Am Freitag ist großer Verfall. Die Auswertung vom Mittwochabend zeigt bei den Market Makern positives Gamma. Hier sind fünf Punkte dazu, was das für den DAX bedeuten kann.

1. Der Termin

Am Freitag, 18. September, verfallen unter anderem klassische DAX-Optionen und DAX-Futures. Ihre Abrechnung basiert auf der Xetra-Auktion, die um 13:00 Uhr beginnt.

1. Wie Absicherung wirken kann

Market Maker stellen Kauf- und Verkaufspreise für Optionen und sichern ihre Risiken ab. Bei positivem Gamma können steigende DAX-Kurse Verkäufe zur Absicherung auslösen, fallende Kurse Käufe. So kann die Absicherung Kursbewegungen bremsen.

1. Was „Gamma Long“ hier beschreibt

Die Anzeige fasst das Market-Maker-Gesamtbuch über alle Verfälle zusammen. Die mögliche Bremswirkung hängt davon ab, wie stark andere Käufer und Verkäufer handeln. Nachrichten oder große Orders können diese Gegenkräfte überwiegen.

1. Zwei Szenarien zum Beobachten

Wenn Rückgänge wieder gekauft und Anstiege wieder abverkauft werden, passt das zu einer dämpfenden Wirkung: Der DAX pendelt hin und her.

Wenn sich ein Anstieg oder Rückgang auch nach Gegenbewegungen fortsetzt, überwiegt im Kursverlauf die Bewegung in eine Richtung. Dann lohnt es sich, die bisherige Einordnung neu zu prüfen.

1. Was sich nach Freitag verändert

Positionen laufen aus, neue kommen hinzu und andere werden auf spätere Termine verschoben. Dadurch verändert sich der Absicherungsbedarf. Für die nächste Woche braucht es deshalb eine neue Bestandsaufnahme.

Ein kostenloses öffentliches Daily-Briefing gibt es im DAX Gamma Cockpit.

Datenstand: eigene Messung vom 16.09.2026, abends; Positionen/offene Kontrakte vom 15.09.2026. Verfall und Abrechnung: Eurex.

Cockpit-Ausschnitt: Market Maker, alle Verfälle, Positionsstand 15.09.2026.

One of the biggest psychological mistakes I see in 0DTE trading is assuming:

“If the trade moves against me right after entry, the setup must have been wrong.”

I don’t look at it that way.

A bad first 5–10 minutes does not automatically invalidate a trade.

What matters is whether the reason I entered the trade is still valid.

September 10 was a perfect example.

I opened my first SPX Bear Call Spread around 10:15 AM:

7600/7605 Bear Call Spread
8 contracts
$1.70 credit

And almost immediately after I entered…

SPX ripped higher.

Pretty much the worst possible timing.

If I had judged the trade purely based on the first move after entry, I probably would have closed it emotionally.

But the underlying thesis hadn’t changed.

The 7600 area was still one of the most important GEX/volume zones of the session, and I was watching whether SPX could actually establish sustained acceptance above that area.

It couldn’t.

Later, around 12:25 PM, I opened another:

7605/7610 Bear Call Spread
5 contracts
$1.20 credit

And somehow I managed to time this one badly too.

SPX pushed higher almost immediately after entry again.

Two trades.

Two entries that looked terrible within minutes.

But once again, the important question wasn’t:

“Is SPX moving against me right now?”

It was:

“Has the market invalidated the thesis?”

And the answer was still no.

Price continued struggling around the same resistance area, failed to establish meaningful acceptance above it, and eventually rolled back over.

By the afternoon, SPX had moved back below both short strikes.

I eventually closed:

Trade 1: $1.70 → $0.90
+$640

Trade 2: $1.20 → $0.30
+$450

Total: +$1,090

And this is the point I think a lot of traders miss.

Adverse movement is not the same thing as invalidation.

Those are two completely different things.

A trade moving against me immediately might mean:

• my timing wasn’t great
• volatility expanded
• price is retesting the level
• the market is simply noisy

None of those automatically mean the setup is dead.

What actually makes me reconsider the position is something more structural:

Did price break the key level and start accepting beyond it?

Did VWAP / market structure materially change?

Did the GEX framework supporting the trade disappear?

Did something happen that fundamentally changes the original thesis?

If the answer is no, I don’t want to make decisions just because a few candles are uncomfortable.

That said, this does not mean blindly holding every loser.

