improve the value of battery-coupled projects; AI also optimizes scheduling and trading strategies for aggregated distributed energy resources (DERs). Blockchain / registries. Pilots for immutable registries aim to reduce double counting and improve provenance — particularly important in voluntary markets and hydrogen certification. These innovations lower transaction costs and allow new market entrants (aggregators, VPP operators) to participate, broadening liquidity. 9. Policy, geopolitics and industrial policy: winners and losers Green trading does not happen in a vacuum: geopolitics and industrial policy decisions shape the supply chains and competitive advantages. Industrial policy matters. Countries that invest in electrolyzer manufacturing, battery supply chains, and port/infrastructure for hydrogen can capture export value chains. IRENA and other analysts point to likely exporters and importers through 2050. Trade frictions and ‘green industrial policy’. Governments are using tax credits, domestic content rules, and subsidies (e.g., IRA in the U.S., similar programs in the EU and Asia) to lock in upstream manufacturing — this can distort trade flows and prompt retaliatory measures. Energy security arguments. The energy transition coexists with strategic concerns — countries are wary of dependence on single suppliers for critical inputs (batteries, rare earths, hydrogen), and that shapes trade and contracting patterns. Geopolitical disruptions (e.g., shifts in trade alliances, sanctions) can quickly change routing and price dynamics for green commodities. 10. Corporate behaviour & financial innovation Corporates are major demand drivers through PPAs, on-site generation, and REC purchases; financial markets are responding with new instruments: Green bonds and sustainability-linked financing have become standard to fund projects. Hedging structures: corporate hedges, merchant storage arbitrage, and hybrid contracts (capacity + energy + attribute) are being packaged to manage revenue volatility. Insurance & de-risking products are maturing to address construction and merchant risk for green projects — critical to mobilize institutional capital. Investor due diligence has also matured: financial crates now scrutinize grid access, congestion risk, and REC/offset integrity before underwriting deals.
NASDAQ:NVDAEducation
by GlobalWolfStreet
Origins and Causes of the US–China Trade WarIntroduction The trade war between the United States and China has become one of the most defining economic conflicts of the 21st century. It is not merely about tariffs or trade imbalances but represents a broader clash of economic models, political systems, and global ambitions. To truly understand why this trade war began, one must look beyond the headlines and consider the deep historical, economic, and geopolitical contexts that shaped U.S.–China relations over the past five decades. The U.S.–China trade war formally erupted in 2018 under President Donald Trump’s administration, but its roots stretch back much further—to China’s economic reforms in the late 1970s, the U.S. decision to integrate China into the global trading system, and the growing perception in Washington that Beijing’s rise posed both economic and strategic challenges. The conflict was therefore the culmination of decades of tensions regarding trade deficits, intellectual property theft, industrial subsidies, and the role of state power in shaping markets. This essay explores the origins and causes of the U.S.–China trade war in detail, examining historical background, economic dynamics, political factors, and the deeper strategic rivalry that underpins the confrontation. 1. Historical Context of U.S.–China Trade Relations 1.1 Early Isolation and Opening Up For much of the 20th century, China was economically isolated. Following the Communist Revolution in 1949, China adopted a centrally planned economic system with little interaction with global markets. The U.S. had minimal trade with China, especially during the Cold War, when the two countries were ideological and geopolitical rivals. Everything began to change under Deng Xiaoping’s economic reforms in 1978. China began opening up to foreign trade and investment, allowing special economic zones and market-driven policies. American companies saw enormous opportunities in China’s cheap labor and expanding consumer base. 1.2 Rapprochement and Normalization The normalization of diplomatic relations in 1979 under President Jimmy Carter paved the way for commercial ties. Over the 1980s and 1990s, trade grew rapidly, and the U.S. increasingly viewed China as both a manufacturing hub and a market for exports. 1.3 WTO Accession and Its Consequences A crucial turning point came in 2001, when China joined the World Trade Organization (WTO). The United States supported China’s accession, believing it would liberalize China’s economy, reduce state intervention, and bring Beijing closer to Western norms of free markets. Instead, China used WTO membership to expand its export-led growth strategy. Its manufacturing capacity boomed, and U.S. companies moved large parts of their supply chains to China. While this benefited U.S. corporations and consumers with cheap goods, it also contributed to job losses in American manufacturing, fueling political resentment. 2. Economic Causes 2.1 U.S. Trade Deficit with China One of the most visible triggers of the trade war was the massive trade imbalance. By the mid-2010s, the U.S. trade deficit with China exceeded $375 billion annually. Washington saw this as evidence of unfair practices, while Beijing argued it was the natural result of global value chains where final assembly took place in China. 