A lot of traders think becoming profitable with SPX 0DTE comes down to finding the perfect strategy.

I don't think it does.

A strategy matters, but if you want to trade 0DTE professionally, there are three things that matter much more than most people realize: capital management, drawdown control, and having a repeatable edge.

1. Capital Management

Your first goal isn't maximizing returns.

It's staying in the game.

If one bad trade or one losing streak can seriously damage your account, you're trading too large.

That's one of the main reasons I prefer defined-risk structures:

• Bull Put Spreads
• Bear Call Spreads
• Iron Condors

Before entering the trade, I know exactly how much capital I'm willing to risk.

2. Control Your Drawdown

Win rate alone means almost nothing.

You can have an 85–90% win rate and still blow up if your losers are too large relative to your account.

This is a good example from my SPX 0DTE Credit Spread backtest:

304 trades
261 winners / 43 losers
85.9% win rate
+$9,974 total P&L
1.66 Profit Factor
$1,622 Maximum Drawdown
2 trades Maximum Losing Streak

Actual results of one of my Credit Spreads strategies

What I care about most here isn't the 85.9% win rate.

It's the relationship between profitability, drawdown and capital required to survive the strategy.

The average winning trade was around +$96, while the average loser was approximately -$351.

That means this strategy absolutely depends on maintaining its statistical edge. A high win rate doesn't eliminate risk.

And that's exactly why position sizing matters.

A $1,622 historical drawdown might be completely manageable on a sufficiently capitalized account and extremely uncomfortable on an undersized one.

3. You Need a Repeatable Edge

My SPX 0DTE framework is relatively simple.

First, I determine the market environment.

Bullish structure → Bull Put Spread

Bearish structure → Bear Call Spread

Balanced / range environment → Iron Condor

Then I use market structure, GEX and liquidity to determine where I want my short strikes.

I'm not trying to predict exactly where SPX will close.

I'm trying to identify areas where price has a lower probability of trading through.

4. Knowing When NOT to Trade

This might be one of the biggest differences between trading and trading professionally.

Look at the results above: I don't need to trade every possible session.

The objective isn't maximum activity.

It's taking trades when your setup actually has an edge.

No trade is also a position.

The Real Goal

If you want to eventually trade SPX 0DTE professionally, stop asking:

“How much can I make per month?”

Start asking:

“Can my account survive the worst drawdown this strategy is realistically capable of producing?”

If the answer is yes, then you can start thinking about consistency and eventually scaling.

That's how I approach SPX 0DTE trading.

I share more of my SPX 0DTE framework, market analysis and trade breakdowns in my Discord for anyone interested:

https://discord.gg/psWnyH6QJ

A lot of traders look at GEX and try to use it to answer one question:

“Is SPX going up or down?”

That’s not how I use it.

For me, GEX is much more useful for identifying where price is likely to react, stabilize, or gravitate toward. Then I combine those areas with price action to decide whether there is actually a trade.

August 13 was a good example.

5-minute chart of 13th August, Blue line represents VWAP

At 10:15 ET, we opened an SPX 0DTE Bull Put Spread at 7795/7790.

The idea wasn’t that SPX needed to rally aggressively.

The important level was 7800.

Price had already made a strong opening move, and the structure suggested that 7800 was becoming an increasingly important area for the session.

Shortly afterward, the 10:30 ET GEX snapshot made that even clearer.

Huge Gamma concentration at 7800

There was an enormous concentration of positive gamma at 7800, significantly larger than the surrounding strikes.

To me, that doesn’t mean:

>“SPX will definitely close at 7800.”

It means that 7800 deserves my attention.

The combination of:

• strong gamma concentration around 7800
• price action respecting the area
• bullish intraday structure
• and defined risk below the key level

made the 7795/7790 Bull Put Spread attractive.

I didn’t need SPX to keep rallying.

I simply wanted the market to remain supported above my short strike.

Price eventually reversed to the downside and broke below VWAP. However, the 7800 area had such a massive gamma concentration that it ultimately acted like a magnet, pulling price back toward that level.

GEX at 11.30 AM confirmed us that it was very possible to see the price moving between 7780 and 7800

That’s the biggest difference in how I use GEX:

GEX = Context
Price Action = Confirmation
Options Structure = Execution

I don’t trade a GEX level just because it appears on a chart.

I trade how SPX behaves around that level.

I share more of these SPX 0DTE setups, GEX analysis, and real-time trades with other traders in our Discord if anyone wants to follow the process:

https://discord.gg/psWnyH6QJ

Curious how others use GEX:

Do you use it to predict direction, or mainly to identify areas where market behavior may change?

A lot of traders think the debate is simple:

• Mechanical trading = disciplined
• Discretionary trading = emotional

But I think the reality is more nuanced than that.

Backtested results of Credit Spreads with 13745$ in profit with only one contract

I recently reviewed a mechanical SPX 0DTE Credit Spread backtest with the following results:

• 382 trading days
• 306 winners
• 76 losers
• 80.1% win rate
• +$13,745 total P&L
• Profit Factor: 1.58
• Average winner: +$122.64
• Average loser: -$312.92
• Max drawdown: -$1,767
• Projected drawdown (1.8x): -$3,180.60

At first glance, those numbers look very solid.

But I think the most interesting takeaway is not just the 80.1% win rate.

The real question is:

Can human trade selection improve a mechanical edge?

Full mechanical Backtest

What the backtest tells me

First of all, the backtest clearly suggests that the strategy has a real base edge.

It is profitable.
It wins often.
And over a large enough sample, it produces meaningful positive results.