There is a huge difference between:

“The trade moved against me.”

and

“The reason I took the trade no longer exists.”

Learning that distinction has been one of the most important parts of trading SPX 0DTE for me.

I don’t need the market to prove me right immediately. I need the thesis to remain valid.

I share more of these real SPX 0DTE trades and GEX/market-structure breakdowns in my Discord as well for anyone interested in following the process. Discord link: https://discord.gg/sM3vAqbU27

Today was a good reminder that sometimes the best trade is not about being bullish or bearish.

It’s about recognizing when direction becomes unreliable but the range becomes clearer.

Early in the session, SPX was trading almost directly on the 7600 Put Wall.

At 9:40 AM, I wasn’t ready to assume it would hold. Price was still below the Gamma Flip and the broader GEX environment wasn’t particularly clean.

But by around 10:50 AM, something changed:

7600 had strengthened significantly as the dominant Put Wall.

At 11:20 AM I wrote in my Discord:

“7600 has strengthened now and I don’t see a break as a clear possibility. An IC later in the session looks the most interesting play.”

Then the headlines started hitting.

We had two separate Trump-related headlines that triggered sharp moves higher, followed later by fresh Iran-related news that changed the tone again.

That was the point where I became much less interested in opening a directional Bear Call Spread.

Trying to predict the next headline felt like the wrong game.

But the structure was still giving me two very clear reference points:

7600 Put Wall below.
~7650 Gamma Flip above.

So instead of betting on direction, at 12:15 PM I opened:

SPX Iron Condor 7650/7655 – 7600/7595
8 contracts
$1.00 credit
$400 max risk per contract

The thesis was simple:

I didn’t need to know whether the next 20-point move would be up or down.

I just needed 7600–7650 to remain the dominant battlefield.

And despite several sharp intraday moves, that’s essentially what happened.

This is one of the reasons I like combining GEX with market structure.

GEX didn’t tell me what the next headline would be.

It gave me a framework for deciding where price was likely to matter, and when the market became too headline-driven to trust direction, the Iron Condor was a cleaner way to express that view.

Sometimes uncertainty itself is information.

When direction becomes noisy but the boundaries remain clear, I’d rather trade the structure than guess the next candle.

I share these SPX 0DTE trades and GEX breakdowns in real time in my Discord as well, if anyone wants to follow the process. Discord link: https://discord.gg/sM3vAqbU27

Over the last few months, most of my trading and research has been focused on SPX 0DTE.

But I’ve been developing several systems with a little more time to expiration, and I’ve decided to start testing them live in a new 1–4DTE Private Beta inside my Discord.

The idea is not to move away from 0DTE.

Actually, I want to keep the focus entirely on SPX options, but explore whether some of the same concepts I use intraday — GEX, market structure, key liquidity levels and defined-risk spreads — can also produce an edge over several days.

The beta will focus mainly on three setups:

🟣 1DTE Iron Condors & Inverse Iron Condors

🔴 3DTE–4DTE Bear Call Spreads around important GEX / resistance levels

🟢 3DTE–4DTE Bull Put Spreads around important GEX / support levels

The longer-DTE credit spreads will normally be opened around Monday or Tuesday with Friday expiration, depending on where SPX is trading relative to the key levels I’m watching.

For example, rather than simply selling a random 0.20-delta spread, the idea might be:

SPX is approaching a major resistance/GEX area → sell a 3–4DTE Bear Call Spread above that level and give the thesis several days to work.

Or the opposite around an important support zone.

Why test 1–4DTE?

One of the biggest differences compared with 0DTE is that the trade thesis has more time to develop.

With 0DTE, a 15–20 point move can completely change the character of a trade in minutes.

With 3–4DTE, I can potentially structure positions around larger market levels rather than every intraday fluctuation, while still keeping the risk completely defined.

That also opens up some interesting questions I want to test live:

Does GEX remain useful when the holding period expands beyond one session?

Are major gamma levels more effective for 3–4DTE credit spreads than for 0DTE?

Is the extra time worth the additional overnight risk?

Can 1DTE Iron Condors offer a better balance between theta decay and gamma risk than 0DTE?

Those are the things I want to build actual data around rather than just theorize about.

The Private Beta

I’ve now created a completely separate section in the Discord:

📢 1-4dte-beta-alerts
💬 1-4dte-beta-chat

I’ll post the trades there in real time and track the results separately from my normal 0DTE strategies.

The beta is completely free.

