The Portfolio Armor Substack

Exits, 4/17/2026

Portfolio Armor — Sat, 18 Apr 2026 02:55:11 GMT

This Week’s Trade Exits

As soon as I exit a trade, I note that in the comments of the post where I first mentioned the trade; at the end of the week, I try to track them all in one post. Starting in July, 2024, I have also been tracking them in this spreadsheet. These are the trades I exited this week.

Stocks or Exchange Traded Products

None.

Options

Comments

Stocks or Exchange Traded Products

No exits this week, as I haven’t been doing our basic strategy, which involves buying stocks and ETFs, and have been focusing on options instead. Nevertheless, the performance of our system’s top names have nearly doubled that of the SPDR S&P 500 Trust (SPY 1.32%↑) since I launched this Substack in December of 2022.

Options

A Solid OpEx Day

Today was the big Options Expiration day for April, and OpEx days tend to be where our losing trades cluster, because we usually take winners off before expiration. That’s what makes this week’s exits notable: out of 30 full or partial exits, 20 were profitable.

That’s a good result in its own right, but it also reflects the improvements we’ve made to our process along the way.

A few of this week’s trades are worth highlighting in particular, either because they illustrate where the process worked well, where the thesis was right but the expression was wrong, or where changes we made to our process later on might have helped us avoid some of the losses.

VIX: The macro call was basically right. The Iran war really was winding down by April 22, and volatility was lower by then. But I got the execution wrong. I centered the butterfly too high, around a 24 VIX, when something closer to 18 would have fit the way volatility actually resolved.
Abivax: This was a good reminder that we don’t always need the original headline thesis to play out in its cleanest form to make money. The takeover some traders were speculating about didn’t happen, but we still made money because of how we structured the trade and how we entered it opportunistically.
Universal Health Services: Another case where our broader thesis was right, but the expression was wrong. The Trump administration did launch a crackdown on violent crime, with task forces in D.C. and Memphis, for example, after the killing of Iryna Zarutska. But the company I picked in this case to express the thesis didn’t pan out.
Semler: This was a merger-arbitrage / exchange-ratio trade where the math looked attractive based on the price of the acquiring shares. But aside from the subsequent collapse in bitcoin prices, I didn’t realize the acquiring company was associated with Vivek Ramaswamy, some of whose previous public-company ventures have destroyed shareholder value.
AirSculpt: As I wrote in No Crying in the Casino, not every trade from our Multibaggers workflow is going to work. In this case, the analyst who originally suggested AIRS is no longer on that list. That doesn’t make the trade irrational in hindsight, but it does underscore the value of continuing to refine who earns a place on that list is going to work.
NuScale and some other previous winners: Some of these trades were entered before we started applying our current RSI and Setup Rating screens in their present form. We did start thinking explicitly about avoiding falling knives last November, but the fuller version of the screens we implemented later also helps us avoid buying overextended names. In at least some cases, including NuScale, that probably would have kept us from entering or re-entering names that had already had a big move.

More broadly, a number of our financing legs again did what they were supposed to do, helping us take gains and reduce cost on longer-dated bullish positions, many of which we entered during “risk-off” periods of elevated volatility.

Trade Alert: Energy And Biotech

Portfolio Armor — Fri, 17 Apr 2026 14:15:30 GMT

Two Very Different Top Names Trades

Our two Top Names trades today come from different sectors.

One fits the recent pattern we’ve seen from Portfolio Armor’s Top Ten: another primarily North American energy name, and at first glance, not the most exciting one. The other is almost the opposite: a European biotech with much more obvious upside potential if its upcoming catalysts break the right way.

That contrast is interesting in itself. Portfolio Armor’s Top Names haven’t all looked thrilling over the last two weeks, but that doesn’t mean they haven’t been worth paying attention to. Sometimes the system gives us a stock that looks solid and a little boring. Sometimes it gives us something with a more obvious “story” attached to it. Last night, it gave us one of each.

A Familiar Energy Setup

The first trade is on another primarily North American energy producer (it has some North Sea and West African exposure, but no Middle East exposure). That fits the pattern we’ve seen over the last couple of weeks, with Portfolio Armor turning up a number of names tied to oil, gas.

On the surface, that may not seem all that exciting. But in this market, cash-generative energy names can still work, especially when they’re based in North America and therefore insulated (and potentially able to profit) from the direct supply disruptions in the Middle East.

A More Exciting Biotech Setup

Our other trade is the more interesting one.

We’ve traded this biotech before, and just this week we exited a profitable trade on it.

What pushed it over the line this time was a confluence of factors. It showed up in Thursday night’s Top Ten. It also passed our tighter RSI and Chartmill Setup Rating screens. It remains a favorite of multiple accounts on our Multibaggers X list. And unlike some biotechs that are just “story” names with no clear timeline, this one has specific upcoming catalysts we can structure around.

The first is in May, when the company is expected to report financial results. The bigger one is in late June, when Phase 3 data are expected. We’ve structured today’s trade so that we harvest premium through the May event while keeping our longer-dated upside exposure alive through the more important June catalyst.

Maintaining Our Discipline

As always, on the options side, we’re not just buying stories. We’re pricing the structures first, estimating fair value, and then trying to enter at discounts to that fair value. We want bullish exposure here, but we still want to be disciplined about what we pay.

Today’s First Top Names Trade

Non-Middle Eastern energy theme

Top Names, 4/16/2026

Portfolio Armor — Fri, 17 Apr 2026 03:50:11 GMT

A Brief Market Comment

Here’s a version that adds the color on internals without stepping on the later performance section:

A Brief Market Comment

The market’s recent rally has been extreme. The strongest leg of it coincided with investors starting to price in a ceasefire and broader de-escalation in the Iran war (something we’ve been anticipating from the beginning), and by today’s session the S&P 500, Nasdaq, and Russell 2000 had all pushed to fresh highs. The Nasdaq has now logged a 12-session winning streak, its longest since 2009, while the S&P 500 is up about 11% from its March 30 low.

And it’s not just the indexes. Breadth has been strong too, with advancing stocks beating decliners across the major exchanges, even if volume has been a bit light. At the same time, momentum is getting stretched: the 14-day RSI had climbed to about 68.4 on the Nasdaq and 67 on the S&P 500, both approaching overbought territory.