2.2 Intellectual Property Theft and Technology Transfer American firms long complained about forced technology transfer, intellectual property (IP) theft, and restrictions on market access. U.S. companies operating in China often had to form joint ventures with local firms, effectively handing over proprietary technology. Additionally, cyber espionage campaigns allegedly backed by the Chinese state targeted American corporations to steal industrial and military secrets. 2.3 Industrial Policy and State Subsidies China’s economic model is built on significant state involvement in industry. Programs like “Made in China 2025”, launched in 2015, aimed to establish dominance in high-tech sectors such as semiconductors, robotics, and artificial intelligence. The U.S. saw these policies as unfair because Chinese firms received state subsidies, cheap loans, and protection from competition, giving them an edge over foreign rivals. 2.4 Currency Manipulation Accusations For years, U.S. policymakers accused China of artificially undervaluing its currency (the yuan) to make exports cheaper and imports more expensive, thereby boosting its trade surplus. While this practice diminished after 2010, the perception remained influential in Washington’s decision-making. 3. Political and Strategic Causes 3.1 U.S. Domestic Politics and Populism By the 2010s, public opinion in the U.S. had shifted. The loss of manufacturing jobs was often attributed to globalization and specifically to trade with China. Politicians began campaigning on promises to bring jobs back and stand up to Beijing. Donald Trump, elected in 2016, tapped into this sentiment with his “America First” agenda. 3.2 Rising Chinese Ambitions China’s rapid economic rise also translated into greater global influence. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), military modernization, and technological leadership ambitions challenged U.S. dominance. Washington grew concerned that China was not just a trading partner but a strategic competitor seeking to reshape global power structures. 3.3 Clash of Economic Models At the core of the conflict lies a fundamental clash of economic philosophies. The U.S. system emphasizes free markets, private enterprise, and limited government intervention, while China relies heavily on state capitalism and party-driven industrial policy. This structural difference fueled mistrust and accusations of unfair competition. 3.4 National Security Concerns Trade and technology are increasingly intertwined with national security. The U.S. worried that dependence on Chinese supply chains—particularly in areas like telecommunications (Huawei, 5G), semiconductors, and rare earth minerals—posed security risks. Restrictions on Chinese technology firms were thus framed not only as trade issues but also as matters of national defense. 4. Escalation into a Trade War 4.1 Trump’s Tariff Strategy In 2018, President Trump imposed tariffs on Chinese imports worth billions of dollars, citing Section 301 of the U.S. Trade Act of 1974. China retaliated with its own tariffs on U.S. goods, particularly targeting politically sensitive industries like agriculture. 4.2 Negotiations and Breakdown Although several rounds of negotiations were held, fundamental differences remained unresolved. The U.S. demanded structural reforms in China’s economy, while Beijing refused to abandon state-led policies it considered essential for development. 4.3 Global Economic Fallout The trade war created uncertainty in global markets, disrupted supply chains, and led to slower economic growth worldwide. Multinational corporations had to rethink sourcing strategies, with some shifting production to countries like Vietnam and Mexico. 5. Deeper Structural Causes 5.1 Thucydides Trap and Power Transition Theory Some scholars frame the trade war as part of the “Thucydides Trap”—the idea that when a rising power (China) threatens to displace an established power (the U.S.), conflict becomes likely. From this perspective, the trade war is just one manifestation of a broader rivalry for global supremacy. 5.2 Technological Dominance as the New Battleground The real competition is not about traditional manufacturing but about who leads in emerging technologies—AI, 5G, quantum computing, and biotech. The U.S. fears losing its edge to China, which invests heavily in these areas with state backing. 5.3 Globalization Backlash The trade war also reflects a broader backlash against globalization. In the U.S., many communities felt left behind by outsourcing and global supply chains. The trade conflict thus became a way to politically channel domestic frustrations. 6. Conclusion The U.S.–China trade war did not arise overnight. It was the product of decades of economic integration combined with unresolved tensions over trade imbalances, intellectual property, state subsidies, and market access. At its core, the conflict represents not just a dispute over tariffs but a struggle between two economic systems and visions of world order. The United States seeks to preserve its global dominance and protect its industries, while China aims to secure its rise as a technological and geopolitical power. The trade war is therefore less about soybeans and steel and more about the future of global leadership. Whether the two countries can find a sustainable coexistence will shape not only their bilateral relationship but also the trajectory of the world economy in the decades ahead.
