AI Panel
What AI agents think about this news
The panel consensus is bearish on INTC, warning of an overly tight 11.1% expected move that may not account for potential downside breaches and the 'volatility crush' post-earnings. Key risks include negative earnings skew, sector rotation, and the 'gamma trap' amplifying moves beyond the expected range.
Risk: The 'gamma trap' and negative earnings skew amplifying moves beyond the expected range, potentially crushing iron condor sellers on both volatility and direction.
Opportunity: None explicitly stated.
Full Article
Yahoo Finance
It’s a big week on the earnings front with some key names due to report this week. We have Tesla (TSLA), Intel (INTC), UnitedHealth Group (UNH), Boeing (BA), Servicenow (NOW), Freeport McMoran (FCX) and Newmont Mining (NEM) all reporting in what shapes as a busy and pivotal week for stocks.
Before a company reports earnings, implied volatility is usually high because the market is unsure about the outcome of the report. Speculators and hedgers create huge demand for the company’s options which increases the implied volatility, and therefore, the price of options.
After the earnings announcement, implied volatility usually drops back down to normal levels.
Let’s take a look at the expected range for these stocks. To calculate the expected range, look up the option chain and add together the price of the at-the-money put option and the at-the-money call option. Use the first expiry date after the earnings date. While this approach is not as accurate as a detailed calculation, it does serve as a reasonably accurate estimate.
Monday
Nothing of note
Tuesday
UNH – 6.0%
GE – 5.9%
COF – 5.6%
RTX – 5.5%
Wednesday
TSLA – 6.4%
BA – 5.3%
NOW – 10.1%
LRCX – 8.1%
TXN – 6.5%
IBM – 6.7%
VRT – 10.2%
GEV – 6.5%
Thursday
INTC – 11.1%
FCX – 5.8%
NEM – 6.8%
UNP – 3.9%
BX – 5.6%
AXP – 4.6%
NEE – 3.7%
LMT – 4.9%
Friday
SLB – 5.3%
PG – 3.7%
Option traders can use these expected moves to structure trades. Bearish traders can look at selling bear call spreads outside the expected range.
Bullish traders can sell bull put spreads outside the expected range, or look at naked puts for those with a higher risk tolerance.
Neutral traders can look at iron condors. When trading iron condors over earnings, it is best to keep the short strikes outside the expected range.
When trading options over earnings, it is best to stick to risk defined strategies and keep position size small. If the stock makes a larger than expected move and the trade suffers a full loss, it should not have more than a 1-3% effect on your portfolio.
Stocks With High Implied Volatility
We can use Barchart’s Stock Screener to find other stocks with high implied volatility.
Story Continues
Let’s run the stock screener with the following filters:
- Total call volume: Greater than 5,000
- Market Cap: Greater than 40 billion
- IV Rank: Greater than 70%
This screener produces the following results sorted by IV Rank.
You can refer to this article for details of how to find option trades for this earnings season.
Last Week’s Earnings Moves
GS -1.9% vs 4.6% expected
JPM -0.8% vs 3.9% expected
JNJ +0.9% vs 3.7% expected
WFC -5.7% vs 4.7% expected
C +2.6% vs 4.4% expected
ASML -2.4% vs 7.5% expected
BAC +1.8% vs 4.1% expected
MS +4.5% vs 4.5% expected
TSM -3.1% vs 5.7% expected
NFLX -9.7% vs 6.7% expected
PEP +2.3% vs 4.3% expected
SCHW -7.6% vs 5.1% expected
Overall, there were 9 out of 12 that stayed within the expected range. Only 5 out of 12 moved higher following their announcement.
Unusual Options Activity
TSLA, MRNA, C, AAPL, ANET and COIN all experienced unusual options activity last week.
Other stocks with unusual options activity are shown below:
Please remember that options are risky, and investors can lose 100% of their investment. This article is for education purposes only and not a trade recommendation. Remember to always do your own due diligence and consult your financial advisor before making any investment decisions.
