Also, CAT is run by CATNMS, LLC which was created in response to an SEC rule 613, however it is operated by the same consortium of SROs that it purports to provide oversight on...
All these layers of responsibility diffusion and a notable absence of penalties for failing to meet rule 613 guidelines mean that rule is little more than for show.
Who would be doing the shielding? The current US government has been operating under the assumption of an incredibly expansive executive power, even over "independent" agencies.
I'm not a legal expert at all but so far the most useful mental model has been to assume absolutely no one is shielded from executive power (including organizations and people entirely outside the federal government) unless the courts have delivered a final ruling on it.
The president nominates the SEC chair, and can fire him.
This explains how, written just before Trump assumed power:
While he can't force Gensler to step down as a commissioner at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, he can name a new interim SEC chair as soon as he's inaugurated on Jan. 20. He can also nominate a new commissioner to the Senate, which has to confirm the pick.
In this administration they will be fired for cases Trump doesnt like. Who would protect their independence, Congress? The house members will not oppose any trump policy unless the US is in a depression due to his action
SEC is a federal agency so falls under the Executive which is controlled by Trump. Trump will fire any SEC employee who investigates the "wrong" people and install a loyalist in their place.
No economic system is functional without a bunch of compromises, and capitalism needs strong regulations as a check to keep it from turning absolutely rotten.
We're witnessing the removal of all of the guardrails, traffic signals, road maintenance crews. The highway patrols have been replaced by organized teams of highwaymen.
I recently read someone's comment here stating that "trust is efficient."
What we are witnessing is the devolution of the USA from a high-trust to low-trust business environment. "Low-trust business environment" is the euphemism we have used to describe other countries, where corruption is rampant. This is so sad to watch.
It depends on what you mean by 'strong regulations'. Regulations that are on the books should be enforced as written. In that sense I agree. But it doesn't mean that we actually necessarily need all the regulations that are on the books to stay on the books.
Eg, it would be perfectly fine to make insider trading legal by law. (And in fact, the definition of insider trading in the US differs a lot from the one used in France. So there are lots of things that have long been legal in the US that would have been illegal in France, without the economy collapsing.)
I agree that random enforcement of some regulations but not others depending on the whim of the executive is less than ideal.
Importantly, there's no guarantee it's actually going to get better. We like to pretend that human existence has some trajectory towards "justice" or "prosperity". I don't think that impulse does us justice.
Stalin/Lenin could have won. Hitler could have won, Napoleon could have conquered and held. It could just get worse.
Capitalism actually thrives where there is only 1 regulation: total transparency. After all, if we go by the classic definition of free market competition we have customers who have perfect knowledge of every product and the products are very similar and etc. etc.
Who cares if someone at the WH does insider trading? In a transparent system people would be able to trace back every transaction and realize something is brewing and they could act accordingly.
No, options are derivatives and are, in the US, generally regulated by the body regulating the underlying asset; stock/index options are regulated by the SEC, commodities options by the CFTC.
There is a difference between making 2.5 billion because you owned stocks and the market went up and making 2.5 billion because you bought just before the market went up and then you sold.
404 Media reported a story on Monday[1] about a news outlet that claimed there'd be a 90-day break on tariffs for all countries besides China. This was published a few days before the official announcement.
So someone, somewhere, knew something before everyone else.
These sort of trades happy fairly regularly, before market breaking news in individual stock names.
Just search for SEC insider trading cases. When they happen in options they are often pretty obvious unless the market is moving with real momentum the same way, and even then, option sellers will report you if they think it is suspicious. (By obvious, I mean, regulators should start asking questions - of course there can be a multitude of reasons.)
The difference here is that absolutely NO ONE on any side of politics seems to think the SEC & DOJ will pursue these.
I think the post established that this volume or size of spike is unique before any market-shifting news event coming out of the government in recent decades. The "sort" of transaction is irrelevant except that it's risky and thus relatively low volume normally.
I said it happens in individual stock cases, but very few people / places that control major market moving news leak - and when they do they investigate the hell out of it.
Imagine if this happened 20 minutes before Jerome Powell unexpectedly dropped interest rates?
> And it wasn’t just options. At exactly 1:01 pm EST, trading volume in SPY shares themselves spiked. Nearly 2.75 million shares were bought in that single minute.
This is standard practice, it was simply the marketmaker hedging its position after just having sold those $2.5 million call options.
The math checks out; at 85 cent per piece, those were 2.94 million call options. At 9 above the spot the delta was less than one so I guess you'd need to buy slightly above 2 million shares to hedge your delta. The normal SPY trades would have made up for the remainder of the 2.75 million volume.
