No qualifying author-owned investment thesis was confirmed in this post.
The author explicitly states they are not predicting direction and are evaluating volatility pricing rather than taking a directional position on the stock.
Score17
Comments33
Upvote %78%
▶ Full Post Text
**During earnings season, I have a heavy focus on earnings vol setups, and this one stands out.**
**Not because of direction - but because of how volatility is being priced.**
**Quick breakdown:**
2DTE ATM Straddle IV: 134.2%
Implied move: ±8%
Expected Vol Crush: 67.9 (vol points)
Vega =$27.59
Vol crush as % of stock price =-4%
**What’s interesting**
The market is essentially saying:
With 68% confidence, the stock will move ±8%
But historically:
Post-earnings opening gap: min -13.5%, max +18%, mean abs move ±4.9%, std dev 9.3%
Adjusting for vol crush: ±14.2% minus -4% vol crush = ±10.2%
Therefore, with 68% confidence, historically the stock has moved ±10.2% post crush
Current options imply a move of ±8%, or a gap of 2.2% vs historical moves
That gap is where things get interesting.
**Where most people go wrong**
Most traders here will:
sell premium because 75% of the time options over estimate earnings induced moves
or pick a direction and hope
Both approaches ignore the only thing that really matters:
Is implied volatility accurately pricing the move?
**How I think about it**
I’m not trying to predict direction.
I’m asking:
Is volatility overpriced?
Is it underpriced?
Or is there no edge at all?
Depending on that, the trade changes completely.
**My current read**
Right now this looks like:
→underpriced volatility
Which means the better approach is likely:
→ long vol / structured trade
**Curious how others see this**
Are you selling this?
Buying vol?
Staying out?
Would be interested in how others are thinking about implied vs realized here.