That kind of backdrop can produce some eye-popping moves in the hotter names. Our Market Watchers space names from Monday is already up more than 20% since then,

And our Market Watchers photonics name from Wednesday’s alert is already up about 29% from our entry.

By comparison, our Top Names have looked relatively boring over the last couple of weeks. But in a market where some of the flashier areas are starting to look stretched, that may not be a bad thing.

Our Basic Strategy

Our basic strategy to buy equal dollar amounts of the Portfolio Armor web app’s top ten names, put trailing stops of ~20% on them, and replace them with names from the current week’s top ten when we get stopped out of a position—there are no options involved in this strategy.

Another Use For Our Top Names

We also use our top names in options trades, such as this one we exited earlier this week:

3-leg combo on Nokia Corp. (). Entered at a net debit of $0.59 on 1/21/2026. Exited the put spread at a net debit of $0.05 on 1/30/2026, sold half of the calls at $2.50 on 3/2/2026, and sold the other half of the calls at $4.20 on 4/13/2026. Profit: 423% (return on max risk: 242%). Signal: PA Top Names.

A Top Names Performance Update

Before we get to this week’s top ten names, let’s look at the final, 6-month performance of our top ten names from October 16th, 2025.

Over the next 6 months, our top ten names from October 16th, 2025 returned 4.46%, versus 6.45% for the SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (SPY 0.23%↑).

So far, we have 6-month returns for 147 weekly top names cohorts since we started this Substack at the end of December, 2022.

[Skipping ahead so this post doesn’t exceed email length—you can see the top names returns for every week here]

And as you can see above, our top names have averaged returns of 17.28% over the next six months, versus SPY’s average of 9.47%. You can see an interactive version of the table above here, where you can click on each date and see a chart showing each of the holdings that week.

This Week’s Top Names

Below are Portfolio Armor’s current top ten names as of Thursday’s close.

Trade Alert: Pharma And Energy

Portfolio Armor — Thu, 16 Apr 2026 14:34:22 GMT

Respecting The System

To be honest, some of the names Portfolio Armor’s Top Ten has been surfacing over the last couple of weeks haven’t exactly been thrilling. We’ve seen a lot of energy names, precious-metals names, and, last night, a large pharmaceutical company. Not exactly the kind of lineup that gets the blood pumping.

But the performance of Portfolio Armor’s Top Names speaks for itself. Since we started this Substack in late 2022, Portfolio Armor’s Top Names have averaged returns of 17.37% over the next 6 months, versus 9.77% for the market-tracking SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (). So maybe the system knows what it’s doing. Maybe it’s deliberately steering away from some of the hotter, more obvious areas of the market because they’re already overextended, and toward names where the valuations still leave room for upside.

That’s worth keeping in mind here, because one of today’s trades comes from that bucket: a stock that isn’t especially exciting at first glance, but may be exactly the kind of name the market starts appreciating more if this bull market broadens out.

A Selective Screen That Has Found Some Winners

Our other trade comes from our “Really Time To Buy?” Chartmill screen. It’s an extremely selective one: last night, only 6 names out of the thousands of U.S.-traded, optionable stocks passed all of its filters.

Like the Top Names list recently, that screen also happened to turn up an energy name last night. On the surface, that may seem a little odd given that we currently have an open bearish near-term bet on oil.

But the two views aren’t necessarily inconsistent. We still think oil is likely to come down once the Iran war ends, but there’s also a chance supply disruptions set in train by the war keep energy markets tighter for a while. And in this case, we’re not just looking at a generic oil trade anyway. We’re looking at a stock that screened well on valuation, fundamentals, and technical setup—the kind of name that may be able to do well even if oil merely settles into a more normal range rather than surging.

Maintaining Our Discipline

Today’s Top Names Trade

Pharmaceuticals / defensive growth theme

Trade Alert: Fertilizers And Photonics

Portfolio Armor — Wed, 15 Apr 2026 15:23:21 GMT

Still Looking Past The War

On Tuesday, President Trump said talks aimed at ending the Iran war could resume in Pakistan within days, reinforcing the view we’ve had for a while now: this war is likely to be over sooner rather than later. That matters for markets, because investors don’t wait for perfect clarity before they start looking ahead. They start discounting the next phase early.

Two New Setups, One Partially Driven By The War

That doesn’t mean the effects of the war disappear overnight. In some industries, they may linger for a while even after the fighting stops. Fertilizer is one of them. The Iran war has disrupted ammonia and fertilizer flows through the Gulf, and Russia also imposed a one-month halt on ammonium nitrate exports through April 21. So even if the war ends soon, the supply effects may persist long enough to keep the backdrop supportive for fertilizer producers.

That helps explain one of today’s trades. It’s in a company with strong fundamentals and an upcoming earnings catalyst, operating in an industry where the geopolitical squeeze may outlast the conflict itself.

And An AI Infrastructure/Photonics Name

Our other trade is in a photonics name from our Market Watchers list. It just landed a major validation event: A large semiconductor company said it plans to develop a new optical transceiver module using the company’s lasers. That’s the kind of supply-chain confirmation that can matter a lot in a market still trying to map the winners in AI infrastructure. This is a small European company that currently trades over-the-counter here, so we’ll have to buy the shares if we want to participate now.

Maintaining Our Discipline

As always, on the options side, we’re not just buying stories. We’re pricing the structures first, estimating fair value, and then trying to enter at discounts to that fair value. On the stock side, with an OTC name, we kind of are buying the story here, but it’s a strong story. We want bullish exposure here, but we still want to be disciplined about what we pay.

Today’s Top Names Trade

Fertilizer / agricultural inputs theme

Trade Alert: Skating To Where The Puck Is Going

Portfolio Armor — Tue, 14 Apr 2026 14:12:00 GMT

Skating To Where The Puck Is Going

As the NHL regular season comes to a close, the old line about what supposedly set Wayne Gretzky apart from other players comes to mind: he didn’t skate to the puck, but to wear the puck was going. Was that a trite oversimplification of his game? Probably, but it has some relevance to today’s market action.