NASDAQ:NVDAEducation
by GlobalWolfStreet
NVDA: A Stoic Approach to a Losing Trade (The Second Breath)As we just discussed, a loss is not a failure; it's information. This trade on NVDA is a perfect, real-time application of that Stoic and Douglas-inspired philosophy. The first attempt was stopped out for a small "paper cut" loss. The Stoics teach us to focus only on what we can control. We couldn't control the price hitting our first stop, but we can absolutely control our reaction. Our reaction is not one of frustration, but of calm acceptance. We take the information the market gave us, remain balanced, and execute the next step of our plan. The New Trade Plan This second attempt is an action taken with more wisdom and an even better potential reward. Style: Long / Re-Entry Entry: Limit Order at $167.75 Stop Loss: A tight, strategically placed stop at $162.25 (3.28% risk) Target: $192.50 Risk/Reward Ratio: Approximately 1 : 4.5 The #limitlessTrader's Mindset The first trade was simply an exhale. This second trade is the next breath, taken with more clarity and from a place of balance. This is the process. Just shine. Disclaimer: This is not financial advice. It is for educational and informational purposes only. Please conduct your own research and manage your risk accordingly.
NASDAQ:NVDALong
by TheTradingDoct0r
Nvidia plummets ~3% afterhours! Buy the dip or sell the rally?Nvidia delivered another strong quarter, beating expectations on both revenue and EPS. However, shares dropped after hours to around $175, as data centre revenue narrowly missed forecasts and China sales remained absent due to regulatory uncertainty. Technically, if NVDA breaks below $175, bears may target the $170 double bottom support in a dead-cat-bounce fashion, with a risk of further downside if that level fails. However, if the stock holds above $179 and reclaims $185, bulls could see a rally toward $193 and potentially $220 in the medium term, which could still materialise after a short-term decline toward $170. This content is not directed to residents of the EU or UK. Any opinions, news, research, analyses, prices or other information contained on this website is provided as general market commentary and does not constitute investment advice. ThinkMarkets will not accept liability for any loss or damage including, without limitation, to any loss of profit which may arise directly or indirectly from use of or reliance on such information.
NASDAQ:NVDAShort
by ThinkMarkets
2
NVDA: Testing Key Support After Sharp Drop –Swing & Scalp Sep 171-Hour Chart Technical View Nvidia’s 1-hour chart shows clear short-term weakness. After failing near $182.5, price has been trending down and now hovers around $175.15. MACD remains deep in negative territory and Stoch RSI is oversold, hinting at potential for a short-term bounce but no confirmed reversal yet. * Immediate Support: $172.5 (high-volume node and HVL 09/19) * Secondary Support: $170 and $166.5 * Resistance: $177.7 and $182.5 are key overhead levels for any rebound Price is trading under both 9 and 21 EMA, confirming a short-term bearish structure until a clean reclaim above $177.7. GEX & Options Flow Options positioning highlights mixed sentiment with cautious call interest: * Call Walls: $177.5 (2nd call wall), $182.5 (highest positive NET GEX / gamma resistance), and $185. * Put Walls: $170 and $165 (significant downside hedges). * GEX Bias: Around 23.5% calls with IVR at 5.7 (IVx ~40.8). This relatively low IVR shows option premiums are moderate despite the pullback. Dealers may support the $172.5 area, but below that, gamma exposure flips bearish and accelerates downside risk. Trade Thoughts & Suggestions * Swing Idea: Aggressive buyers can nibble near $172.5 with a tight stop below $170, aiming for a relief bounce to $177.7–$182.5. * Scalp Idea: Short bounces into $177.7 resistance if momentum stays weak, or scalp quick long entries off a confirmed double-bottom near $172.5. * Bearish Scenario: A decisive break under $170 could accelerate selling toward $166.5. Quick Take NVDA is in a corrective phase. For Sept 17, all eyes are on $172.5. Holding that level can spark an oversold bounce; losing it could open the door to deeper downside. Disclaimer: This analysis is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. Always do your own research and manage risk before trading.