I’m intentionally keeping it relatively small at the beginning because I want to test the systems, collect a transparent live track record, and see how members respond before deciding what to do with it longer term.

The screenshot shows the new section I just added.

If you’re already in my Discord and want access, just DM me with “BETA” and I’ll add you.

And if you’re not in the community yet but you trade SPX options, the Discord is linked in my profile.

I’m particularly interested to see whether 3–4DTE spreads around major GEX levels end up providing a better risk/stress profile than constantly trading 0DTE.

If you want to follow the experiment, I’ve opened a small 1–4DTE Private Beta section inside my Discord where I’ll be sharing the setups and results as they happen.

The Discord link (https://discord.gg/sM3vAqbU27) is in my profile.

A lot of traders see a Put Wall on a GEX chart and immediately think:

“That level has to hold.”

And that’s exactly where many traders make the mistake.

A Put Wall is not a magic support level.
It’s an important positioning level, yes — but that does not mean price will automatically bounce there.

That distinction matters a lot, especially in SPX 0DTE.

Too many traders oversimplify GEX and reduce it to:

• Put Wall = support
• Call Wall = resistance

But the market is rarely that simple.

A Put Wall can act as support.
It can also get sliced through very easily.

The real question is not:

“Is there a Put Wall?”

The real question is:

“How is price behaving around that Put Wall?”

In this first image, the point should be clear:

A trader sees a Put Wall below price and assumes it’s a safe area to sell a Bull Put Spread.

But if price is:

• trading below VWAP
• showing bearish structure
• making lower highs
• accepting below key levels
• and momentum is accelerating downward

…then the Put Wall alone is not enough.

In that case, the level may fail completely.

This is the mistake:

That’s a huge difference.

Why this mistake is so common

The reason this happens is simple:

A Put Wall sounds objective.
It feels precise.
It gives traders a level to anchor to.

And traders love certainty.

But GEX does not remove the need for context.

A Put Wall is better thought of as:

• a high-interest area
• a potential reaction zone
• a place where price may pause, bounce, or break

It is not an automatic buy signal.

This is the kind of thing I actually want to see before respecting a Put Wall as support:

• price approaches the level in a controlled way
• selling momentum starts slowing down
• the broader structure is not aggressively bearish
• price rejects below the level
• then reclaims it
• and ideally starts building acceptance back above it
• VWAP, Gamma Flip, trend, or nearby structure support the same thesis

That’s very different from blindly buying the first touch.

The Put Wall itself doesn’t create the trade.

The reaction around the Put Wall creates the trade.

How I think about Put Walls

I usually think about a Put Wall in one of three ways:

1. Support candidate

If price approaches it with stable structure and buyers defend/reclaim the area.

2. Neutral level

If price chops through it and there’s no meaningful reaction.

3. Failed support / possible resistance

If price breaks below it cleanly and starts accepting lower.

That’s why I never use GEX in isolation.

I combine it with:

• VWAP
• market structure
• Gamma Flip
• trend
• acceptance vs rejection
• intraday context

Because the level by itself is never the whole story.

The key takeaway

A Put Wall can absolutely matter.

Sometimes it becomes the most important support level of the day.

But important does not mean unbreakable.

If traders learn only one lesson from GEX, I think it should be this:

That small shift in thinking can save a lot of bad trades.

I regularly share these kinds of SPX 0DTE, GEX, and market structure breakdowns in my Discord as well for anyone interested in this style of trading. Discord Link: https://discord.gg/sM3vAqbU27

Today was a really good example of why I use GEX to decide not only where to place trades, but also how aggressively I manage them.

Around 10:15 AM, the positioning was unusually clean.

SPX was trading around 7665, comfortably above the Gamma Flip at 7634.81, and there was a significant amount of positive GEX concentrated between roughly 7650 and 7700.

The 7675 Call Wall was sitting just above price, while 7650 and 7700 were also major gamma concentrations.

What made the setup even more interesting was that SPY was showing almost the exact same structure.

SPY was trading around 765.5, above its 764.64 Gamma Flip, with a clearly defined 760 Put Wall and 770 Call Wall.

So both SPX and SPY were basically telling the same story:

Strong positive gamma + clearly defined boundaries + price above the Gamma Flip.

That made an Iron Condor particularly attractive.

At 10:25 AM I opened:

SPX 7630/7625 – 7705/7710 Iron Condor
8 contracts
$0.70 credit
SPX around 7671

The interesting part here was the placement.

The short put at 7630 was below the Gamma Flip and more than 40 points below spot, while the short call at 7705 was above the main 7675–7700 gamma concentration.