That matters.

Because before risking real money, I want to know whether a strategy has any statistical foundation at all.

So for me:

The backtest gives the foundation.

That’s the starting point.

But it is not the whole story.

The part many traders ignore: drawdowns

This is where I think people get too comfortable when they see a high win rate.

An 80.1% win rate sounds very attractive.

But the drawdowns still matter a lot.

In this backtest:

• Average winner: +$122.64
• Average loser: -$312.92
• Max drawdown: -$1,767
• Projected drawdown: -$3,180.60

That means the losing trades are much bigger than the average winners.

So even if the strategy wins often, the losing periods can still feel uncomfortable — and for some traders, psychologically difficult.

This is especially important for anyone following my trades or trying to apply this type of strategy:

you must be prepared for drawdowns.

A high win rate does not mean a smooth ride.

And I think that’s something many traders underestimate.

High Winrate vs Drawdown

Where I think human discretion may help

This is where the discussion becomes more interesting.

A mechanical strategy usually does one thing very well:

it applies the rules consistently

But its biggest weakness is also obvious:

it often takes every valid setup

A human trader can potentially add value by doing something the backtest cannot do very well:

deciding when NOT to trade

And I think that matters a lot in SPX 0DTE.

Because not every day offers the same quality setup.

Market conditions change quickly.

The same exact structure may behave very differently depending on:

• market structure
• GEX / dealer positioning
• volatility regime
• liquidity
• trend vs range conditions
• overall risk/reward

This is why I believe:

Human discretion may improve results by filtering out lower-quality conditions.

Not by randomly overriding the system.
Not by emotional guessing.

But by asking:

>Is this actually a good environment to deploy the strategy?

That’s a very different type of discretion.

Can discretion improve the win rate?

I think the answer is yes, potentially.

At least in theory — and in my own experience — discretionary trade selection can improve win rate by avoiding weak setups that a fully mechanical model would still take.

That doesn’t mean discretion automatically makes a strategy better.

Poor discretion can easily make a good system worse.

But structured discretion — especially the ability to skip poor environments — may improve the quality of entries and reduce unnecessary losing trades.

So I don’t see this as:

• mechanical good / discretionary bad or
• discretionary good / mechanical bad

I see it more like this:

Mechanical logic creates the edge.

Human trade selection may refine the edge.

Mechanical edge vs Human Trade Selection

The key lesson

For me, the biggest lesson is this:

A profitable backtest is valuable because it gives you a repeatable starting point.

But I don’t think trading should end there.

The next level may come from understanding when not to use the strategy.

That’s especially true in SPX 0DTE, where conditions can change fast and where one weak day can do more damage than several small winners suggest.

So yes:

• the mechanical backtest matters
• the edge looks real
• the 80.1% win rate is strong

But it is equally important to understand that:

• drawdowns can still be meaningful
• followers need to be prepared for them
• and trade selection may be one of the most important ways to improve the overall process

That’s what I’m increasingly interested in:

Not replacing a system with emotion —
but using discretion to decide when the system should stay inactive.

I share more of these SPX 0DTE ideas, backtests, and market analysis with my community if anyone wants to follow the process more closely:

https://discord.gg/psWnyH6QJ

Curious what others think:

Would you rather trade a strategy 100% mechanically, or use human discretion as a filter to decide when NOT to trade?

85.1% win rate.

At first glance, that sounds incredible.

But this is exactly why I think win rate is one of the most misunderstood statistics in options trading.

I recently analyzed almost 300 trading days of SPX 0DTE Iron Condor backtesting, and these were the results:

• 296 trading days
• 252 winners
• 44 losers
• 85.1% win rate
• +$9,730 P&L
• Profit Factor: 1.65
• Average Winner: +$98.45
• Average Loser: -$342.70
• Max Drawdown: -$1,524
• Maximum losing streak: 3

Those are objectively interesting results.

But the 85.1% win rate is not the most important number here.

https://preview.redd.it/l4hxbx0vvkjh1.png?width=1893&format=png&auto=webp&s=936aed6688ebdd8131eafbea8d333c332322a9f6

The statistic I pay much more attention to is this:

Average Winner: +$98
Average Loser: -$343

The average losing trade is roughly 3.5x larger than the average winner.

That completely changes how you should interpret an 85% win rate.

The psychological trap of high win-rate strategies

Imagine winning trade after trade.

+$90
+$105
+$100
+$95
+$110...

After enough winners, the strategy starts feeling almost impossible to lose with.

Then the bad market regime arrives.

One loss can erase several winners.

A second loss increases the drawdown.

And suddenly a strategy that felt incredibly safe doesn't feel safe anymore.

That's exactly why drawdown matters.

A strategy isn't defined by how comfortable it feels during its winning streak.

It's defined by whether you can survive its losing periods.

85.1% Winrate but Drawdown still matters

In this backtest, the maximum drawdown was -$1,524.

That's completely manageable with appropriate capital and position sizing.

But take exactly the same strategy and multiply the position size aggressively because “it wins 85% of the time” and suddenly that drawdown becomes a serious problem.

This is something I think many 0DTE traders misunderstand:

Probability of profit ≠ risk.

You can have a very high probability trade and still take far too much risk.

Where I think human discretion can add value

This is where things get particularly interesting.

The backtest is largely mechanical.

It doesn't look at a market and say:

“Today the conditions are terrible. I'm not trading.”

A human can.