Yeah this whole article is meant to stir outrage - HN is taking the bait, but that's expected. The most proficient people in the world at logic, and they are still culpable to biases. My comment shouldn't be confused though - there is smoke, but none of this is really proof because there isn't enough evidence yet from our perspective.
A lot more details needed:
- Is it a fund or individual?
- Does the trader make these kind of trades regularly?
I have more questions, but those are the first questions I would start with. I trade 0 and 1 days quite a bit in SPY and have collected a lot of data and performed statistical analysis on them for several years now. I myself sold S&P futures options that morning based off my data.
My theory until proven otherwise - Trader makes smaller trades in 0 days regularly - market volatility and the state of that week gave a much higher probability that there would be an extreme reversal at the first sign of any hint of good news, which was proven by fake news of a tariff lift just a day or two before. The overall bearish sentiment also coiled the market for an extreme move to the upside. Adding even more probability, the market that day was at the same level from Monday, where it showed buyers were foaming at the mouth to buy. Trump tweets just after market open that it was a great time to buy. Probability increases even more...
Similar to a very high probability count in Blackjack, trader puts in a trade at 12 and has an exit plan for 1 or two hours later. Trader determines that worst case 50 to 75% of the trade is lost due to theta decay by 2pm. Maybe they have a stop at 40%? Best case 2 to 10x's their money due to support levels giving a small rally. They've done this before and the wins outweigh the losses. Maybe even a hedge fund or algo trader running an ML model.
In my data I've seen extremely large multi-million dollar call option plays regularly when there is market volatility like this. Until proven otherwise, everyone just needs to stop with the outrage. I'm completely willing to change my mind as more evidence comes out.
A few years back the US labeled China a “state manipulator” of currency.
Surely it will only take a few more rounds of pump and dumping the entire US economy for basically every country to label the US the same, and move away from US bonds and the US dollar as reserve currency. It just won’t be stable enough with all these antics.
When it happens I just hope trump won’t use it as justification for war.
The follow-up post shows the whole magnitude of the insider trading:
> My previous post highlighted a striking example: how a single $2.5 million options position turned into $70 million in under an hour. But focusing solely on that trade risks missing the larger picture. What we actually saw was widespread activity. Numerous sophisticated traders carefully placing positions across several strike prices ($504, $505, $507, $509) in SPY as well as similar trades in QQQ.
> The pattern wasn't limited to a single trade or strike price. It was a coordinated wave of positions, all established within a critical half-hour window before the news broke.
> Imagine someone purchasing thousands of lottery tickets with a specific number combination just moments before those exact numbers are drawn.
Is it any different, in principle, to what congressmen (and women) have been doing for decades? Insider trading, corruption, etc. has all been normalized.
Readit News
Actually, “we”, collectively, do know, because the SEC maintains an “XKEYSCORE for equities” called CAT.
If there was interest, the government could know exactly who placed these trades. But the call (options) are coming from inside the house.
https://catnmsplan.com/sites/default/files/2025-04/04.01.25-...
Also, CAT is run by CATNMS, LLC which was created in response to an SEC rule 613, however it is operated by the same consortium of SROs that it purports to provide oversight on...
All these layers of responsibility diffusion and a notable absence of penalties for failing to meet rule 613 guidelines mean that rule is little more than for show.
I'm not a legal expert at all but so far the most useful mental model has been to assume absolutely no one is shielded from executive power (including organizations and people entirely outside the federal government) unless the courts have delivered a final ruling on it.
In the past month the SEC has stopped most enforcement actions involving crypto.
This explains how, written just before Trump assumed power:
While he can't force Gensler to step down as a commissioner at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, he can name a new interim SEC chair as soon as he's inaugurated on Jan. 20. He can also nominate a new commissioner to the Senate, which has to confirm the pick.
https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2024/11/07/heres-how-quickly...
And Gensler resigned as Chair as soon as Jan 20th:
https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2025-29
Such an expectation was rational prior to 2025-01-20. Since then it's been completely counterfactual.
Dead Comment
We're witnessing the removal of all of the guardrails, traffic signals, road maintenance crews. The highway patrols have been replaced by organized teams of highwaymen.
It'll get a lot worse before it gets better.
What we are witnessing is the devolution of the USA from a high-trust to low-trust business environment. "Low-trust business environment" is the euphemism we have used to describe other countries, where corruption is rampant. This is so sad to watch.
Eg, it would be perfectly fine to make insider trading legal by law. (And in fact, the definition of insider trading in the US differs a lot from the one used in France. So there are lots of things that have long been legal in the US that would have been illegal in France, without the economy collapsing.)
I agree that random enforcement of some regulations but not others depending on the whim of the executive is less than ideal.