The Iran conflict still dominates headlines, but certain corners of the market are already looking past it. We’re already seeing movement in space stocks, for example, ahead of what is likely to be the biggest IPO ever, for SpaceX. Intuitive Machines (), which we entered a trade in earlier this year, is up about a third over the past month. Space investors and traders are looking past the Strait of Hormuz, setting their sights on the stars. So are we: one of today’s trades is in another space name from our Market Watchers X list.

Today’s other trade is in one of our Top Names from last night, an oil field services company whose services should be in demand after the Iran war wraps up.

Maintaining Our Discipline

As always, we’re not just buying stories. We’re pricing the options structures first, estimating fair value, and then trying to enter at discounts to that fair value. We don’t want to miss the next rocket taking off, but we don’t want to overpay for the ride either.

Today’s Top Names Trade

Oilfield services / postwar production normalization theme

Trade Alert: Selective Setups

Portfolio Armor — Mon, 13 Apr 2026 15:09:16 GMT

Selective Setups From Our Strongest Screens

After a volatile week driven by war headlines, ceasefire chatter, and sharp moves in oil, we’re staying selective.

Friday night’s Top Names list gave us one fresh candidate that passed our RSI and Setup screens, and our Market Watchers workflow gave us one more name with enough growth and options torque to justify a shot. In both cases, the common thread is the same one we’ve been emphasizing lately: we’re not interested in forcing trades just because a stock moved or a story sounds interesting. We want names that screen well, have a plausible catalyst path over the next few months, and give us options structures we can enter at prices that make sense.

How We’re Playing It

So today we’re taking two shots.

The first is a discount retailer that reported strong results recently and still offers decent upside if the consumer backdrop stays resilient. The second is an advanced-battery name tied to aviation, defense, and high-performance energy storage, where the growth story is stronger but the stock is more speculative.

As usual, we estimated fair values on the options structures first and then aimed to enter them at discounts to those values. That means we may not get filled. But over time, we’d rather miss a trade than overpay for one.

Today’s Top Names Trade

Discount retail / consumer recovery theme

Avoiding The Mistakes Of 1991

Portfolio Armor — Mon, 13 Apr 2026 08:23:00 GMT

Avoiding The Mistakes Of 1991

In a post on Friday, I expressed concern that the Trump administration might repeat the mistakes of the first Gulf War in 1991 fumble the peace talks in a similar way.

So far, that hasn’t happened.

The talks in Islamabad didn’t produce a final agreement, but they also did not end with Washington giving Tehran some cosmetic off-ramp that would leave the underlying problem intact. Instead, after roughly 21 hours of negotiations, the Trump administration moved directly to another lever I argued for on Friday: blockading Iranian oil exports and maritime trade. CENTCOM said Sunday that the blockade would begin Monday at 10 a.m. ET, and that it would apply to vessels entering or leaving Iranian ports while still allowing traffic bound for non-Iranian ports to transit the Strait of Hormuz.

That is a meaningful distinction. This is not a general closure of the Gulf. It is targeted pressure on Iran.

“The Talks Failed” Is Too Strong

A lot of the commentary over the weekend treated Islamabad as if it proved diplomacy was dead. That seems premature.

The United States and Iran haven’t had diplomatic relations in 47 years. These were high-level talks held after more than a month of open war. No one should have expected all of that to be patched up in a single sitting. What’s more revealing is that the talks reportedly lasted about 21 hours. That suggests there was enough overlap to keep going for a long time, which in turn suggests there was likely agreement on a number of points, even if not yet on the biggest ones.

In their public posts following the negotiations, President Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian made some conciliatory comments. For example, President Trump wrote this, on Truth Social:

My three Representatives, as all of this time went by, became, not surprisingly, very friendly and respectful of Iran’s Representatives, Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf, Abbas Araghchi, and Ali Bagheri

That’s not what final diplomatic collapse sounds like.

Washington Has Moved To The Next Lever

More important than the atmospherics is the substance. Washington has now moved to “Plan B.”

In Friday’s post, I argued that if China and Russia could not deliver enough pressure on Tehran, the U.S. still had another lever to pull before returning to major bombing or ground-force escalation: go after Iranian oil exports directly. That is now what the administration is doing.

This matters because it gives Washington real leverage without immediately resuming the air war.

Why The Blockade Is Serious Pressure

Former Treasury-OFAC sanctions official Miad Maleki argued over the weekend that a U.S. naval blockade of Iran’s Gulf trade would impose roughly $435 million a day in combined economic damage, or about $13 billion a month, through lost exports and disrupted imports.

He also argued that Iran’s alternative routes outside the Gulf could replace less than 10% of the lost throughput, and that storage constraints could force shut-ins quickly enough to risk lasting damage to oil production capacity.

Why This Still Likely Ends Soon

If Trump initially refrains from launching a new round of strikes while the blockade begins to bite, the dynamic changes in Washington’s favor. If Iran accepts the pressure and keeps talking, the conflict can move toward a negotiated settlement. If Iran instead tries to break the blockade by attacking an American ship, then it will be Iran, not the United States, that has plainly reinitiated the war after the ceasefire window and after direct talks. That is a much worse position for Tehran politically and diplomatically.

Pakistan’s Moves Matter Too

There was another weekend development that should get Tehran’s attention.

Pakistan hosted the talks in Islamabad, but Saudi Arabia also said over the weekend that Pakistan had sent fighter jets and support aircraft to King Abdulaziz Air Base in the kingdom’s Eastern Province under the September 2025 mutual-defense pact.

That doesn’t mean Pakistan is spoiling for a wider war. It does mean Iran is being reminded that if the conflict flares up again, especially if Gulf infrastructure is hit again, it may be facing a wider set of opponents than just the U.S. and Israel.

That’s not a trivial signal. Pakistan’s role as host of the talks makes the military move more striking, not less.

Don’t Count On China To Break The Blockade

Some Iran supporters still hold out hope that China will somehow break the blockade.