When I trade these setups in real time, I also consider things like:

• GEX / dealer positioning
• market structure
• volatility
• liquidity
• important SPX levels
• whether the market is trending or ranging
• whether the premium actually justifies the risk

And most importantly:

I can decide not to trade.

My recent real-time/discretionary results have been around a 92% win rate, compared with approximately 85% in this mechanical backtest.

I wouldn't claim that discretion automatically turns an 85% system into a 92% system — the samples aren't directly comparable yet.

But it raises an interesting question:

Can human trade selection improve a mechanical edge by removing the worst market conditions?

I think it can.

And that's one of the things I'm continuing to test.

Mechanical backtest vs Discretionary Trading

For me, the goal isn't to override a system with emotions.

It's the opposite.

Backtesting provides the foundation.

Human discretion is then used primarily as a filter:

>Is this actually a good environment to deploy the strategy?

Not:

>I have a feeling SPX is going higher.

There's a massive difference between those two.

The real power of backtesting

Backtesting isn't valuable because it gives you a beautiful equity curve.

It's valuable because it shows you the ugly parts before you risk real money.

It tells you:

• how often you lose
• how large those losses can be
• what losing streaks look like
• what drawdown you need to survive
• whether the strategy has positive expectancy
• and how much capital you realistically need

An 85.1% win rate looks sexy.

Knowing that you can survive the other 14.9% is far more important.

That's the real value of backtesting.

I share more of these SPX 0DTE backtests, GEX analysis, and the real-time setups I'm trading with the community in Discord:

https://discord.gg/psWnyH6QJ

I'm curious how other systematic traders approach this:

Would you rather run a strategy 100% mechanically, or use human discretion as a filter to decide when NOT to trade?

Over the last two months, I’ve been sharing my SPX 0DTE trades in real time with my trading community.

After the latest closed trade, the results are:

26 total trades
24 winners
2 losers
92.31% win rate
+$7,840 Gross P&L
$13,615 Gross Profit
-$5,775 Gross Loss
Profit Factor: 2.36

And there’s something in these numbers that I think is much more interesting than the 92% win rate.

26 Trades / 24 Winners / 2 Losers / 92.31% Win Rate / +$7,840 Gross P&L / 2.36 Profit Factor

July was a very important month

July:

10 trades
8 winners / 2 losers
80% win rate
+$95 Gross P&L

August so far:

16 trades
16 winners / 0 losers
100% win rate
+$7,745 Gross P&L

At first glance, July looks strange.

How can you win 80% of your trades and basically make no money?

Because win rate alone is almost meaningless without understanding risk/reward.

The two losing trades were enough to erase almost all of the profits generated by the eight winners.

That month was actually much more valuable to me than a month of easy winners because it reinforced something I constantly talk about:

A high-probability strategy can still perform badly if the losses become too large relative to the winners.

August has obviously been very different, but I don't expect a 100% win rate to continue indefinitely.

Losses are part of trading.

The objective is surviving them.

July vs August Performance

So what am I actually trading?

My approach is almost entirely focused on SPX 0DTE defined-risk options strategies, mainly:

• Bull Put Spreads
• Bear Call Spreads
• Iron Condors

But I don't wake up every morning and automatically sell an Iron Condor.

The market determines the strategy.

I first look at the broader SPX structure and then combine that with GEX, dealer positioning, liquidity and important option levels.

If the structure is bullish, I may look for a Bull Put Spread below an important support area.

If the structure is bearish, I may look for a Bear Call Spread above resistance.

If SPX looks more likely to remain contained between important levels, an Iron Condor can make more sense.

And if the setup isn't there?

I don't trade.

That last part is probably one of the most underrated edges in 0DTE trading.

I'm not trying to predict SPX

This is probably the biggest difference between how I trade and how I see many people approaching 0DTE.

I'm not trying to perfectly predict:

“SPX will close at X today.”

I'm trying to identify areas where I think the probabilities are favorable and then structure a trade around them with defined risk.

If I'm bullish, I don't necessarily need SPX to explode higher.

Sometimes I simply need an important downside level not to break.

That's a completely different game from buying calls and hoping for a large directional move.

The biggest lesson from these 26 trades

I'm obviously happy with:

92.31% win rate
+$7,840 gross P&L

But the number I'm paying attention to isn't just the win rate.

It's whether the overall process continues producing positive expectancy while keeping drawdowns under control.

Because eventually there will be another losing trade.

There will probably be another losing streak too.

The goal isn't to avoid that.

The goal is to make sure the losing trades don't destroy what the winning trades built.

That's what I'm trying to improve every month.

I share these trades in real time and discuss the SPX/GEX reasoning behind the setups with traders in our Discord for anyone interested in following the process:

https://discord.gg/psWnyH6QJ

Would be interested to hear how other SPX 0DTE traders think about this:

Would you rather trade a strategy with a very high win rate and asymmetric losses, or accept a lower win rate for better risk/reward?

Every time people talk about SPX 0DTE, I keep hearing the same thing:

“It’s way too risky.”

I actually think that’s the wrong conclusion.

In my opinion, SPX 0DTE itself isn’t the main problem.
The real problem is that most traders use too much size, too much emotion, and too little structure.

That’s why 0DTE gets blamed for mistakes that are really about risk management.

The issue is often not the product itself — it’s oversized positions, poor entries, and no defined risk.

Why people think SPX 0DTE is “too risky”

To be fair, I understand why it has that reputation.

A lot of traders approach it like this:

• they oversize because the trades are short-term
• they chase fast moves out of FOMO
• they buy or sell without a clear plan
• they ignore defined risk
• they treat high win rate setups as if they are automatically safe

Then when the trade goes wrong, they blame SPX 0DTE.