Importantly, there's no guarantee it's actually going to get better. We like to pretend that human existence has some trajectory towards "justice" or "prosperity". I don't think that impulse does us justice.
Stalin/Lenin could have won. Hitler could have won, Napoleon could have conquered and held. It could just get worse.
If they're getting away with it, they'll do it again. The tariffs were paused for 90 days. The plan is to run the same playbook in 90 days.
Who cares if someone at the WH does insider trading? In a transparent system people would be able to trace back every transaction and realize something is brewing and they could act accordingly.
They're a derivative, so options of equities are equities and I guess options of commodities are commodities
He literally bragged that his friend made 2.5 billion and the other 900 million that day.
https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/1jvyryz/tru...
"Rules for thee not for me."
So someone, somewhere, knew something before everyone else.
[1] https://www.404media.co/benzinga-news-service-that-falsely-r...
Deleted Comment
Just search for SEC insider trading cases. When they happen in options they are often pretty obvious unless the market is moving with real momentum the same way, and even then, option sellers will report you if they think it is suspicious. (By obvious, I mean, regulators should start asking questions - of course there can be a multitude of reasons.)
The difference here is that absolutely NO ONE on any side of politics seems to think the SEC & DOJ will pursue these.
I think the post established that this volume or size of spike is unique before any market-shifting news event coming out of the government in recent decades. The "sort" of transaction is irrelevant except that it's risky and thus relatively low volume normally.
It did not established that. If it was so unique, the market would have reacted to this trade (before the news).
I said it happens in individual stock cases, but very few people / places that control major market moving news leak - and when they do they investigate the hell out of it.
Imagine if this happened 20 minutes before Jerome Powell unexpectedly dropped interest rates?
This is standard practice, it was simply the marketmaker hedging its position after just having sold those $2.5 million call options.
The math checks out; at 85 cent per piece, those were 2.94 million call options. At 9 above the spot the delta was less than one so I guess you'd need to buy slightly above 2 million shares to hedge your delta. The normal SPY trades would have made up for the remainder of the 2.75 million volume.
A lot more details needed: - Is it a fund or individual? - Does the trader make these kind of trades regularly?
I have more questions, but those are the first questions I would start with. I trade 0 and 1 days quite a bit in SPY and have collected a lot of data and performed statistical analysis on them for several years now. I myself sold S&P futures options that morning based off my data.
My theory until proven otherwise - Trader makes smaller trades in 0 days regularly - market volatility and the state of that week gave a much higher probability that there would be an extreme reversal at the first sign of any hint of good news, which was proven by fake news of a tariff lift just a day or two before. The overall bearish sentiment also coiled the market for an extreme move to the upside. Adding even more probability, the market that day was at the same level from Monday, where it showed buyers were foaming at the mouth to buy. Trump tweets just after market open that it was a great time to buy. Probability increases even more...
Similar to a very high probability count in Blackjack, trader puts in a trade at 12 and has an exit plan for 1 or two hours later. Trader determines that worst case 50 to 75% of the trade is lost due to theta decay by 2pm. Maybe they have a stop at 40%? Best case 2 to 10x's their money due to support levels giving a small rally. They've done this before and the wins outweigh the losses. Maybe even a hedge fund or algo trader running an ML model.
In my data I've seen extremely large multi-million dollar call option plays regularly when there is market volatility like this. Until proven otherwise, everyone just needs to stop with the outrage. I'm completely willing to change my mind as more evidence comes out.
/klĕp-tŏk′rə-sē/ noun
A government characterized by rampant greed and corruption.
Surely it will only take a few more rounds of pump and dumping the entire US economy for basically every country to label the US the same, and move away from US bonds and the US dollar as reserve currency. It just won’t be stable enough with all these antics.
When it happens I just hope trump won’t use it as justification for war.
> My previous post highlighted a striking example: how a single $2.5 million options position turned into $70 million in under an hour. But focusing solely on that trade risks missing the larger picture. What we actually saw was widespread activity. Numerous sophisticated traders carefully placing positions across several strike prices ($504, $505, $507, $509) in SPY as well as similar trades in QQQ.
> The pattern wasn't limited to a single trade or strike price. It was a coordinated wave of positions, all established within a critical half-hour window before the news broke.
> Imagine someone purchasing thousands of lottery tickets with a specific number combination just moments before those exact numbers are drawn.
https://data-and-politics.ghost.io/this-is-what-insider-trad...
It's treason what they did, treason on their principles. All this in times when it was supposedly "Main Street" turn.
https://x.com/SecScottBessent/status/1910000578198986822
Apparently most of them are just temporarily embarrassed billionaires.
Deleted Comment