China certainly likes Iranian oil. But China also has a much larger stake in the principle that commercial shipping should move through international waters and maritime chokepoints without being extorted, tolled, or arbitrarily throttled by regional powers. China’s economy depends heavily on large-scale seaborne trade, and its persistent trade surplus depends on the continued smooth movement of commercial shipping. That makes direct China challenging the U.S. Navy in support of Iran’s quest to toll the Strait of Hormuz seem unlikely.

There Is Still A Huge Carrot Here

If Iran gives up its nuclear-weapons ambition, stops financing foreign militias, and stops threatening shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, the upside is full normalization with the United States, the lifting of sanctions, and the possibility of a real economic boom. Iran is a large, educated country with major resources, a strategic location, and obvious rebuilding needs. Under different political conditions, it could grow dramatically.

The U.S. doesn’t need every Iranian to agree to that future. It just needs someone in power who is willing to take the deal.

Investing Implications

From an investing perspective, nothing that happened over the weekend changed my view that this conflict will probably be over within the next month or so.

Before the first round of talks and before the blockade announcement, I already had two trades teed up for Monday. I still plan on sending out an alert on those trades later today.

My only change today is tactical. The negative market reaction to the blockade gives us an opportunity to lower our bid prices a bit and try to take advantage of weaker prices.

Exits, 4/10/2026

Portfolio Armor — Fri, 10 Apr 2026 21:57:26 GMT

This Week’s Trade Exits

Stocks or Exchange Traded Products

None.

Options

Put spread on Riot Platforms (). Entered at a net credit of $1.42 as part of a 3-leg combo on 12/9/2025; exited at a net debit of $0.20 on 4/8/2026. Profit: 86% (return on max risk: 21%). Signal: PA Top Names.
Put spread on Micron Technology (). Entered at a net credit of $1.77 as part of a 4-leg combo on 3/3/2026; exited at a net debit of $0.20 on 4/8/2026. Profit: 89% (return on max risk: 49%). Signal: PA Top Names.
Put spread on Intel Corp. (). Entered at a net credit of $1.75 as part of a 4-leg hybrid combo on 2/18/2026; exited at a net debit of $0.20 on 4/10/2026. Profit: 89% (return on max risk: 39%). Signal: PA Top Names.
Put spread on Almonty Industries (). Entered at a net credit of $2.29 as part of a 4-leg hybrid combo on 2/23/2026; exited at a net debit of $0.20 on 4/9/2026. Profit: 91% (return on max risk: 47%). Signal: Market Watchers.
Put spread on Energy Fuels (). Entered at a net credit of $2.55 as part of a 3-leg combo on 11/21/2025; exited at a net debit of $0.12 on 4/8/2026. Profit: 95% (return on max risk: 168%). Signal: PA Top Names.
4-leg combo on ITT (). Entered at a net debit of $3.35 on 10/13/2025. Exited the put spread at a net debit of $0.20 on 10/29/2025, and exited the call spread at a net credit of $16.00 on 4/8/2026. Profit: 372% (147% on max risk). Signal: PA Top Names.

Comments

Stocks or Exchange Traded Products

Options

This week’s exits were closely tied to the market’s reaction to the tentative ceasefire announced Tuesday evening in the Iran war. By Wednesday morning, oil had plunged, stocks were ripping higher, and several of the downside-financing put spreads in our open combos had become cheap enough to buy back at substantial profits. That was the case with RIOT, MU, UUUU, and ITT, and it was a good reminder that macro events can sometimes accelerate the timetable on these financing-leg exits.

More broadly, these trades again showed how useful these structures can be in a market that remains headline-driven and unstable. In several cases, we were able to remove downside-financing put spreads for large gains while keeping the longer-dated bullish legs alive. That was also true with INTC and ALM later in the week. The financing legs did exactly what they were supposed to do: they reduced our net cost, helped define our risk, and then came off for strong profits as expiration approached.

The standout this week was ITT. There, the put spread had already been exited months ago, and the remaining call spread ultimately produced a large gain. Like some of our other recent full exits, that trade is a good reminder that once the financing leg has done its job, it can make sense to stay patient with the bullish leg if the underlying thesis is still working. Sometimes the biggest payoff comes only after the hedge has already been peeled off.

The larger lesson this week is the same one these structures keep reinforcing: when we combine a strong underlying thesis with disciplined entries, defined risk, and preset exits, we put ourselves in a position to benefit not just from stock-specific moves, but also from abrupt macro shifts like this week’s ceasefire relief rally.

Trade Alert: Biotech

Portfolio Armor — Fri, 10 Apr 2026 14:13:42 GMT

Selective After The Relief Rally

Earlier this week, we added long exposure in several names after the market’s relief rally on ceasefire news in the Middle East. Since then, we’ve stayed selective. Some of the names that looked interesting on the screens were simply too expensive in the options market after their recent moves, and others didn’t give us structures with reward/risk profiles we liked well enough.

That’s part of the process too. We don’t need to force trades just because a stock passes one screen or another. We’d rather wait for a setup where the structure, the timing, and the price all line up.

Today’s Setup

Today, we’re taking a shot on a large cap pharma name that came to us from one of our Multibaggers accounts. As a reminder, our Multibaggers list is comprised of accounts from our Market Watchers X list that have had documented, 100%+ gainers over the last year.

Unlike some of the faster-moving names we looked at last night, this one doesn’t have a great chart right now. But it does have much stronger fundamentals, a major earnings catalyst coming up in early May, and another one in early August. And it passes our falling knives screens. So rather than trying to trade it as a short-term momentum name, we’re giving it room to work through both earnings cycles with a longer-dated structure, while financing that exposure with nearer-term short premium and a defined-risk put spread.

Sticking To Our Process

As usual, we estimated the fair value of the structure first and then looked for a way to enter it at a discount. This isn’t a name that typically fits our risk budget for a 4-leg hybrid if we have to pay up for it, so we’re being a little stingier here than usual.

That means if we don’t get our price, we won’t chase it.

Today’s Multibaggers Trade

Large-cap pharma / obesity-drug rebound theme

How To Win The Iran War

Portfolio Armor — Fri, 10 Apr 2026 10:56:30 GMT

How To Win The Iran War

If you go by damage done in the five weeks of Epic Fury, it was a lopsided tactical defeat for Iran.

