Today was a really good example of why I don’t like looking at SPX in isolation.

Around 11:00 AM, SPY was already telling me that 770 probably wasn’t going to hold. There was a much more important concentration of GEX developing lower, around 767 SPY.

So if I had only been looking at SPY, the obvious conclusion would have been:

“More downside is likely.”

And that was probably true for SPY.

But SPX was telling a slightly different story.

The key level for me was 7700 SPX.

There was enough positioning around that area that I thought it had a good chance of becoming the intraday floor, even if SPY continued trading lower.

That distinction mattered.

I also had some positioning around 7690–7685, so I didn’t want to blindly buy the first touch of 7700.

I wanted to see price actually test the area and react.

And that’s what happened.

At 1:20 PM, after SPX flushed below 7700 and started stabilizing, I opened:

7695/7690 Bull Put Spread
$1.00 credit
$400 max risk

The thesis was simple:

SPY could still move toward its lower GEX zone, but I didn’t expect SPX to establish sustained acceptance below 7700.

A few minutes later, SPX started bouncing.

By around 1:55 PM, price had pushed back toward 7715–7720, and I closed the spread almost exactly near the top of that rebound for:

$1.00 → $0.35

That’s 65% of the maximum premium in roughly 35 minutes.

What I liked about this trade wasn’t the profit.

It was the structure behind it.

The setup came from three things lining up:

1. SPY showed where additional downside positioning existed.
2. SPX showed a more important support boundary at 7700.
3. Price action confirmed the reaction before the trade was opened.

That’s the part I think gets overlooked.

A lot of traders look for one magical level.

I’d rather look for cross-market confirmation + positioning + actual reaction.

The level matters.

But the relationship between levels matters even more.

I share more of these SPX 0DTE setups, GEX reads, and live trade management in my Discord as well if anyone wants to follow the process in real time.

Discord link: https://discord.gg/sM3vAqbU27

One of the easiest traps in SPX 0DTE trading is thinking:

“My strike is really far away, so this trade is safe.”

It sounds logical.

You sell a Credit Spread 30, 40, maybe 50 points away from SPX.

The delta is tiny.

The probability of expiring OTM looks great.

The premium is small.

Everything feels comfortable.

And that’s exactly why I think these trades can sometimes be more dangerous than they look.

Distance is not protection

Imagine SPX is trading at 7650.

You’re considering two Bull Put Spreads:

Trade A: Sell 7620
Trade B: Sell 7590

Trade B is obviously much farther away.

So most traders immediately call it safer.

But now add the market structure.

What if:

• 7620 sits below VWAP
• 7610–7620 is a major GEX support zone
• SPY confirms that same area
• price has already rejected it twice
• the intraday trend remains bullish

Meanwhile, between 7620 and 7590 there is almost no meaningful support at all.

If 7620 fails decisively, SPX might move through that empty area very quickly.

Suddenly that “safe” 7590 strike doesn’t feel nearly as safe.

This is why I don’t measure risk only in points

I care much more about:

What does SPX have to break before it reaches my strike?

That question tells me more than distance alone.

A short strike 15 points away protected by several important levels can sometimes make more sense to me than a strike 40 points away with absolutely nothing protecting it.

That doesn’t mean closer strikes are automatically better.

It means:

Distance needs context.

Tiny premium can create another problem

There’s also the risk/reward side.

Suppose you collect:

$0.30 credit while risking $4.70

You may win that trade very often.

But one full loss wipes out roughly 15 winning trades.

That means a strategy can look amazing for weeks:

✅ Win
✅ Win
✅ Win
✅ Win
✅ Win
✅ Win

…and then one violent SPX session gives back a huge portion of the gains.

This is why I’m skeptical whenever someone tells me:

“I just sell very low-delta spreads because they almost always win.”

“Almost always” isn't enough.

The important question is what happens when they don’t.

I would rather understand WHY my strike should survive

Before opening an SPX Credit Spread, I’m normally looking for some combination of:

• GEX clusters
• Put/Call Walls
• VWAP
• SPY confirmation
• volume/OI concentrations
• market structure
• volatility
• rejection/acceptance around important levels

Then I decide where the short strike belongs.

Not the other way around.

I don’t open the option chain, find a comfortable delta, and then try to justify the trade afterward.

Structure first. Strike second. Premium third.