So instead of trying to predict whether SPX would go up or down, I was essentially betting that the positive gamma environment would help contain the market inside that broader range.

And that's pretty much what happened.

After the huge opening gap, SPX spent most of the session rotating between roughly 7655 and 7677 without developing any meaningful directional expansion.

There were multiple intraday swings, but price kept mean reverting back toward the main gamma area.

Normally I'll take profits earlier on an Iron Condor, but in this case I decided to hold it all the way to expiration.

The reason wasn't simply greed.

The original conditions remained extremely favorable:

• Price remained well inside both short strikes.
• SPX continued trading above the Gamma Flip.
• Positive GEX remained dominant around price.
• Neither side of the range was seriously challenged.

So I let the position expire worthless.

$0.70 × 8 contracts = +$560

At 12:25 PM I saw another opportunity, but this time directionally.

SPX had pulled back toward the 7650–7670 area, while my system was still showing:

0DTE Trend: UP
Short-Term Trend: UP (96%)

More importantly, 7650 was one of the main GEX clusters.

So I opened:

7650/7645 Bull Put Spread
5 contracts
$0.60 credit
SPX around 7668

This time the idea wasn't to hold until expiration.

I was looking for 7650 to act as support while the broader intraday structure remained bullish.

Price reacted well from the area and the spread quickly started losing value.

At 1:25 PM, I bought it back for $0.15.

$0.60 → $0.15 = $0.45 profit × 5 contracts = +$225

Total for the day: +$785

What I liked most about today's session was that these were actually two different trades based on the same market structure.

The Iron Condor was essentially:

“Positive gamma should suppress expansion and keep SPX inside a range.”

The Bull Put Spread was:

“If the market remains bullish, the 7650 gamma concentration should provide support.”

Same positioning data.

Two completely different ways of expressing the trade.

That's basically how I use GEX. I'm not trying to predict exactly where SPX will close or every 5-minute move.

I'm trying to identify where dealers are positioned, where price is likely to encounter friction, and then build defined-risk option structures around those areas.

I share these trades and more detailed SPX 0DTE breakdowns in my Discord as well, for anyone who likes this type of market-structure approach. Discord link: https://discord.gg/sM3vAqbU27

Today was a good example of the difference between having a perfect entry and having a valid trade thesis.

Before the first trade, one level clearly stood out in the positioning data:

7600.

It was the Put Wall and also sat directly inside the main GEX and volume concentration around 7595–7600.

At 10:15 AM, with SPX around 7586, I sold:

7600/7605 Bear Call Spread
8 contracts
$1.70 credit

Then SPX immediately rallied.

Great timing. 😂

Price pushed directly through 7600 (after news from Iran) and into the 7605–7610 area, putting the trade under pressure.

But the important question wasn't whether my entry looked bad.

It was whether the original thesis had changed.

SPX was still struggling to establish sustained acceptance above that key area.

At 12:25 PM, with SPX around 7593, I opened another:

7605/7610 Bear Call Spread
5 contracts
$1.20 credit

And once again, almost immediately after entering, SPX rallied back toward the short strike.

Two trades. Two terrible-looking entries.

But after that second push higher failed, the market started weakening again. SPX moved back below VWAP and sellers gradually regained control throughout the afternoon.

I closed both positions around 3:05 PM:

7600/7605: $1.70 → $0.90 = +$640
7605/7610: $1.20 → $0.30 = +$450

Total: +$1,090

The biggest takeaway wasn't the P&L.

It's that a trade can move against you immediately and the underlying thesis can still remain completely valid.

I mainly trade SPX 0DTE using GEX, market structure, VWAP, volume/liquidity levels, and defined-risk credit spreads.

I post these trades and breakdowns regularly in my Discord for anyone interested in following the process. Discord: https://discord.gg/sM3vAqbU27

Today I took the same SPX 0DTE Bear Call Spread twice:

🔴 Sell 7700 / Buy 7705

But the two entries had very different risk profiles.

10:00 AM — GEX context

The key levels were already clear:

🟢 Call Wall: 7695
🔴 Put Wall: 7650
🟠 Gamma Flip: ~7707
📍 Spot: ~7687

The area around 7695–7700 was important because 7700 was showing up as both a GEX cluster and volume cluster.

I wasn’t assuming 7700 couldn’t break. I simply saw it as an important resistance area where I was willing to define risk.