By the time the ceasefire took hold, the damage was overwhelmingly lopsided against Iran: according to Gen. Dan Caine’s post-ceasefire briefing, as reported by Business Insider, U.S. and allied forces had struck more than 13,000 targets in Iran, destroyed roughly 80% of Iran’s air defenses, damaged or destroyed more than 155 naval vessels, and wrecked about 90% of Iran’s weapons factories, including every known Shahed drone factory. By contrast, Iranian retaliation, while real and costly, was far smaller in physical effect: Reuters reported that 23 people were killed in Israel by missiles from Iran and Lebanon, 11 Israeli soldiers were killed in southern Lebanon, and the U.S. lost 13 service members, with hundreds more wounded.

Put simply, Iran absorbed the catastrophic destruction of a state’s military infrastructure, while the U.S. and Israel absorbed painful but much lighter losses in personnel and local damage.

But the U.S. may still be headed for a strategic defeat if it fumbles the ball during the peace talks. It wouldn’t be the first time. The current war with Iran can be thought of as the Third Gulf War, after the 1990-1991 war and the later Iraq War starting in 2003. Had the armistice negotiations been handled right in the first Gulf War, the Iraq War may well have been prevented.

The 1991 Warning

When President Trump threatened earlier this week to bomb Iran’s bridges and power plants, critics called those strikes war crimes. That was a new, tendentious accusation. You didn’t hear as much criticism when the U.S.-led coalition bombed Iraq’s power grid and its bridges in 1991, although that directly into one of the biggest blunders of the war’s endgame.

At the Safwan armistice talks, the Iraqi delegation was led by Lt. Gen. Sultan Hashim Ahmad. He asked Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf for permission to fly helicopters. Schwarzkopf agreed, but later said he had been “suckered.” He had assumed the request was reasonable because the coalition itself had destroyed so many Iraqi bridges.

Saddam Hussein’s regime then used those helicopters to help crush the Shiite and Kurdish uprisings that might otherwise have toppled him. The regime survived, regrouped, and the world eventually got the Second Gulf War. Winning the shooting phase and losing the political endgame is not a hypothetical risk for the United States. It is something Washington has already done once in the Gulf.

The Minimum Terms Of Victory

If this war is going to count as a strategic victory for America, the minimum conditions are straightforward.

Iran’s highly enriched uranium has to be removed from its control. Iran has to make a verifiable commitment not to pursue nuclear weapons. Not a “fatwa” that can be ignored by whichever faction actually controls the stockpile, but a real mechanism with enforcement behind it. Freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz has to be restored. And ideally, Iran should also be made to stop supporting its proxies, especially Hezbollah, whose attacks on Israel from Lebanon have drawn Israel deeper into battle there.

Given President Trump’s longstanding concern about nuclear proliferation, it seems unlikely he’ll give way on the uranium question. But he has publicly floated the idea of letting Iran collect tolls in the Strait. That would be a terrible idea.

The United States is not a party to the Law of the Sea convention, but Washington has long treated most of its navigation rules as customary international law anyway. More important, the strategic implications would be enormous. If the world’s largest navy cannot restore freedom of navigation against a second-rate regional power, that would be a grave blow to American maritime credibility. It would tell every chokepoint state on earth that shipping lanes are open to coercion if only the price is high enough.

Before More Bombing, Use Real Leverage

There is still a path to a better outcome, and it starts with diplomacy backed by leverage instead of diplomacy as an excuse for drift.

The first step is to isolate Iran diplomatically. That means trying to bring Russia and China on board, not because either suddenly shares Washington’s worldview, but because each has leverage over Tehran and each has reasons to prefer a contained settlement to an open-ended regional war. On China, there are already signs of movement. Trump said this week that he believes China helped persuade Iran to negotiate; China’s diplomacy also fit Beijing’s interest in improving the atmosphere ahead of the coming Xi-Trump summit.

To get China more fully on board, Washington would likely have to offer something in return. That could include allowing China to import more of Nvidia’s H200 chips. More broadly, Washington could lower the rhetorical temperature on Taiwan, emphasizing peaceful resolution and eventual reunification with Mainland China.

For Russia, the most obvious concession would be to stop providing ISR that helps Ukraine kill Russians. Ukraine can continue fighting with European money and weapons if it chooses, but if Washington wants Moscow’s help in isolating Tehran and removing uranium, there is no compelling reason for the U.S. to keep supplying targeting data to an enemy of Russia while asking Russia for help against an enemy of the U.S.. A second, less-obvious concession would be to signal that Washington will not interfere with the International North-South Transport Corridor, the Russia-Caspian-Iran-India route Moscow sees as a sanctions-resistant trade artery.

And if sanctions on Iran are going to be relaxed as part of a settlement anyway, Washington should think carefully before leaving Russia sanctioned while restoring Iran’s trade. That would risk turning Iran into an unnecessary intermediary in commerce that could just as easily flow directly. Might as well drop sanctions on Russia as well in that scenario.

The Next Lever

If Russia and China can’t deliver enough pressure, the United States still has another lever to pull before bombing Iran again or sending ground forces to secure the Strait.

It can go after Iranian oil exports directly. If Iran is going to impede its neighbors’ exports through Hormuz, Washington has an obvious asymmetry available: identify the ships carrying Iranian crude once they are outside the Strait, interdict them, arrest the crews if necessary, and seize the cargoes. That would hit the regime where it hurts most without immediately escalating to another major bombing campaign.

And if the concern is that China, Japan, Australia, and others still need Gulf oil, the U.S. and its partners could offset some of that by exporting more oil themselves and by reselling the cargoes taken from Iranian tankers. That would be coercive. But it would also be more directly connected to the actual problem than allowing Tehran to weaponize a global trade artery while Washington debates how many more bridges to bomb.

After The Shooting Stops

So far, even the ceasefire has involved a lot of shooting. Iran and its neighbors have continued firing at one another during the supposed pause. Israel has continued attacking Hezbollah in Lebanon.

But when the shooting finally does stop, one thing is already obvious: a lot of infrastructure is going to have to be rebuilt.

That includes oil infrastructure. We recently entered a trade related to that.

And it includes desalination plants too. We entered a trade related that earlier this week.