But most of the time, the real issue is not the expiration.

The real issue is that the trader is risking far more than the setup deserves.

The real danger is position sizing

This is the biggest point.

A setup can be perfectly valid and still become dangerous if the trader is too large.

That’s why I think the real question is not:

“Is SPX 0DTE risky?”

The better question is:

“How much risk are you putting on for this trade?”

Because if someone is:

• risking too much of the account on one setup
• increasing size after a winning streak
• ignoring max loss
• collecting small premium for large downside

…then yes, the strategy becomes dangerous very quickly.

But that isn’t because SPX 0DTE is inherently broken.

It’s because the trader is using too much risk.

The same strategy can feel manageable with proper size — or dangerous when oversized.

What I think actually makes 0DTE dangerous

In my opinion, these are the real reasons traders get hurt:

1. No defined risk

If you enter without knowing max loss, you’re already making the trade more dangerous than it needs to be.

2. Oversized positions

Even good setups can become bad trades if the size is too large.

3. Emotional entries

Late entries, FOMO, and chasing momentum usually make the risk/reward much worse.

4. Ignoring market conditions

Not every day is good for the same setup. Volatility, structure, liquidity, and GEX matter.

5. Thinking win rate = safety

A high win rate means nothing if the losing side is too large.

That’s why I think the real edge is not “trading 0DTE.”

The real edge is understanding:

• when to trade
• how much to risk
• where the structure is favorable
• and when the best trade is simply no trade

What SPX 0DTE can actually offer when used correctly

If approached properly, I think SPX 0DTE can actually be one of the best markets to specialize in because it offers:

• defined-risk structures
• excellent liquidity
• frequent opportunities
• repeatable setups
• the ability to build a structured process

But only if the trader respects the risk.

If someone keeps using too much size, then even a decent setup will feel “too risky.”

The edge is not 0DTE by itself — it’s structure + position sizing + defined risk + patience.

The real lesson

I don’t think SPX 0DTE is too risky by default.

I think most traders simply use too much risk for the quality of the setup.

That’s a huge difference.

Because once you understand that, the conversation changes from:

“Is 0DTE bad?”

to

“Am I structuring risk correctly?”

And in my opinion, that’s the question that actually matters.

I also discuss these kinds of SPX / GEX / 0DTE ideas with other traders in my Discord if anyone wants to follow along:

https://discord.gg/psWnyH6QJ

Curious what others think:

Is SPX 0DTE really too risky — or do most traders just size it badly?

Most Traders Are Trading SPX 0DTE Completely Wrong

A lot of traders think SPX 0DTE is all about making a fast directional bet and hoping for a big move.

That’s exactly why so many people struggle with it.

In my opinion, most traders are trading SPX 0DTE completely wrong — not because the market is bad, but because their approach is bad.

They focus on:

• predicting every move
• chasing momentum too late
• overtrading low-quality setups
• sizing too aggressively
• and ignoring market structure completely

SPX 0DTE is not easy money.
But I do think it can be one of the best markets to specialize in if you trade it the right way.

Most traders treat SPX 0DTE like a gamble. The real edge comes from structure, probabilities and risk control.

What most traders do wrong

1. They try to predict every move

A lot of traders approach SPX 0DTE with the mindset of:

“Will the market go up or down today?”

That sounds logical, but I think it’s the wrong starting point.

The better question is:

“What does the market structure look like, and where is the risk actually favorable?”

Trying to predict every move usually leads to emotional trading.

Trading the structure leads to better decision-making.

2. They chase fast moves

This is one of the most common mistakes.

A big candle appears, traders panic, and they jump into calls or puts after the move has already happened.

At that point:

• the entry is worse
• the risk is worse
• the emotional pressure is higher
• and the reward often becomes smaller

Most traders don’t lose because SPX 0DTE is “impossible.”

They lose because they enter too late, too emotionally, and without a clear plan.

3. They ignore defined risk

Another major issue is that many traders are focused only on making money fast.

They don’t think enough about:

• max loss
• expected payout
• position size
• how a bad trade affects the account

That’s why I strongly prefer defined-risk structures.

If I enter a trade, I want to know the risk before I click the button.

Without that, SPX 0DTE becomes far more dangerous than it needs to be.

The problem is not SPX 0DTE itself - it's poor entries, bad timing and no structure,

What I think the right approach looks like

For me, SPX 0DTE is much more about:

• market structure
• GEX / dealer positioning
• liquidity zones
• key levels
• defined risk
• selectivity

The edge is not “trading 0DTE.”

The edge is understanding when the setup is good and when it isn’t.

Some days the best trade is a put spread.
Some days it’s a call spread.
Some days it’s an iron condor.
And some days the best trade is simply no trade.

That’s the part many people miss.

They think the edge comes from action.

Very often, the edge comes from waiting.

Why I like SPX 0DTE

I think SPX 0DTE has a lot of advantages for traders who want to specialize:

• very liquid market
• defined-risk strategies
• frequent opportunities
• clear structure when conditions are favorable
• the ability to build a repeatable process

But only if you stop treating it like a lottery ticket.

If your entire plan is just:

• buy calls when the market looks strong
• buy puts when it looks weak
• hope for a fast move

…then yes, you’re probably trading it wrong.

The real edge in SPX 0DTE = Structure + GEX + Liquidity + Defined Risk + Patience

The real lesson

I don’t think most traders fail at SPX 0DTE because the product is bad.