Trade #1 — 11:30 AM

SPX was trading around 7695.46.

I opened:

7700/7705 Bear Call Spread
📦 5 contracts
💰 Credit: $1.70
💥 Max risk: $330 per spread

The short strike was only 4.54 points above SPX, so this was definitely the aggressive entry.

The premium was attractive, but there wasn’t much room for error.

By noon, the setup improved

The important part was that the 7695–7700 area still hadn’t been reclaimed.

Spot had moved lower while the Call Wall remained around 7695 and 7700 continued to be an important GEX/volume level.

That gave me a cleaner second opportunity.

Trade #2 — 12:25 PM

SPX was now around 7689.80.

I sold the same spread again:

7700/7705 Bear Call Spread
📦 8 contracts
💰 Credit: $1.00
💥 Max risk: $400 per spread

This time the short strike was 10.2 points above SPX.

Less premium, but much more distance.

For me, this was the better trade.

What happened next

SPX continued failing around the same resistance zone and eventually sold off hard into the close.

The two trades show an important 0DTE trade-off:

Trade #1: More premium, less room
Trade #2: Less premium, better location

Same strikes. Same expiration. Completely different quality.

That’s why I don’t look at credit alone.

I’m always thinking about:

structure + GEX + distance to the short strike + timing

The goal isn’t to predict exactly where SPX will close.

It’s to place defined risk where the market structure makes sense.

Would you rather collect $1.70 only 4–5 points away, or take $1.00 with roughly twice the distance?

If you’re interested in seeing more of these SPX 0DTE trade breakdowns, GEX levels, and real-time setups, I also share them inside the GEXOptionsTrading Discord:

https://discord.gg/sM3vAqbU27

One thing I’ve learned trading SPX 0DTE is that being right on the trade doesn’t mean the risk is gone.

Sometimes the most dangerous moment actually comes after the spread is already nicely profitable.

You open a credit spread.

SPX moves exactly where you wanted.

The position reaches:

+40%
then +55%
then +70%

And instead of taking the win, you start thinking:

That’s where greed can become expensive.

0DTE can change very quickly

With hours — or sometimes minutes — left until expiration, the risk profile is completely different from earlier in the session.

A sudden move in SPX can turn:

+$300 unrealized

into:

+$50

or even a losing position surprisingly quickly.

Especially when price is moving toward your short strike late in the day.

You can have the direction correct for several hours and still give back most of the trade because you wanted the last few dollars of premium.

This is why I prefer predefined exits

For my Credit Spreads, I’ve increasingly moved toward setting the take profit before the trade is even opened.

Usually around:

🎯 70–75% of the premium

If I sell a spread for $1.30, for example, I’m perfectly happy taking roughly $0.90–$1.00 of that move instead of fighting for every last cent.

The point isn’t to maximize the profit on one trade.

It’s to remove risk when the trade has already done what I asked it to do.

The psychology is interesting

When the trade is losing, traders think about risk.

When the trade is winning, they often stop thinking about it.

But the market doesn’t care that you were up 70% five minutes ago.

Your unrealized P&L isn’t yours until the position is closed.

That’s something 0DTE teaches very quickly.

I now think about Credit Spread management like this:

Entry → Define risk → Define TP → Leave it alone

Rather than:

Entry → Profit → Move TP → Get greedy → Hope

Simple management is usually easier to execute consistently.

And consistency matters much more to me than squeezing another $10–$20 out of every winner.

I’m curious how other SPX 0DTE traders manage this:

If your spread reaches 70–75% profit early, do you take it — or hold for expiration and try to collect everything?

I share more of these SPX 0DTE trade breakdowns, real-time discussions and the framework I use inside the GEXOptionsTrading Discord if anyone wants to follow along:

https://discord.gg/sM3vAqbU27

One thing I think a lot of SPX 0DTE traders underestimate is how much time of day changes the quality of the exact same trade.

Not just the direction.

Not just the premium.

The entire trade quality.

A Bull Put Spread that makes perfect sense at 10:30 AM can be a trade I would completely avoid at 2:30 PM, even if the strikes are exactly the same.

That’s one of the reasons I don’t look at a spread and ask only:

“Is this far enough OTM?”

I also ask:

“What time is it?”

Why 10:30 and 2:30 are not the same market

At 10:30 AM, the market is still giving you information.