The key thing now though is to make sure the diplomacy that follows the war does not squander the military advantage that has already been won. America does not need another Gulf War that ends in a tactical victory and a strategic mess. It has already tried that once.

Top Names, 4/9/2026

Portfolio Armor — Fri, 10 Apr 2026 01:48:51 GMT

A Brief Market Comment

The big news this week was the ceasefire announced Tuesday night.

On Tuesday morning, before that happened, we bet against oil on the view that the Iran war was more likely to end sooner rather than later.

That trade’s in the money now, but since then, the market has sent a mixed message. Stocks have kept rallying—the S&P 500 and Nasdaq just logged their seventh straight up day, their longest winning streak since 2024—while oil, though up a bit on Thursday, is still far below where it was before the ceasefire. And the VIX dropped below 20 for the first time since the conflict began, even though the Strait of Hormuz is still being throttled by Iran and fighting is continuing between Iran and its Gulf neighbors, as well as between Israel and Iran’s proxy Hezbollah in Lebanon. (Barron’s)

Our own view hasn’t changed much. We’re still cautiously optimistic this gets resolved within the next few weeks—whether by negotiations, more combat, or some combination of both. In the meantime, we’re staying disciplined and continuing to add long exposure, especially from our strongest source of alpha: our system’s Top Names.

Our Basic Strategy

Another Use For Our Top Names

We also use our top names in options trades, such as this one we exited this week,

4-leg combo on ITT (). Entered at a net debit of $3.35 on 10/13/2025. Exited the put spread at a net debit of $0.20 on 10/29/2025, and exited the call spread at a net credit of $16.00 on 4/8/2026. Profit: 372% (147% on max risk). Signal: PA Top Names.

No Performance Update This Week

Before we post our new Top Names, we usually post a performance update on our Top Names from six months earlier. There was some inconsistency in the data last week, that we thought had been cleaned up, but we’re still having issues today. We’ll plan on getting the performance tracking corrected before next week’s post.

This Week’s Top Names

Below are Portfolio Armor’s current top ten names as of Thursday’s close.

Trade Alert: Our Top Names Pivot To Energy

Portfolio Armor — Thu, 09 Apr 2026 17:40:35 GMT

Energy Setups After Wednesday’s Relief Rally

As regular readers may remember, on Tuesday, before the ceasefire was announced, we placed a bearish trade on oil on the view that the Iran war likely to wrap up soon.

On Wednesday, that thesis started to play out fast: with news of a tentative ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran, oil plunged and stocks ripped higher in a broad relief rally.

A lot of the stocks that spiked the most in Wednesday’s rally were previous Top Names of ours, including photonics names and others tied to the broader AI hardware ecosystem. But those weren’t the names that dominated our Top 10 on Wednesday night. Instead, four of our Top Names were energy-related. That makes sense in light of how our system works: all else equal, it tends to favor names that were down over the last week, anticipating some degree of mean reversion.

Why These Two Names

So today, we’re taking advantage of Wednesday’s drop in energy names to add trades on two of the energy stocks that showed up in last night’s Top 10.

One is a newly public LNG export name, tied to the buildout of U.S. gas infrastructure and to the long-term growth of liquefied natural gas demand. The other is a renewable fuels name that gives us exposure to a different corner of the energy complex, one tied more to agricultural and industrial recovery than to oil and gas directly.

Sticking To Our Process

As usual, we’re maintaining our discipline here. We estimate the fair values of the options structures first, then try to enter them at discounts to those values. That means we won’t always get filled. But over time, we think it’s better to miss a trade than to overpay for one—especially in a tape that’s still moving violently on war headlines, ceasefire chatter, and shifting expectations about what comes next.

That’s the approach we’re taking again today.

Today’s First Top Names Trade

LNG export / energy infrastructure theme

Trade Alert: Ceasefire Edition

Portfolio Armor — Wed, 08 Apr 2026 15:14:33 GMT

Ceasefire Relief, But We’re Keeping Our Discipline

In yesterday’s trade alert, we placed a bearish options trade on oil on the view that the Iran war was more likely to end sooner rather than later.

After news broke last night of the ceasefire in the Iran war, that thesis has started to play out. Oil is tumbling today, and stocks are ripping higher in relief.

That said, we’re maintaining our discipline here. The demands of the two sides still seem far apart, and the path from a tentative ceasefire to a durable settlement is far from straightforward. So even with the market moving sharply in the direction we expected, we’re not treating this as a reason to chase new trades indiscriminately.

How We’re Approaching Today’s Trades

As usual, when we look at options structures, we start by estimating their fair values and then try to enter them at discounts to those values. That doesn’t guarantee fills, of course. Sometimes it means we miss trades. But over time, we think it’s a better approach than paying up in the heat of a fast-moving tape.

That’s especially important on a day like today, when stock prices are ripping higher and the temptation is to get more aggressive just because the headlines have turned. We’d rather miss a trade than overpay for one.

Today’s Two Setups

Today we’re looking at two names from our Top Names list.

One is a company in photonics and industrial lasers, a space that could benefit if capital spending continues to recover and if investors stay willing to rotate into cyclical technology names with improving setups.

The other is a more defensive growth name in specialty ingredients, a steadier kind of business that still offers upside when it shows up high in our rankings and gives us an options structure we can live with.

That’s the common thread here: not chasing the hottest headline, but looking for names with good setups, solid upside potential, and options structures we can enter at prices that make sense.

Today’s First Top Names Trade

Photonics / industrial laser theme

Trade Alert: Fading Oil

Portfolio Armor — Tue, 07 Apr 2026 14:21:49 GMT

War-Resolution, Biotech, And Space Setups

In yesterday’s trade alert, we argued that this war is still more likely to end in weeks than months.

What happened after that alert only reinforced the point. President Trump appeared Monday with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and later showed up at the White House Easter Egg Roll.

Neither Trump nor his team seemed nervous about Trump’s Tuesday 8:00 p.m. Eastern deadline for Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz or face major U.S. strikes.

One reason may be that they still expect a deal. Another may be that they expect another deadline extension. But if you listened to how they described the rescue of the downed F-15 Weapons Systems Officer in Iran, a third possibility is they expect to decisively defeat Iran.