I think they fail because they approach it with:

• too much prediction
• too much emotion
• too much size
• and not enough structure

SPX 0DTE can be a very good market to trade.

But if you approach it like a random bet, it will punish you very quickly.

If you approach it like a professional — with a process, risk control, and patience — it becomes a completely different game.

I also discuss a lot of these SPX / GEX setups with other traders in my Discord if anyone wants to follow along:

https://discord.gg/psWnyH6QJ

Curious what others think:

What do you think is the biggest mistake traders make with SPX 0DTE?

A lot of traders hear “85% win rate” and immediately think:

“That must be low risk.”

In my opinion, that’s one of the biggest mistakes people make when looking at SPX 0DTE strategies.

A high win rate can look amazing on paper.
It can also make traders feel overconfident, oversize positions, and completely ignore the one thing that actually matters most:

What happens when the trade loses?

My Iron Condor results with 85% winrate

I’ve been reviewing Iron Condor results, and this is exactly why I say win rate alone means very little.

In the results above, the strategy shows:

• 84.9% win rate
• $9,355 total profit
• 248 winning days vs 44 losing days
• Profit factor: 1.62
• Max drawdown: $1,524
• Average profit: $98.52
• Average loss: $342.70

That last part is the key.

The average loss is roughly 3.5x bigger than the average win.

So yes, the strategy wins a lot.
But when it loses, the loss matters.

And that’s exactly why a strategy with an 85% win rate can still blow up your account if the trader doesn’t understand risk, sizing, and drawdowns.

Why win rate can be deceptive

A high win rate is attractive because it feels consistent.

You win Monday.
You win Tuesday.
You win Thursday.
You win Friday.

And after enough small wins, it becomes very easy to believe the strategy is “safe.”

That’s where traders get in trouble.

Because the real danger of high-win-rate 0DTE strategies is not the frequency of wins.

It’s that:

• traders start sizing too aggressively
• they become comfortable collecting small premiums
• they underestimate the impact of a full loss
• and when a bad day comes, it wipes out multiple winners very quickly

That’s how accounts get hurt.

Not because the win rate was bad.
But because the trader treated high probability as if it meant low risk.

Winrate alone tells you very little

What actually matters more than win rate

1. Risk / Reward

An 85% win rate sounds great until you realize your average loss is several times larger than your average win.

That doesn’t make the strategy bad — it means risk has to be controlled.

2. Position sizing

This is probably the biggest one.

A strategy can have a real edge and still destroy your account if you trade it too large. High probability should never be an excuse to increase size aggressively.

3. Market conditions

I don’t believe in blindly selling SPX 0DTE every day.

Volatility, GEX, liquidity and market structure matter. Sometimes the best trade is simply no trade.

Market conditions matter

The real lesson

An 85% win rate isn't the edge.

The real edge is:

High probability + controlled risk + proper sizing + good trade selection.

Ignore any one of those and eventually the losing 15% will matter far more than you expected.

That’s why I track the full performance of my Iron Condor strategy — not just the headline win rate.

I also share and discuss my SPX 0DTE / GEX setups with other traders in our Discord if anyone wants to follow along:

https://discord.gg/psWnyH6QJ

Curious what you guys think:

Do SPX 0DTE traders focus too much on win rate?

Whenever I tell someone that I mainly trade SPX 0DTE options, I often get the same reaction:

“Isn’t that basically gambling?”

I understand why.

0DTE options have extreme gamma, very little room for mistakes, and terrible risk management can destroy an account quickly.

But after specializing in SPX, I've come to believe almost the opposite:

SPX 0DTE can be one of the best environments to specialize in as a trader.

Why I specialize in SPX 0dte

Why SPX?

I don't want to scan 50 stocks every morning.

I don't want to constantly search for the next opportunity.

I prefer studying one market, during the same hours, every single trading day.

SPX also has some major advantages for options traders:

• Cash settled
• European-style options
• No early assignment
• Extremely liquid 0DTE market
• Easy to create defined-risk positions

But for me, the biggest advantage is specialization.

Those are the main reasons I only trade SPX 0dte

WHY SPX 0DTE?

✓ Cash Settled
✓ No Early Assignment
✓ High Liquidity
✓ Defined Risk
✓ New Opportunity Every Day

My framework is extremely simple

I mainly trade three structures:

Bullish environment → Put Credit Spread

Bearish environment → Call Credit Spread

Balanced / range market → Iron Condor

The difficult part isn't understanding the option strategy.

The difficult part is identifying when the market actually supports that trade.

That's why I focus heavily on:

Market structure, VWAP, volatility, GEX, liquidity levels and price action.

My SPX 0dte Framework

MY SPX 0DTE FRAMEWORK

📈 Bullish → Put Credit Spread
📉 Bearish → Call Credit Spread
↔️ Range → Iron Condor

The edge isn't 0DTE

This is where I think many traders get it wrong.

Simply selling far OTM 0DTE options because “theta is high” isn't an edge.

You can win many trades and then lose weeks of profits during one strong directional move.

The real edge, in my opinion, comes from:

Trade selection + positioning + risk management.

And sometimes the best trade is simply doing nothing.

The edge is Trade Selection + Risk Management

That's ultimately why I've chosen to specialize so heavily in SPX 0DTE.

One underlying.

A few strategies.

Hundreds of sessions watching the same market behave under different conditions.

Over time, you start building pattern recognition that would be much harder to develop if you were constantly jumping between markets.

0DTE isn't easy money.

But I think SPX provides an incredibly focused environment for someone who wants to master one specific style of trading.