NASDAQ:NVDA
by BullBearInsights
NVIDIA Analysis: Short-Term Gains & Long-Term PotentialShort-Term Analysis (1-2 weeks): Price Action: The current price is near the lower boundary of the descending channel, with the support level around $174.80. This could act as a good entry point for a potential rebound. Technical Insights: The chart shows a descending channel, indicating that if the price reaches the lower boundary, there's a likelihood of a short-term reversal. Price Target: In the short term, the first target would be around $180, which is near the upper resistance of the channel. If broken, a further move toward $185 could be possible. Stop Loss: If the support at $174.80 breaks, the stop loss could be set at $170. Long-Term Analysis (1-3 months): Price Action: If the price manages to break out of the descending channel, a continued bullish trend would likely push the price toward $190. This is a strong resistance level. Technical Insights: A breakout from the descending channel would indicate a continuation of the bullish trend. In that case, the price might reach higher levels above $190. Price Target: In the long run, if the price breaks above the channel, the next target could be $200. Stop Loss: In case the price drops below $170 in the long term, the bearish trend would likely continue, with a stop loss set at $160. Summary: Short-Term: Support at $174.80, with a price target of $180 and a stop loss at $170. Long-Term: Bullish target at $190-$200, with a stop loss at $160. Always consider fundamental news that could significantly impact price movements.
NASDAQ:NVDALong
by isahebdadi
What Is Beta in Stocks and How May It BeUsed?What Does Beta Mean in Stocks, and How May It Be Used in Risk Management? Beta is a key measure of how a stock moves relative to the market, helping traders assess risk exposure and price volatility. Understanding this indicator can help traders analyse potential price swings and portfolio stability. This article explores how beta works, its implications, and how it may be used in risk analysis. What Is Beta in Stocks and How Does It Affect Risk? Beta is a statistical measure that quantifies how a stock’s price fluctuates relative to the broader market. It helps traders analyse systematic risk—the kind that affects most stocks at the same time, such as economic downturns or interest rate changes. The number itself comes from regression analysis, which compares a stock’s potential returns to a benchmark index like the FTSE 100 or S&P 500. A beta of 1.0 indicates that a share generally tracks the movements of its benchmark index. If the index gains 5%, a stock with a value of 1.0 is likely to rise by about the same amount. A beta above 1 signals greater volatility—company shares with a beta of 1.8 may rise 9% when the market gains 5%, but they also tend to fall more sharply during downturns. A value below 1 suggests lower volatility, with the asset moving less than the broader index. Interpreting Beta Values Now, we will examine beta values in detail. High Beta Stocks (>1.0) These stocks react strongly to market changes. High beta is common in technology, consumer discretionary, and financials, where investor sentiment drives price movements. While they offer the potential for higher returns, they also come with increased price swings. Low Beta Stocks (<1.0 but >0) Lower beta stocks experience smaller movements compared to an index. A value of 0.6, for example, suggests it might rise 3% if the market gains 5%. Sectors like utilities, healthcare, and consumer staples often have these types of stocks, as demand for their products tends to remain stable, except in situations such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Negative Beta Stocks (<0) Some assets, such as gold mining company shares, have negative beta values, meaning they move in the opposite direction of the broader market. These assets can act as a hedge when markets decline, though a negative value is relatively rare. While the beta of a stock provides insights into its volatility, it doesn’t account for company-specific risks or broader economic shifts. Investors often combine this form of analysis with fundamental and technical factors to build a more complete view of exposure. How Traders Use Beta in Measuring Risk Rather than examining price movements in isolation, traders use beta to evaluate how a stock reacts to broader trends. This helps them decide whether it aligns with their risk tolerance and market outlook. Analysing Systematic Risk Since beta measures sensitivity to the market, it’s useful for assessing systematic risk—the kind of risk that can’t be eliminated through diversification. A stock with a high beta will likely experience sharp swings during broader turbulence, making it appealing for those looking to capitalise on potential momentum but at the cost of greater volatility. In contrast, low-beta shares may hold up better in downturns but won’t rally as aggressively in bull markets. Beta in Portfolio Construction Investors often consider this metric when balancing a portfolio’s overall risk level. A portfolio heavily weighted in high-beta company shares can be more volatile, while one with low-beta stocks may offer less volatile potential returns. Some investors focus on diversified beta investing, combining high- and low-beta assets to adjust their exposure depending on overall conditions. The Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) Beta is also a key component of the Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM), which estimates a stock’s expected return based on its risk level. CAPM considers the relationship between beta and market returns, helping to compare potential opportunities. If the asset is more volatile than an index but offers lower-than-expected rewards, it may not justify the added volatility. The Limitations of Beta Beta is a useful tool for assessing how a stock moves relative to an index, but it has shortcomings. Since it’s based on historical price data, it doesn’t always reflect how the asset will behave in the future. It’s important to be aware of its limitations when using it for risk assessment. 