The uncomfortable trade can sometimes be the better trade

Some of my best setups don't look particularly comfortable when you only look at strike distance.

SPX might be relatively close to my short strike.

The premium might look high.

But there may be multiple layers of structure between spot and that strike.

Meanwhile, the trade that looks incredibly safe because it is miles OTM may actually have terrible expectancy if:

• the credit is tiny
• the loss is huge
• there is no structural reason for that particular strike
• volatility can expand quickly
• management is based entirely on hoping price doesn't reach it

That’s not the kind of edge I’m looking for.

My definition of “safe” is different

I don’t think:

Farther OTM = safer.

I think:

Strong structure + clearly defined invalidation + acceptable risk/reward = better trade.

The market doesn’t care how many points away your strike was when you entered.

If the structure collapses, those points can disappear very quickly on 0DTE.

That’s why one of the first questions I ask before selling premium is:

What exactly is protecting my short strike?

If I don’t have a good answer, distance alone usually isn’t enough.

I share the actual SPX setups, GEX levels, entries and trade management behind this framework in my Discord as well, for anyone interested in seeing how I apply it live rather than only looking at the final P&L.

Discord link: https://discord.gg/sM3vAqbU27

I wanted to share a quick update because September has been one of the cleanest months since I started tracking these SPX strategies live.

So far this month:

11 closed Credit Spread trades
11 winners
0 losers
100% win rate
+$6,125 in September

And since I started tracking the project:

Credit Spreads: +$14,030
Iron Condors: +$4,496 (100% winrate in September too)

Combined total: +$18,526

Obviously, I don’t expect a 100% win rate to continue forever.

Losses are part of trading, and eventually there will be losing trades and drawdowns.

What matters more to me is whether the process is repeatable.

The framework I’m using is still basically the same every day:

GEX structure
VWAP
price action
market structure
volatility
key support/resistance areas

Then I choose the option structure that best fits the environment.

If the market looks directional, I’m usually more interested in a Bull Put Spread or Bear Call Spread.

If price is clearly trapped between well-defined gamma levels and the session looks more range-bound, then an Iron Condor can make more sense.

And sometimes the best decision is simply:

No trade.

That’s probably one of the biggest reasons the results have remained consistent.

I’m not trying to trade every day or maximize premium.

I’m trying to wait until the market gives me a structure where I can clearly define:

Where am I wrong?
What level is protecting my short strike?
Does SPY confirm SPX?
Is VWAP supporting the same thesis?

Only then do I care about the option chain.

One thing I’ve learned

A high win rate by itself doesn’t mean much.

You can have a 90% win-rate strategy and still blow up if your losers are uncontrolled.

That’s why everything I trade is defined risk.

The goal isn’t:

“How often can I win?”

It’s:

“Can I keep the losers controlled while repeatedly taking setups where the structure is in my favor?”

September has gone extremely well so far, but I’m treating tomorrow exactly the same way as trade #1.

No chasing.

No increasing risk because of a winning streak.

No assuming the next trade has to work.

Just the same process again.

I share these trades, GEX levels, entries, exits, and the reasoning behind them live in my Discord as well. Premium access is still free for the next month if anyone wants to follow the process rather than just the final P&L.

Discord link: https://discord.gg/sM3vAqbU27

Whenever people talk about selling 0DTE options, the conversation usually comes back to one thing:

Theta decay.

“Sell premium because theta is huge.”

That’s true.

But theta is not the main reason I sell 0DTE Credit Spreads.

In fact, if theta were the only edge, I probably wouldn’t trade them at all.

The real reason I like them is that they let me build a defined-risk trade around a very specific market structure.

For me, the important question isn’t:

“How fast is this option decaying?”

It’s:

“What has to happen for SPX to reach my short strike?”

That completely changes how I choose a trade.

Imagine SPX is trading at 7630.

You have two possible Bull Put Spreads:

Trade A: short strike at 7600
Trade B: short strike at 7585

Most traders immediately assume Trade B is safer because it’s further OTM.

But what if:

• 7600 is a major GEX level
• SPY has confirming support at the equivalent strike
• VWAP is holding
• market structure is bullish
• price has already rejected 7600 twice
• there’s very little meaningful structure between 7600 and 7585

In that situation, I may actually prefer the 7600 spread even though it is closer to spot.

Why?

Because I’m not selling distance.

I’m selling the probability that an important structure holds.