Trump’s Truth Social post from this morning suggests that as well.

The market may not have priced in that scenario yet.

Today’s Macro Trade

In light of that, we are adding a trade today predicated on a relatively fast end to the war: a bearish options trade on the United States Oil Fund (). If the war ends soon, the Strait reopens, and the current oil shock begins to normalize, crude could give back a meaningful chunk of its war premium by summer.

The Other Trades

Beyond that macro trade, today’s alert also includes two biotech names from our Top Names list and one space name from our Market Watchers X list.

The biotech trades reflect our usual interest in names with strong upside potential over the next several months, when we can structure the options intelligently and define the risk. The space trade gives us exposure to a group that could get an additional tailwind from the upcoming SpaceX IPO and the renewed market enthusiasm that could come with it.

Price Discipline Still Applies

The tape is still messy, and volatility is still elevated. So the same rule still applies: we do not get rewarded for chasing. We either get filled at prices that make sense, or we move on.

Today’s Macro Trade

Oil normalization / postwar de-escalation theme

The instrument is the United States Oil Fund (), and our trade is a combo consisting of these four legs:

Trade Alert: After The War

Portfolio Armor — Mon, 06 Apr 2026 14:39:11 GMT

Postwar Reconstruction

President Trump’s revised deadline for Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz is now Tuesday at 8:00 p.m. Eastern, and his public threat remains the same: if there’s no deal and the Strait stays closed, the U.S. military will destroy Iran’s power plants and bridges. Iran has warned that it will hit Gulf infrastructure and other targets in retaliation—not that they haven’t already done some of this. Iranian strikes have already hit petrochemical facilities in Kuwait, Bahrain, and the UAE, and in Kuwait, drones also targeted water desalination plants, in addition to hitting oil infrastructure there..

Last month, we placed bullish trades on companies positioned to benefit from repairing that oil infrastructure.

Today, we’re adding a new trade on a company that supplies key components to desalination plants in the Persian Gulf.

Plus, Keeping Our Eyes On The AI Buildout

We are also adding four other bullish, defined-risk setups today. Two are Top Names in semiconductor equipment. Two more come from our Market Watchers X list, tied to power and emissions-control infrastructure and to semiconductor test and inspection. But the common thread is the same one we’ve been emphasizing for weeks now: we think this war is more likely to end in weeks than months, and we want exposure to the kinds of names that should benefit once the market can start looking past the fighting. At the same time, the tape is still messy, volatility is still elevated, and we do not get rewarded for chasing. We either get filled at prices that make sense, or we move on.

Today’s Postwar Reconstruction Trade

Desalination infrastructure reconstruction theme

Top Names, 4/2/2026

Portfolio Armor — Fri, 03 Apr 2026 01:41:15 GMT

A Brief Market Comment

This week’s market action was dominated by the Iran war and the market’s shifting interpretation of how long it is likely to last. The week began with a relief rally on hopes that the conflict might be heading toward an endgame sooner rather than later, but that optimism faded after President Trump’s speech suggested another two or three weeks of bombing and offered no obvious diplomatic offramp. Stocks sold off, oil jumped, and the market was reminded again that this is still a headline-driven tape where sentiment can reverse violently in a matter of hours.

Even so, as we noted in this week’s Exits post, there were still reasons not to overread the bearish reaction. Trump reiterated that he expects the war to be wrapped up within weeks, not months, and he also went out of his way to note that the U.S. has not struck Iran’s oil infrastructure, despite calling it an easy target. Then on Thursday, even amid fresh escalation, Gulf countries kept pushing diplomatic avenues to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, and there were reports that Iran and Oman were working on a protocol for future traffic through the strait. In other words, this still looks less like the start of a long occupation or regional ground war than a brutal but time-limited campaign with an eventual off-ramp.

That remains the basis of our positioning. Before this war started, we hedged against it. More recently, we have been selectively adding bullish exposure several months out, with the idea that by the time those options mature, we expect to be on the other side of this conflict. The best source for those trade ideas, as always, remains our Top Names.

Our Basic Strategy

Another Use For Our Top Names

We also use our top names in options trades, such as this one we exited this week,

Call spread on Lumentum Holdings (LITE 16.54%↑). Bought for $2.10 as part of a 4-leg combo on 1/14/2026; exited the put spread at a net debit of $0.10 on 2/4/2026, and sold the call spread for $16.00 on 4/1/2026. Profit: 662% (return on max risk: 185%). Signal: PA Top Names.

No Performance Update This Week

Before we post our new Top Names, we usually post a performance update on our Top Names from six months earlier. There’s some inconsistency in the data today though, that I need to get cleaned up, so we’ll plan on getting back to our top names performance updates next week.

This Week’s Top Names

Below are Portfolio Armor’s current top ten names as of Thursday’s close.

Exits, 4/2/2026

Portfolio Armor — Thu, 02 Apr 2026 22:59:47 GMT

This Week’s Trade Exits

Stocks or Exchange Traded Products

None.

Options

Put spread on Uranium Energy (). Entered at a net credit of $0.99 as part of a 4-leg hybrid combo on 2/26/2026; exited at a net debit of $1.45 on 4/2/2026. Loss: 30% of max risk (46% on premium collected). Signal: PA Top Names.
Put spread on iShares Silver Trust (). Entered at a net credit of $2.32 as part of a 4-leg combo on 2/2/2026; the short 3/31/2026 $70 put was assigned, and I sold the resulting shares at $68.34 on 4/1/2026. Profit: 28% (return on max risk: 25%). Signal: PA Top Names.
Put spread on SLB (). Entered at a net credit of $0.70 as part of a 4-leg hybrid combo on 3/20/2026; exited at a net debit of $0.20 on 3/30/2026. Profit: 71% (return on max risk: 17%). Signal: Market Watchers.
Short call on Almonty Industries (). Sold-to-open for $1.43 as part of a 4-leg hybrid combo on 2/23/2026; bought-to-close for $0.20 on 3/30/2026. Profit: 86%. Signal: Market Watchers.
Put spread on Alcoa (). Entered at a net credit of $1.79 as part of a 4-leg combo on 2/6/2026; exited at a net debit of $0.20 on 4/1/2026. Profit: 89% (return on max risk: 39%). Signal: PA Top Names.
Short call on Aeluma (). Sold-to-open for $2.25 as part of a 4-leg hybrid combo on 3/5/2026; bought-to-close for $0.20 on 3/31/2026. Profit: 91%. Signal: Market Watchers.
Call spread on Lumentum Holdings (). Bought for $2.10 as part of a 4-leg combo on 1/14/2026; exited the put spread at a net debit of $0.10 on 2/4/2026, and sold the call spread for $16.00 on 4/1/2026. Profit: 662% (return on max risk: 185%). Signal: PA Top Names.

