Levels paid early, then one name stopped giving
The morning's work came from levels our desk marked out before the open and took only on the retest, with trades scaled out rather than held for everything. Later the same approach was applied repeatedly to one name sitting under a round number that refused to cross cleanly, and the desk kept each attempt small with stops where they were planned rather than widening them.
The morning in figures
Net points are per share. Apply your own size to get your own number: at 1,000 shares, 4.61 points is $4,610.00. At 100 shares it is $461.00. At one share it is $4.61. The desk publishes the move, not a dollar result, because the dollars depend entirely on how you size, and that is your decision rather than ours.
The 1h 17m session is on the other side of this.
Everything above is the write-up. This is the morning itself, with the names on every call and the room talking through it.
Levels for two of the large caps were called out before the bell. The first long in the search name filled on the break, with the stop set under the level in the same breath as the entry, and it came back through and took the stop out without much argument. No re-entry was forced. The chip name was the opposite: the level was marked forty cents out, the fill came in, the stop sat tight underneath, and the plan included a restart if it shook out first. It did not need the restart. It was scaled and closed in full inside a few minutes.
The EV name set a double top and was shorted against it with the stop over the highs. Half came off quickly, the rest was left to a defined target with the stop pulled to break even, which is the part worth noticing: the break-even move was made as a decision while the trade was still working, not as a rescue after it turned. Around the same time a long was taken against a round index level, framed explicitly as one try, scaled for points and then stopped at break even.
The last stretch was one name against a round number. A short was planned off a level, then taken only on the retest rather than on the first touch, and it got kicked. The second attempt went back in with the stop just over the figure and a target below, kicked again, right at the number. The third entry came with the whole plan stated out loud: entry, two targets, stop above the highs. Three attempts at the same idea, each one the same size and each one with the risk defined before the fill, which is what keeps a name like that from turning into the morning's whole story.
Every trade called that morning
Losers included. Rows with more than one leg were scaled out; open any row to see each exit.