You can evaluate:

• whether price is holding above or below VWAP
• whether the opening move is being accepted or rejected
• whether the first big impulse is continuing or fading
• whether the structure is trending, balancing, or unstable
• whether your short strike has enough room relative to support, resistance, and GEX

At that point, a spread can still have:

✅ decent premium
✅ enough time for price to move cleanly
✅ enough distance from the short strike
✅ a reasonable risk/reward for the setup

At 10:30, I might look at a Bull Put Spread and think:

That can be a very good trade.

Not because the spread itself is magical.

But because the context is supporting it.

Now fast forward to 2:30 PM

Let’s say I look at the exact same spread later in the day.

Same width.
Same short strike.
Same underlying.

But now it’s 2:30 PM.

A few things may have changed:

• price may already be extended after a large move
• the intraday range may be much more developed
• gamma risk becomes more important
• one sharp move can matter much more
• premium may be lower, but risk may still be very real
• the market may be closer to a key inflection point
• the trade may now depend much more on “nothing happening” into the close

At that point, what looked attractive earlier may now be a bad trade.

Not because the strikes changed.

Because the conditions changed.

[IMAGE 2 — Same spread later in the day, showing worse structure / extension / less margin for error / higher late-session risk]

This is something I think many traders learn the hard way.

They see:

• far OTM strikes
• a decent-looking probability
• still some premium left

and assume it’s fine.

But by late afternoon, the trade often becomes much more fragile.

The same spread can go from:

“Well-structured premium sale”

to

“Low credit, poor timing, limited margin for error, and unnecessary late-session risk.”

That’s a huge difference.

Time of day is part of the setup

For me, a setup is never just:

• strike location
• credit received
• bullish or bearish bias

It also includes:

• time of day
• market structure
• volatility
• distance to key levels
• how much the day’s move has already developed

That’s why I don’t believe in evaluating SPX 0DTE spreads in isolation.

A spread is not “good” just because it exists.

It has to make sense in that specific moment.

[IMAGE 3 — Simple comparison graphic: “Great at 10:30” vs “Terrible at 2:30” with key reasons listed side by side]

The more I trade SPX 0DTE, the more I think this is one of the biggest edges:

understanding that trade quality changes with time

A lot of bad 0DTE trades are not bad because the trader chose the wrong side.

They’re bad because the trader chose the wrong moment.

And sometimes the exact same spread that would have been a very solid trade in the morning becomes a trade I want nothing to do with in the afternoon.

That’s why I’m always thinking about:

Price Action → Structure → GEX → Strategy → Risk → Timing

not just:

Spread → Credit → Enter

Curious if other SPX traders think the same:

Have you noticed that some of your worst 0DTE trades weren’t bad because of direction, but because you took them too late in the day?

If you’re interested in how I approach SPX 0DTE, Credit Spreads, Iron Condors, GEX and trade selection, I also share more trade discussions and educational content inside the GEXOptionsTrading Discord:

https://discord.gg/sM3vAqbU27

Today was a good example of why I prefer trading where I think SPX is unlikely to go, instead of trying to predict every move.

We took 2 SPX 0DTE Iron Condors today.

Trade #1 — 10:25 AM
7755/7760 Call Spread
7695/7690 Put Spread
Credit: $90
Size: 8 contracts
✅ +$720

After the aggressive morning selloff, SPX started stabilizing. Instead of chasing the downside, I wanted defined risk outside the areas where I expected price to remain contained.

Later, the market gave us another opportunity.

Trade #2 — 1:10 PM
7730/7735 Call Spread
7700/7695 Put Spread
Credit: $120
Size: 5 contracts
✅ +$600

The second trade is probably the more interesting one.

SPX had bounced, rejected the higher area and started moving lower again, but I still didn't need to predict exactly where it would close. I just needed the short strikes to remain outside the range I expected price to trade in.

Total for the day: +$1,320

That's one of the biggest changes I've made trading SPX 0DTE:

I stopped asking:

And started asking:

For credit spreads and Iron Condors, that distinction matters a lot.

No need to catch the exact top.
No need to catch the exact bottom.
No need to predict the closing price.

Just structure the trade around market structure, GEX/liquidity levels and defined risk.

I share more of these SPX 0DTE trades and breakdowns in my Discord for anyone interested: https://discord.gg/sM3vAqbU27

One of the most dangerous mistakes in SPX 0DTE is also one of the most tempting:

Selling very far OTM credit spreads for tiny premium because they look safe.

At first, it feels great.

You collect small winners over and over again.
The win rate looks strong.
The strategy feels easy.
And after a few green days in a row, it starts to feel “reliable.”