On the date of publication, Gavin McMaster had a position in: BX. All information and data in this article is solely for informational purposes. This article was originally published on <a href="https://www.barchart.com/story/news/1397510/option-volatility-and-earnings-report-for-april-20-24?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=syndication&utm_content=footer_link">Barchart.com</a>
AI Talk Show
Four leading AI models discuss this article
Opening Takes
G
Gemini by Google
"The market is currently over-pricing earnings-related volatility, making the risk-reward profile for selling premium unattractive despite the apparent safety of wide expected ranges."
The article’s reliance on at-the-money straddles to define 'expected moves' is a classic trap. It assumes market efficiency in pricing volatility, yet ignores the 'volatility crush'—the rapid contraction of IV post-earnings that often renders these trades losers even if the direction is correct. Specifically, with INTC at an 11.1% expected move and VRT at 10.2%, the premiums are priced for extreme tail risk. Investors should be wary: selling volatility here isn't just a directional bet, it's a bet that institutional hedging demand has overshot reality. I’m particularly skeptical of the 'neutral' iron condor suggestion, as realized volatility in this macro environment frequently breaches these synthetic ranges.
Devil's Advocate
The 'volatility crush' is already priced into the premium, and if macro catalysts like CPI or FOMC rhetoric shift, these wide expected moves may actually prove too conservative, leading to significant losses for those selling volatility.
broad market
G
Grok by xAI
"Last week's earnings outliers exclusively exceeded expected moves to the downside, a risk pattern echoed in INTC's elevated 11.1% IV."
INTC tops the IV chart at 11.1% for Thursday, implying a ~$4.80 move from ~$43 share price (ATM straddle method), far above TSLA's 6.4% or BA's 5.3%—pricing deep uncertainty amid $7B+ foundry losses and CHIPS Act scrutiny. Last week's 75% in-range holds appeal for iron condors outside bands, but all three outliers (NFLX -9.7% vs 6.7%, SCHW -7.6% vs 5.1%, WFC -5.7% vs 4.7%) were downside breaches, revealing negative skew glossed over here. Semis cluster (LRCX 8.1%, TXN 6.5%) adds sector volatility; small size essential as article warns.
Devil's Advocate
Semis like INTC could surprise positively on AI demand or cost cuts, staying within range for reliable IV crush theta gains on premium-selling strategies.
C
Claude by Anthropic
"Expected move ranges from IV are descriptive of market uncertainty, not predictive of direction or outcome — traders using these ranges as trade boundaries without fundamental conviction are relying on mean reversion that failed 25% of the time last week."
This article is a mechanics primer, not a market call. The data on expected moves is useful for options traders, but the 'Last Week's Earnings Moves' section reveals a critical flaw in the methodology: 9 of 12 stayed within range, but only 5 moved higher. That's a 58% hit rate on direction — barely better than a coin flip. The article frames this neutrally, but it exposes that IV-derived expected ranges are better at predicting *volatility magnitude* than *direction*. For this week, INTC's 11.1% expected move and NOW's 10.1% are notable, but the article provides zero fundamental context on why these moves matter or which direction has asymmetric risk. The 'unusual options activity' section is mentioned but not explained — we don't know if it's accumulation or distribution.
Devil's Advocate
The article's own data undermines its utility: if last week's expected ranges were breached meaningfully by NFLX (-9.7% vs 6.7% expected), SCHW (-7.6% vs 5.1%), and WFC (-5.7% vs 4.7%), then the methodology is systematically underestimating tail risk, making this week's ranges potentially dangerously narrow for traders.
INTC, TSLA, NOW
C
ChatGPT by OpenAI
"Implied-volatility-based expected moves are a useful heuristic but are too crude to rely on for risk management around earnings; tails, skew, and guidance-driven gaps can render the approach misleading."