I'm curious what other traders think:

Would you rather master one instrument like SPX, or trade multiple markets and strategies?

I also share my SPX market analysis, GEX observations and the reasoning behind my trades with my Discord community: https://discord.gg/psWnyH6QJ

If you want to follow the setups in real time, the Discord is the best way to follow my trades.

Today was a good example of why I don’t decide the strategy before seeing how the first 30–60 minutes develop.

Market at the opening 9.46h

9:40 — Initial bias: Bull Put Spread

Initial GEX looked promising for a Bull Put Spread

The market initially looked strong, so my first idea was a Bull Put Spread. However, I wanted at least 30 minutes of confirmation before taking directional risk.

At 9:46, the key level was around 7750. The first GEX snapshot showed the market in a negative-gamma regime, with meaningful positioning concentrated around the 7740–7750 area and the gamma flip higher near 7770.

My thinking was simple: if SPX could break and hold above 7750, that would strengthen the bullish case. If 7750 acted as resistance, the session would become much more difficult directionally.

9:57–10:00 — The thesis changed

The Standard Deviation levels were approximately:

• +1DE: 7771.79
• -1DE: 7698.59
• +2DE: 7808.39
• -2DE: 7661.99

Standard Deviations at the opening

That created a very interesting potential range around 7700–7770/7780.

https://preview.redd.it/czbhvis7l0ih1.png?width=1435&format=png&auto=webp&s=db75c0ff257043949cf544ddec6c700eadc60773

At the same time, price started losing momentum and moved below VWAP. That significantly reduced my confidence in a pure Bull Put Spread.

This is where I started preferring an Iron Condor.

One important clarification: negative gamma itself is not automatically good for an Iron Condor. In fact, negative gamma can increase directional and breakout risk. What made the IC attractive was the combination of the expected-move boundaries, concentrated GEX levels, and the lack of clean directional confirmation.

10:15 — 7700 became very interesting

The next GEX update showed significant positioning around 7700, while 7750 remained the dominant upside concentration.

The interesting part was the confluence: 7700 was almost exactly the -1 standard-deviation level at 7698.59.

At that moment, I actually considered returning to the Bull Put Spread idea if SPX tested 7700 and reacted strongly there.

At 10:18, price dropped sharply, but the move happened too quickly and I missed the entry I wanted. I did not chase it.

That is an important part of trading 0DTE: sometimes the correct decision is simply accepting that the setup moved without you.

10:43 — Trade #1

10.43h I open my first trade IC 7700-7695/7780-7785

GEX at the moment I made the trade 10.43h

After price recovered and the session looked increasingly range-bound, I opened my first Iron Condor:

• 5x SPX 7700/7695 – 7780/7785
• Credit: $0.90
• SPX: 7744.28
• Short put: ~39 points below spot
• Short call: ~36 points above spot

The construction was deliberate.

The 7700 put side was placed around the -1DE/GEX area, while 7780 was above the +1DE level and above the main intraday gamma concentration.

At $0.90 credit, that represents $90 maximum profit and $410 maximum risk per spread, or $450 / $2,050 respectively for five contracts before commissions.

12:26PM — VWAP changed the directional picture again

Later, price moved back through VWAP.

12.26 PM VWAP is broken with momentum

For me, that weakened the case for holding a strongly bullish directional bias. It did not automatically make the Iron Condor safe, but it reinforced the idea that the market was rotating around a range rather than establishing a clean trend.

By this point, the original IC was behaving much closer to the scenario I had expected.

13:05–13:06 — Trade #2

Trade #2 IC 7720-7715/7760-7765

The most important development came in the later GEX snapshot.

GEX at 13.05 PM

The 7750 area had become extremely concentrated, with roughly 5K positive call GEX and around -3K put GEX around the same region. The gamma flip remained close to 7770.

That made 7750 a major intraday pivot/magnet.

There were also important positioning areas around 7725 on the downside and approximately 7760 on the upside.

With SPX around 7745, I opened a second, tighter Iron Condor:

5x SPX 7720/7715 – 7760/7765 at $1.20 credit.

This one was considerably more aggressive. The short strikes were only about 20 points away from spot, so the trade depended much more heavily on SPX continuing to rotate around the 7750 area.

The $1.20 credit means $120 potential profit versus $380 maximum risk per spread, or $600 versus $1,900 across five contracts before commissions.

The main lesson from today

The important part was not predicting at 9:40 AM whether the market would go up or down.

My sequence went:

Bull Put Spread bias → wait → directional thesis weakens → Iron Condor becomes preferable → 7700 presents a potential Bull Put opportunity → missed entry → return to the range thesis → two Iron Condors.

That adaptation came from watching VWAP, GEX changes, statistical expected-move levels and actual price behavior throughout the session.

GEX levels are not static, and they should never be traded blindly. Today, the structure evolved considerably between the opening and 1:00 PM ET. For me, that is exactly why continuously updating the options-market picture is so valuable when trading SPX 0DTE.

Today was a good example of why I monitor intraday GEX changes, rather than relying only on the positioning visible at the open.

SPX 5-minute chart 30th July 2026

At 10:04 AM ET, the first GEX map showed strong downside positioning around 7380–7375, while the largest positive call-gamma concentration appeared near 7440. This created an initial options-defined range, with the lower zone likely to attract liquidity and generate a reaction if tested.

GEX at 10.10AM

First trade — 10:20 AM ET

With SPX trading around 7401.94 and both the 0DTE and short-term trends pointing higher, I opened:

• Bull Put Spread: 7370/7365
• Credit: $1.10 per spread
• Contracts: 10
• Short strike distance: approximately 32 points below spot

The 7370 short strike was positioned below the main 7380–7375 institutional zone, providing an additional buffer and a potential bottom of the session.