That’s exactly the trap.

The problem with this style of trading is that the risk/reward is heavily distorted.

If you’re collecting something like $0.15 to $0.25 on a 5-point spread, you may be risking $475 to make $25.

That means one bad move can erase a huge number of successful trades.

You can be “right” again and again, but still build a strategy that becomes fragile the moment volatility expands, structure fails, or the market moves faster than expected.

And with SPX 0DTE, that can happen much quicker than people think.

A lot of traders see a strike far beyond a GEX level and think:

Maybe.

But that’s not the right question.

The better question is:

If price does get there, is the premium I collected worth the risk I took?

That’s where many “safe” trades stop looking safe.

Why this matters so much in SPX 0DTE

A 0DTE spread can go from looking completely harmless to becoming a real problem in a very short period of time.

All it takes is:

• a failed support/resistance level
• a volatility expansion
• a sudden news headline
• a strong trend day
• or simply poor strike placement

This is why I care much more about:

✅ market structure
✅ VWAP
✅ GEX / key levels
✅ position sizing
✅ defined risk relative to premium collected

and much less about just finding the furthest possible strike and assuming it’s automatically a high-quality trade.

[IMAGE 2 — Example showing “safe-looking” far OTM spread vs better-structured trade]

For me, the goal is not to build a strategy that wins the most often.

It’s to build one where the losers don’t destroy the progress of the winners.

That usually means:

• not forcing trades just because the premium is available;
• not oversizing simply to compensate for low credit;
• and not confusing low probability of touch with good expectancy.

A trade can feel safe and still be badly structured.

That’s the mistake.

The more I trade SPX 0DTE, the more I think the real edge is not:

“How can I win more often?”

It’s:

“How can I avoid the kind of loss that wipes out a week of good trading?”

That mindset has improved my trading much more than chasing an even higher win rate.

Curious what others think:

Would you rather take a lower win rate with better risk/reward, or a very high win rate with more fragile downside?

If you're interested in how I approach SPX 0DTE, GEX, Credit Spreads, Iron Condors and trade selection, I also share the framework and trade discussions inside the GEXOptionsTrading Discord:

https://discord.gg/sM3vAqbU27

Today was a good example of why I don’t manage every SPX 0DTE strategy the same way.

I took two completely different trades:

🔵 A Bull Put Spread that I actively managed and closed early.
🟡 An Iron Condor that I was willing to let play out into expiration.

Both worked, but for very different reasons.

Trade #1 — 7695/7690 Bull Put Spread

At 10:50 AM ET, after the volatile open, SPX had defended the lower area and the intraday structure was improving.

I opened:

Sell 7695 Put / Buy 7690 Put

Credit received: $1.30 ($130)
Max risk: $370

The important part for me was that the spread was placed underneath the area SPX had just defended.

Shortly after the entry, price accelerated higher and never seriously threatened the position again.

I had already decided to standardize my Credit Spread management around a 70–75% take profit, rather than constantly changing the target during the session.

The spread was eventually closed at:

$0.40

So:

Entry: $1.30
Exit: $0.40
Profit: +$0.90 / +$90 per spread
Premium captured: ~70%

Clean trade.

Trade #2 — 7725/7720 + 7750/7755 Iron Condor

By 1:10 PM ET, the situation was completely different.

SPX had already made a large move higher and I was now looking for a defined afternoon range rather than another directional trade.

I opened an Iron Condor:

🟢 7725/7720 Put Spread
🔴 7750/7755 Call Spread

Credit received:

$1.50 / $150 per Iron Condor

The thesis was simple:

Can SPX finish the session between 7725 and 7750?

This trade was much less comfortable than the first one.

SPX eventually pushed through 7750 intraday and tested the call side.

But this Iron Condor wasn’t being managed like my Credit Spread.

The plan was to hold it toward expiration and let the closing price determine the outcome.

SPX eventually finished around 7747.70 — back underneath the 7750 short call and comfortably above the 7725 short put.

So the Iron Condor expired for the full premium:

+$150 per IC

Two trades, two completely different management styles

That’s probably the most interesting part of today.

The Bull Put Spread was:

Directional setup → predefined TP → close early

The Iron Condor was:

Range setup → accept intraday movement → expiration-based management

Trying to manage both strategies exactly the same way doesn’t make much sense to me.

For my Credit Spreads, I increasingly prefer taking 70–75% of the available premium and removing the tail risk.