1. It Changes Over Time Beta in a stock is not a fixed number. Company risk profiles can shift due to short-term developments, industry changes, or economic cycles, and impact a stock’s beta, meaning a stock with a value of 1.5 today might move closer to 1.0 over time as conditions evolve. 2. It Doesn’t Account for Company-Specific Risk Beta measures systematic risk, meaning it doesn’t factor in aspects specific to a company, such as management changes, earnings surprises, or regulatory issues. Two stocks can have the same beta but react very differently to news. 3. High Beta Doesn’t Always Mean Greater Potential Returns A stock with a beta of 2.0 might move twice as much as the market, but that doesn’t mean it will generate higher potential returns. If the asset consistently underperforms, its added volatility becomes a liability rather than an advantage. 4. Different Market Conditions Affect Reliability Beta tends to be more stable in normal market conditions but can break down during extreme events, such as financial crises or sudden liquidity shocks. In times of panic, correlations between assets often increase, making the metric less useful for risk analysis. Practical Examples of Beta in Action Looking at beta in real-world scenarios helps illustrate how different stocks react. Two well-known examples are NVIDIA (NVDA) and Johnson & Johnson (JNJ), which have very different values. NVIDIA (NVDA) – 1.76 According to Yahoo Finance, NVIDIA has a 5-year monthly beta of 1.76. This means its price is about 76% more volatile than the S&P 500. If the index gains 10%, NVIDIA’s stock could rise around 17.6%. However, in a downturn, it could fall by a similar magnitude. The tech sector is highly sensitive to market sentiment, innovation cycles, and economic conditions, making high-beta assets like NVIDIA riskier but also capable of higher potential returns. Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) – 0.46 Johnson & Johnson has a 5-year monthly beta of 0.46 (source: Yahoo Finance), meaning it moves about 54% less than the market. If the index rises or falls 10%, JNJ stock might move by 4.6%. The lower value reflects the so-called stability of the healthcare industry, where consistent demand for products like medical devices and pharmaceuticals tends to lead to more resilient stock performance. Key Takeaways Those willing to take on more risk for higher potential returns often favour high-beta stocks like NVIDIA, while those seeking less volatility may prefer low-beta companies such as Johnson & Johnson. However, the measure ignores company-specific risks or specific short-term outperformance factors (e.g. positive earnings or product releases), and it is typically calculated over a long timeframe—5 years in this instance. The Bottom Line Understanding the beta definition and how it applies may help traders and investors assess a stock’s volatility. Whether they are focused on high-beta growth stocks or lower-volatility options, this metric may help traders refine their strategy. However, while it may provide useful insights, it should be used alongside other analysis methods for a well-rounded approach. FAQ What Does Beta Mean in Stocks? The beta in stocks meaning refers to a measure of how much a stock moves relative to the broader market. A beta of 1.0 means it generally follows market movements, while a beta above or below 1 indicates higher or lower volatility, respectively. What Are High Beta Stocks? High-beta stocks have a beta greater than 1, meaning they tend to move more than the overall market. These assets often belong to technology, consumer discretionary, and financials, where price swings are more pronounced. What Does a Portfolio Beta Measure? Portfolio beta calculates the overall volatility of a portfolio relative to an index. It’s determined by weighting each stock’s beta based on its proportion in the portfolio. A portfolio with a value above 1 is more volatile than the market, while one below 1 is less volatile. What Does a Stock With a Beta of 1.5 Indicate? A stock with a beta of 1.5 is 50% more volatile than the market. If the index rises 5%, shares might increase by 7.5%, but it could also fall more sharply in downturns. What Is β? The symbol β is a Greek letter signifying beta. The beta meaning in finance refers to a stock’s expected performance relative to an index. This article represents the opinion of the Companies operating under the FXOpen brand only. It is not to be construed as an offer, solicitation, or recommendation with respect to products and services provided by the Companies operating under the FXOpen brand, nor is it to be considered financial advice.
NASDAQ:NVDA
by FXOpen
1