Later, price weakened and closing the position became a reasonable possibility. However, the market continued to show resilience, and 7400 remained an important magnet, which was exactly the behavior I wanted to see.

The GEX structure changed

By 12:25 PM ET, the positioning had shifted significantly.

SPX 5-minute chart 30th July 2026

The strongest negative put-gamma concentration had moved to 7400, while major positive call gamma appeared near 7420. SPX was trading around 7410, between those two important levels.

GEX 12.20PM

Based on the updated structure, I opened a second and considerably more aggressive position:

• Bull Put Spread: 7395/7390
• Credit: $1.10 per spread
• Contracts: 10
• Short strike distance: approximately 15 points below spot

The thesis was that 7400 could continue acting as an important support and liquidity magnet, keeping the short strike below the most relevant intraday options level.

However, this was not a risk-free setup. The market was operating in a negative-gamma environment, meaning that a decisive break below 7400 could have increased volatility and accelerated the downside move. That is why GEX levels should never be traded blindly.

Main lesson

GEX is not static. The most relevant dealer-positioning levels can change significantly throughout the session.

The first trade used 7380–7375 as the main downside reference. A few hours later, the market structure had shifted and 7400 became the dominant level.

The level itself provides the framework, but the final decision must also consider:

• Price action
• VWAP
• Volatility
• Trend strength
• Distance between spot and the short strike
• Whether the level is holding or beginning to break

The second trade offered a higher premium relative to the distance from spot, but it was also substantially more aggressive and dependent on 7400 continuing to hold.

If you want to learn more about my strategy you can check my Youtube videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEPEnumY2_w&t=3s

You can also can get access to those trades via my Discord: https://discord.gg/psWnyH6QJ

Important VWAP break (blue line) at 10.40AM

Today’s SPX session was a good example of why traders should adapt to new information instead of remaining attached to their initial bias.

Before the open, market conditions were extremely difficult. Semiconductors and Nasdaq-related stocks were showing significant weakness, while the Dow Jones remained relatively strong.

The divergence between blue-chip technology stocks and the Dow was unusually large, making the market highly unpredictable.

For that reason, my initial plan was clear:

No Iron Condor at the open.

A directional Bear Call Spread or Bull Put Spread made more sense until the market established a clearer structure.

Early institutional positioning

Institutional positioning at 7325 strike at 9.50AM

At 9.50 AM, we noticed relevant put positioning around the 7325 strike.

This level was particularly interesting because it was located just below the second standard deviation, suggesting that institutions were positioning around an extreme downside area.

https://preview.redd.it/wya5y7s4y0gh1.png?width=775&format=png&auto=webp&s=d2f15b8bed45f34f27d4341835851311c053e0b9

However, Nasdaq weakness remained significant, and I also considered the possibility of a short squeeze if technology stocks suddenly recovered.

The correct decision was simply to wait.

The market structure changed

During the first part of the session, SPX recovered strongly and broke above VWAP.

At that point, the market moved into bullish territory. Any Iron Condor opened near the market open would likely have been under considerable pressure.

This confirmed why waiting was necessary.

Later in the session, conditions changed again. The market entered a much more defined range, while the GEX structure showed important positioning around:

• 7430–7435 on the downside
• 7450–7460 on the upside

7430 strike to the downside and 7450-7460 to the upside

The strong positive gamma concentration near 7450 suggested that upside movement could become more difficult without a significant catalyst.

At the same time, the market still had enough downside room for 7410 to be a reasonable short-put strike.

The trade

At approximately 12:35 ET, I opened the following SPX 0DTE Iron Condor:

• Sell the 7410 put
• Buy the 7405 put
• Sell the 7455 call
• Buy the 7460 call
• Entry credit: $1.55
• Contracts: 5
• SPX price at entry: 7436.46

I deliberately reduced the position to only five contracts because the setup was not perfectly clear and the risk was higher than usual. (I normally place 10 contracts)

The take-profit order was placed at $0.35, representing approximately 78% of the premium collected.

The position was closed at the target at approximately 2:55 ET.

Final result: +$600 before commissions

Main lesson

The most important part of today’s trade was not the Iron Condor itself.

It was the ability to change the plan.

At the open, an Iron Condor was not appropriate. Later, after VWAP was reclaimed, volatility stabilized and the GEX structure created a clearer range, the same strategy became viable.

We don’t predict the market. We adapt to positioning, price action, GEX and liquidity.

I share more real SPX 0DTE trades and intraday analysis in r/GEXOptionsTrading.

Today's session was a good example of why I always adapt to market structure instead of forcing a directional bias.

Screenshot of the market session

🕒 Premarket / Open

7440 institutional positioning

Before the open, 7450 looked like the key support level based on GEX. We also noticed institutional positioning around the 7440-7430 OTM puts, suggesting dealers had interest defending that area.

At that point, an Iron Condor looked like the highest-probability setup.

📊 Early Session

A few minutes after the open, another interesting detail appeared: institutions were positioning below the 1st Standard Deviation, reinforcing the idea that downside could become limited if volatility stabilized.

Dealers positioning below 1st Standard Deviation

However, the market quickly changed character.

Potential Iron Condor 7480-7485/7400-7395after the market broke 7450 level

Instead of respecting 7450, price broke below it almost immediately. That invalidated the original bullish thesis, so rather than forcing a Bull Put Spread, we stayed patient and kept the Iron Condor bias.