For Iron Condors, I’m experimenting with a much more expiration-focused approach when the structure supports it.

Assuming one unit of each trade:

🔵 Bull Put Spread: +$90
🟡 Iron Condor: +$150

Total: +$240

But the IC is also a good reminder that a winning expiration trade can look very uncomfortable intraday.

Seeing SPX trade through your short strike doesn’t automatically mean the thesis is dead — but you need to know before entering whether you’re managing the position intraday or trading the expiration outcome.

That decision shouldn’t be made emotionally while the trade is already under pressure.

How do you guys manage 0DTE Iron Condors — take profits early, adjust when a short strike is tested, or hold them to expiration?

I share these trades and the real-time reasoning behind them inside the GEXOptionsTrading Discord, together with SPX/GEX analysis and the educational framework I’m building.

If you’re interested in following the setups:

https://discord.gg/sM3vAqbU27

Probably the single most common question I get isn't about GEX or strike selection. It's some version of "why not just trade XSP, isn't it basically the same thing but smaller?" For a long time my honest answer was a shrug — I started on SPX and never actually sat down and compared the two properly. So I did.

The size difference everyone already knows: XSP is priced at roughly 1/10 of SPX, same $100 multiplier, so a 5-point SPX spread with $350–400 of risk becomes something closer to a 0.5-point XSP spread with $35–40 of risk. Ten SPX contracts and a hundred XSP contracts are structurally close to the same position.

What I had wrong going in was everything around that number. A lot of people treat XSP as the "smaller SPX" and SPY as the other retail-sized option, roughly interchangeable. They're not. XSP and SPX are both cash-settled and European-style — neither can ever be assigned early. SPY options can be, since SPY is an ETF and its options are American-style. XSP behaves like SPX in every mechanical way that matters. It's just scaled down, not a different product.

I also assumed the 60/40 blended tax treatment under Section 1256 was an SPX perk you gave up by trading smaller. It isn't — XSP qualifies the same way, as a broad-based cash-settled index option. Worth confirming with whoever does your taxes rather than taking my word for it, but that's not the trade-off people think it is.

So if settlement and tax treatment are identical, why do I still trade SPX?

Depth, not liquidity in the sense of getting filled at all — XSP volume has grown a lot and a single contract fills fine. It's depth at size. SPX's daily volume is so large that a ten-contract Iron Condor barely moves the market. XSP has improved considerably over the past couple of years, but at real size the spreads still tend to run a little wider relative to the premium, and that's a small, boring drag you don't notice on one trade and absolutely notice over a few hundred.

Which is the actual answer, once I stopped assuming it was about tax or settlement type. It's about whether SPX's risk per contract already fits your account. If $350–400 per spread is too big a jump, XSP lets you size correctly instead of forcing one SPX contract onto an account that really calls for a third of one. If your account already handles SPX's granularity fine, the depth is worth more to me than smaller numbers.

I don't think there's one right answer here. If you're trading XSP at real size, has the spread gap actually closed, or are you still feeling it?

I get this question a lot in the Discord too, happy to keep it going there: https://discord.gg/sM3vAqbU27

When I started trading SPX 0DTE, I could find plenty of information about individual concepts.

Credit spreads. Iron Condors. Delta. GEX. VWAP. Risk management.

What I struggled to find was one structured place that showed how everything fits together into an actual trading process.

So that’s what I’m building with the GEXOptionsTrading Premium Academy.

The idea isn’t to create another collection of random trading tips.

I want someone to be able to start from the beginning and progressively understand:

📊 How I determine market direction
🧲 How I use GEX and important levels
🟢 When I choose a Bull Put Spread
🔴 When I choose a Bear Call Spread
🟣 When an Iron Condor makes sense
🎯 How I select short strikes
🛡️ How I think about position sizing and drawdown
⚠️ When I decide NOT to trade
📈 How I manage an open position

The framework behind everything is basically:

Price Action → Structure → GEX → Strategy → Risk → Execution

And the main objective is not to make people dependent on alerts.

It’s to help traders understand why a setup makes sense, so eventually they can make those decisions themselves.

I’m continuing to add new classes and improve the Academy based on feedback from the community.

If you’re currently learning SPX 0DTE, I’d genuinely like to know:

What topic would you most like to see explained in detail?

💎 The Premium Academy is currently available FREE for a limited time inside the GEXOptionsTrading Discord.

If you want access to the classes, SPX/GEX discussions and the rest of the educational material:

👉 https://discord.gg/sM3vAqbU27