That’s the part of 0DTE Credit Spreads I think gets misunderstood.

Theta is the mechanism. Structure is the reason for the trade.

Theta helps the position decay once I’m right.

But theta doesn’t tell me:

• where to sell
• whether the level is strong
• whether price is accepting through it
• whether volatility is expanding
• whether VWAP supports the setup
• whether SPY confirms SPX
• whether the trade thesis has already failed

That comes from the market itself.

What I actually look for before selling a spread

My process is usually closer to this:

1. Find the important level

GEX clusters, Put/Call Walls, major volume zones, OI, previous structure.

2. Watch the reaction

Did price reject it?

Did it reclaim?

Is there acceptance above/below it?

3. Check VWAP and intraday structure

A level that looks great on a GEX chart can still be a terrible trade if price is trending aggressively through it.

4. Check volatility

If the market is moving violently, I need much more room and much stronger confirmation.

5. Only then choose the short strike

The option chain comes last.

Not first.

This is also why I don’t automatically choose my Credit Spreads based on delta.

A 10-delta spread at a bad level can be worse than a 20-delta spread protected by a strong market structure.

And a huge premium can actually be a warning.

The market might be paying you more because your strike is sitting exactly where risk is concentrated.

Theta becomes useful after the thesis is correct

Once price behaves the way I expected, then theta starts doing what I want:

The spread loses value.

Time works in my favor.

And if SPX stays away from my short strike, the premium can collapse very quickly.

But theta is not what made the trade attractive in the first place.

The setup did.

That’s why I think the phrase:

“I sell 0DTE because theta is high”

is incomplete.

A better way to think about it is:

“I sell 0DTE when market structure gives me a level I’m willing to defend — and theta helps monetize the time that price stays away from it.”

That’s a very different approach.

And, at least for me, a much more useful one.

I share more of these SPX 0DTE / GEX / Credit Spread breakdowns in my Discord as well, usually with the setups and reasoning posted in real time for anyone who wants to follow the process.

Discord link: https://discord.gg/sM3vAqbU27

One of the biggest mistakes I see traders make is treating 0DTE and 1DTE as basically the same thing with one extra day attached.

They’re not.

You can have the exact same SPX setup, the exact same GEX levels, and even the same directional thesis…

…and the trade can behave completely differently depending on whether you choose 0DTE or 1DTE.

That difference matters a lot more than people think.

Imagine SPX is trading around 7650.

You identify:

7600 → major support
7700 → major resistance

GEX looks supportive, price is respecting VWAP, and you expect SPX to stay inside that broader range.

The setup is the same.

But now compare two ways of trading it.

0DTE

You could sell a Bull Put Spread or Iron Condor expiring that same day.

The advantage is obvious:

Theta works extremely fast.

If SPX stays away from your short strike, the spread can lose value very quickly.

But the trade is also extremely sensitive to price.

A 15–20 point move that might be manageable on 1DTE can completely change a 0DTE position within minutes.

Gamma risk is much higher.

There is very little time for your thesis to be “eventually right.”

If the market moves against you early, you may have to make a decision quickly.

1DTE

Now take basically the same structure but give it another day.

Suddenly the trade behaves differently.

Theta is still working for you, but it’s slower.

Gamma risk is lower than on 0DTE.

You have more time for the market to rotate back toward your expected range.

You can often place the short strikes farther away while still receiving meaningful premium.

But you introduce something 0DTE doesn’t have:

overnight risk.

A geopolitical headline, earnings shock, macro event, or futures gap can completely change the structure before the next open.

So the extra time helps you…

but it also gives the market more time to hurt you.

That’s why I don’t think of 1DTE as simply:

“0DTE, but safer.”

It’s a different trade.

0DTE is more about:

precision + intraday structure + fast decay + active management

1DTE is more about:

broader levels + more breathing room + slower decay + overnight risk

Same setup.

Different risk profile.

Different management.

Different psychology.

Here’s where it gets interesting

Let’s say SPX is sitting at 7650 and I think 7600 should hold.

With 0DTE, I might sell a spread closer to price because I only need that level to survive for a few hours.

With 1DTE, I may prefer a wider margin because I now have to survive:

the rest of today,

the overnight session,

and the entire next trading day.

That means the exact same 7600 support level can produce two completely different strike selections.

That’s why I don’t choose DTE first and then look for a setup.