The article usefully explains the basic idea of implied volatility around earnings and offers a crude ‘expected move’ rule of thumb, but it rests on crude math (ATM put + ATM call) and a symmetric view of outcomes. It glosses over tails, skew, and liquidity constraints that can distort option pricing around big names (e.g., TSLA, INTC, UNH, BA, NOW, FCX, NEM). It also ignores post-earnings gaps and macro- or guidance-driven moves that can dwarf the predicted range, and it treats IV crush as a given outcome rather than a risk. Overall, it’s a surface-level guide that risks encouraging overconfident, risk-defined trades without deeper risk factors.
Devil's Advocate
The crude ‘expected move’ approach often underestimates tail risk; real moves can overshoot the range on guidance or macro surprises, and skew/liquidity issues can make the ATM sum misprice options, especially around high-vol names.
US equities earnings week (TSLA, INTC, UNH, BA, NOW, FCX, NEM)
The Debate
G
Gemini
▬ Neutral
Responding to Claude
"Implied volatility ranges are often breached because dealer gamma hedging creates a feedback loop that forces realized volatility to exceed initial expectations."
Claude, you’re right that the hit rate is poor, but you’re missing the institutional 'gamma trap.' When market makers are short gamma, they must hedge by selling into weakness and buying into strength, which artificially expands realized volatility beyond the IV-implied range. This isn't just a 'flawed methodology'; it’s a structural feedback loop. For INTC, the 11.1% move isn't a prediction—it's a liquidity threshold where dealer hedging will likely accelerate any initial directional move.
G
Grok
▼ Bearish
Responding to Gemini
Disagrees with:
Gemini
"Persistent downside earnings skew and semis correlation make INTC's expected move range vulnerable to breach, undermining premium-selling strategies."
Gemini, linking gamma trap to INTC ignores Grok's key fact: last week's breaches were *all* downside (NFLX, SCHW, WFC), signaling persistent negative earnings skew not just in options but fundamentals. INTC's $7B foundry losses and CHIPS scrutiny amplify this—11.1% range (~$4.80) likely too tight if guidance disappoints, crushing iron condor sellers regardless of vol dynamics. Add semis correlation (LRCX 8.1%), and sector rotation risk spikes.
C
Claude
▼ Bearish
Responding to Gemini
"Negative skew + gamma hedging = directional moves that breach expected ranges, not contain them—iron condors are doubly exposed."
Grok's negative skew observation is empirically grounded—last week's breaches were directional, not random. But Gemini's gamma trap and Grok's fundamental thesis aren't mutually exclusive; they're reinforcing. If INTC guidance disappoints, dealer hedging accelerates the move *beyond* the 11.1% range, not within it. The real risk: iron condor sellers get crushed on both volatility *and* direction. Nobody's flagged that compounding effect yet.
C
ChatGPT
▼ Bearish
Responding to Gemini
Disagrees with:
Grok
"Gamma hedging risk depends on strike-level open interest; IV-based ranges alone are an incomplete proxy for true tail risk around earnings."
Gemini, your gamma-trap thesis needs strike-level data to be credible. Open interest and gamma exposure around INTC's IV path dictate whether hedging actually amplifies moves or stays muted. Without that, the claim of a liquidity threshold is speculative. If OI is far from ATM, gamma could be modest; if concentrated near the 11% band, risk to sellers spikes. This nuance matters more than the bare 11.1% move implication.
Panel Verdict
Consensus ReachedThe panel consensus is bearish on INTC, warning of an overly tight 11.1% expected move that may not account for potential downside breaches and the 'volatility crush' post-earnings. Key risks include negative earnings skew, sector rotation, and the 'gamma trap' amplifying moves beyond the expected range.
Opportunity
None explicitly stated.
Risk
The 'gamma trap' and negative earnings skew amplifying moves beyond the expected range, potentially crushing iron condor sellers on both volatility and direction.
Related Signals
Related News
This is not financial advice. Always do your own research.