Comments

Stocks or Exchange Traded Products

Options

(Since the market will be closed for Good Friday tomorrow, I’m publishing this week’s exits today)

This week’s exits were a good reminder of why we use these structures in the first place. Even in a market dominated by war headlines, sharp reversals, and elevated volatility, several of our downside-financing legs still worked the way they were supposed to: we were able to peel off put spreads and short calls for solid gains while keeping the longer-dated bullish exposure alive when warranted. That was the case with SLV, SLB, AA, and ALMU, where the financing legs did their job and let us reduce risk or lock in gains without having to abandon the broader thesis immediately.

The standout this week was LITE. There, the put spread came off early for almost nothing, and the remaining call spread ultimately delivered a very large gain. That trade is a good example of why it can make sense to stay patient with the bullish leg after the downside hedge has been removed: once the financing piece has done its work, the remaining upside exposure can become very powerful if the story keeps improving.

The blemish this week was UEC. That one is a reminder that even when the broader theme remains intact, near-term downside legs can still go against us if the stock weakens into expiration. More broadly, though, this week’s exits reinforce the same lesson as last week’s: our best results tend to come when we combine a strong underlying thesis with disciplined entry filters and preset exit orders, and then let the structure do its work.

Trade Alert: More War

Portfolio Armor — Thu, 02 Apr 2026 14:33:18 GMT

Staying Disciplined In A Hostile Tape

President Trump’s speech last night, suggesting the war could continue for another two or three weeks, was broadly consistent with the view we’ve been expressing here: that this conflict is more likely to be resolved within the next month or so than to drag on indefinitely. The market’s initial reaction was bearish anyway, with stocks sliding and oil jumping back above $100, which suggests some of that reaction may prove overdone if our timing is roughly right. But whether it is or not, that kind of uncertainty may give us a chance to get a few fills below fair value today.

Just as importantly, we’re staying disciplined here the same way we did yesterday, when the market was rising. We’re not changing our standards just because the tape is weak. Either the market comes to our prices, or it doesn’t. We’re not chasing anything in this environment.

Letting The Market Come To Us

That discipline matters in both directions. For example, our trade yesterday on a company tied to the buildout of new power capacity for AI infrastructure did not fill. But the stock passed our screens again last night, so we’re taking another shot at it today—again at a price we think makes sense. If we get filled, great. If not, we move on.

That same logic applies to today’s other trades. We have one on a semiconductor-equipment name tied to leading-edge chip manufacturing. Another is on a test-and-measurement company that sits underneath the AI and semiconductor ecosystem. A third is on a power-capacity name whose story has only grown more credible since it became a big winner for us earlier this year. And the fourth is on a clinical-stage biotech name from our Multibaggers workflow, where we think the options are priced attractively enough to justify a defined-risk bullish shot.

Same View, Same Process

So the broader setup has not changed much. We still think this war is more likely to be wrapped up by May than to become a permanent fixture, and we’re still aiming our bullish exposure several months beyond that. But we’re doing it selectively, through names that pass our tighter entry rules, and at bids designed to reflect the uncertainty in this market. If we get filled below fair value, all the better.

Today’s First Top Names Trade

Semiconductor equipment / AI capex theme

Trade Alert: Returning To A Recent Winner

Portfolio Armor — Wed, 01 Apr 2026 15:06:30 GMT

A Second Bite At A Prior Winner

The market ripped higher yesterday, but the jury is still out on whether that was just an oversold bounce or the start of something more durable. And with President Trump set to give a major speech on Iran tonight, there is still plenty of uncertainty hanging over this tape. So we’re staying selective in adding long exposure here rather than buying indiscriminately.

Today’s trade is in a name we know well, because it was already a big winner for us earlier this year. When we first traded it back in November, the stock was so depressed that we used a risk-reversal structure partly because there wasn’t really a market for the in-the-money puts we would normally have used to define the downside. We exited part of that trade for a gain of more than 400% earlier this month. But a big move by itself is not a reason to avoid a stock if the story has kept improving underneath it.

Why Add Another Here?

That is the case here. Since our first trade, the company’s core story has been further validated in a way that helps explain why the stock is up so much. This is not a case of irrational exuberance levitating a weak business. It is a case of a market re-pricing a company whose role in the buildout of new power capacity for AI infrastructure has become more credible and more concrete. In other words, the stock’s rise appears to have been driven by improving fundamentals and validation of the thesis, not just by momentum for its own sake.

And that matters, because our technical screens are not just there to keep us from buying falling knives. They are also there to keep us from chasing names that have become overextended. A stock can climb 200% in a few months and still not be overextended if the move has been orderly enough and the setup is still constructive. In this case, that is what our screens are telling us. The stock still passes our RSI and Chartmill Setup filters, which is one reason we’re comfortable taking another shot at it here.

Still Aiming Beyond The War

More broadly, this still fits the way we’ve been thinking about this market. We continue to think the war is more likely to be wrapped up by May than to drag on indefinitely, and we’re aiming our bullish exposure several months beyond that, with the idea that by the time these options expire, we’ll be on the other side of this conflict. That doesn’t mean there won’t be more violent swings along the way. It does mean we’re still looking for selective ways to position for the upside that could follow once this war is behind us.

And in this case, those swings can work in our favor. The options structure we’re using today is designed to harvest some of the elevated implied volatility created by this unstable tape while still giving us bullish exposure into the summer.

Today’s Market Watchers Trade

Power capacity / AI infrastructure theme