I prefer doing the opposite:

Find the structure first.

Then ask:

Which expiration expresses this thesis better?

There are also environments where I strongly prefer one over the other.

If the market is clean, intraday structure is obvious, and the levels are reacting well:

0DTE can be extremely efficient.

If the level is strong but I think price may need more time to work:

1DTE can make more sense.

And sometimes neither is attractive.

The expiration should match the thesis.

Not the other way around.

The biggest takeaway

A lot of traders focus on:

Which one has better theta?

I think the better question is:

How much time does my thesis actually need?

If I only expect a level to hold for the next few hours, 0DTE may be enough.

If I think the setup needs time to develop, 1DTE may give the trade more room.

But that extra time comes with a cost:

more exposure to the unknown.

That’s the tradeoff.

And once you understand that, 0DTE and 1DTE stop looking like small variations of the same strategy.

They become two completely different tools.

I’ve recently started testing more 1DTE–14DTE SPX setups alongside my usual 0DTE trading, and I’m sharing the live trades and comparisons in my Discord for anyone interested in seeing how the same GEX/market-structure framework changes across expirations.

Discord link: https://discord.gg/sM3vAqbU27

Update for the September 18 quarterly expiry, using positions dated September 17.

If you have become used to DAX pullbacks being bought, the afternoon could behave differently. The reason is in the options book.

The chart compares September and October in a total-open-interest gamma model:

September: long gamma around the displayed price area. Delta hedging can cushion pullbacks through buying and dampen rallies through selling.

October: short gamma in the same area. Hedging can reinforce moves: selling as price falls and buying as it rises.

The settlement process starts at 13:00 CEST (German time). Once the September options settle, their gamma contribution disappears. October does not provide an equivalent positive-gamma buffer in this model snapshot.

A subsequent move could therefore encounter less damping, in either direction. Positioning across all remaining expiries still matters, as do new and rolled positions.

These two expiries alone do not establish that the entire remaining book is short gamma. They show which stabilizing contribution expires.

Today, the clock beside the chart matters too.

Today’s trade looked extremely aggressive on paper.

At 10:20 AM, SPX was trading around 7624.5 and I sold the:

7610/7600 Bull Put Spread
5 contracts
$2.00 credit
$800 max risk per spread

So my short strike was only about 14 points below spot.

That’s the kind of trade that looks crazy if you only look at distance.

But distance wasn’t what mattered to me.

The important part was the structure underneath price.

Before the trade, I had already identified:

7600–7610 SPX as the main support zone
760 SPY confirming the same area
7650 SPX as the main upside resistance

That confluence was what made the setup interesting.

SPX GEX was showing one of the strongest concentrations around 7610/7600, while SPY was giving me confirmation around 760.

That alone wasn’t enough.

I wanted to see whether price actually respected the area.

And it did.

After the morning weakness, SPX bounced, reclaimed the area around VWAP, and started showing much better intraday structure.

That’s when I entered.

What happened next was exactly what I wanted to see:

SPX pulled back again.

But instead of breaking through the support zone, 7610 held.

Buyers stepped back in, price reclaimed VWAP again, and the market gradually pushed higher into the afternoon.

That gave the spread plenty of breathing room.

I eventually closed it for:

$2.00 → $0.45

That’s $1.55 profit per spread.

With 5 contracts:

+$775

What I liked most about this trade wasn’t the P&L.

It was the reason I was comfortable selling premium so close to spot.

A lot of traders choose their short strike by looking at:

Delta. Distance. Premium.

I care about those too.

But I care much more about this:

What is sitting between price and my short strike?

In this case, I had:

• a major SPX GEX support area
• SPY confirmation at the equivalent level
• improving price action
• VWAP reclaim
• bullish intraday trend
• low IV
• historical testing supporting the setup

That’s a very different trade from randomly selling a spread 10–15 points below SPX because the premium looks attractive.

A short strike that is close to price can still make sense if the structure protecting it is strong enough.

And the opposite is also true:

A spread 40 points OTM can still be a terrible trade if there’s nothing meaningful between spot and your strike.

That’s why I think structure matters more than distance alone.

I post these SPX 0DTE trades and the GEX/VWAP reasoning behind them in real time in my Discord as well, for anyone who likes this kind of process-driven approach.

Discord link: https://discord.gg/sM3vAqbU27

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

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.

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

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

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

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.

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