The next important reference became 7400.

GEX at 10.17AM

Institutions are positioning below 7400, particularly around 7385–7380, which could indicate a potential lower trading range or closing area for today. These are the types of details we need to monitor to better understand market structure and improve our trading decisions.

🎯 Trade Execution

Around 10:25 ET, we opened an aggressive SPX Iron Condor:

• 7370/7365 Bull Put Spread
• 7455/7460 Bear Call Spread

The trade collected $1.32 in premium with defined risk.

As premium decayed throughout the afternoon, we progressively tightened our take-profit orders:

• 75%
• 81%
• 85%

The position was finally closed at $0.20, capturing approximately 85% of the maximum profit while avoiding the unnecessary risk of holding into the final minutes of expiration.

Key Takeaway

Today's session perfectly illustrates how I trade SPX 0DTE.

The goal isn't to predict where the market will close. It's to identify important GEX levels, monitor how price reacts to them, and adjust the strategy as new information appears.

Sometimes the market confirms the initial idea. Sometimes it doesn't.

The edge comes from adapting to market structure, managing risk, and letting probabilities work over time—not from trying to be right on every trade.

If you're interested in this type of GEX-based SPX 0DTE analysis, I regularly share my market commentary and real trades in r/GEXOptionsTrading.

Over the past few months, this community has grown much faster than I expected. Some of my posts have reached thousands of traders, and I genuinely appreciate everyone who has taken the time to read, comment, and discuss the strategies.

My goal has always been to share a more structured approach to SPX 0DTE trading—focused on market structure, GEX, dealer positioning, liquidity, probabilities, and defined risk rather than blindly predicting direction.

I’m now opening a small number of private 1-to-1 mentorship spots for traders who want more personalized guidance.

The mentorship will include:

• Reviewing your trades and decision-making process
• Explaining how I select strikes and structure positions
• GEX, VWAP, liquidity, and market-context analysis
• Credit Spread and Iron Condor risk management
• Backtesting and strategy-development guidance
• Direct private access for questions and ongoing support

I will accept a maximum of 10 members so I can provide proper individual attention.

The introductory price will be $39 per month, but this price will increase substantially in the future as the mentorship develops. This first stage is mainly intended for serious traders who want to learn the system from the beginning and provide feedback.

I also have a private Premium section inside the Discord community where I regularly share more in-depth educational content about:

• GEX and dealer positioning
• Market analysis
• Trading research and backtesting insights
• Strategy development and risk management

From now on, most of my educational trading content will be shared inside this section. Anyone who is genuinely interested can send me a DM, and I can add them to Premium.

You can also follow the broader community and my public content here:

Discord: https://discord.gg/psWnyH6QJ
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEPEnumY2_w

Results of my Iron Condor

I wanted to share the results of my SPX 0DTE Iron Condor strategy from February 2025 to July 2026.

The backtest uses one Iron Condor per trade, with every position held through expiration. Tuesday and Wednesday were excluded, so trades were only opened on Monday, Thursday, and Friday.

Results of my Iron COndor SPX 0dte

Results

Total P/L: +$6,770
Trades: 206
Winning trades: 176
Losing trades: 30
Win rate: 85.4%

Average winner: +$98.64
Average loser: -$353.03
Profit factor: 1.64

Maximum drawdown: -$1,466
Maximum winning streak: 29 trades
Maximum losing streak: 3 trades
Total commissions: $412

The strategy finished positive in 14 of the 18 months tested, although the equity curve still experienced several meaningful pullbacks.

Performance by day

Friday: +$3,858
Monday: +$2,124
Thursday: +$788

Friday generated approximately 57% of the total profit and also had the strongest win rate, with 62 winners and only six losers. Thursday was the weakest of the three traded days.

The main weakness

The average loss was more than three times larger than the average profit.

That is normal for a high-win-rate Iron Condor strategy, but it means one full loss can erase several successful trades. An 85% win rate may look impressive, but position sizing and drawdown management are what determine whether the strategy is actually tradable.

The historical maximum drawdown was $1,466, equivalent to roughly four average losing trades. Any trader using this type of strategy should be prepared for a larger future drawdown than the one shown in the backtest.

Taking profits earlier

These results cover my Iron Condor strategy from February 2025 onward, using one contract per trade and holding every position through expiration.

Performance could potentially improve by taking profits earlier—for example, closing the position once 50-70% of the premium received has been captured. This is a common management approach for 0DTE Iron Condors because it reduces exposure to a sharp late-session move.

However, I do not currently have a backtest for this specific early-exit rule. Therefore, all results shown here reflect positions held through expiration only.

These are historical simulated results and do not guarantee future performance.

For real-time SPX trades and GEX analysis, you can join the Discord:

https://discord.gg/J4qBTZ4f

You can also watch my strategy breakdowns on YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEPEnumY2_w

First of all, I want to apologize for my inactivity over the past month.

I’ve been extremely busy and fully focused on my own trading. Trading SPX 0DTE professionally requires a significant amount of time and concentration, and documenting every setup, decision, and adjustment publicly has become difficult to manage consistently.

For this reason, the GEXOptionsTrading Reddit community and public channels will remain inactive for the foreseeable future.

Instead, I’m opening a small 1-to-1, chat-based program for a maximum of five traders who already trade SPX 0DTE options and are serious about improving their process.

The focus will be on:

• Credit Spreads and Iron Condors
• GEX and dealer positioning
• Trade structure and execution
• Risk management and position sizing
• Reviewing trades, mistakes, and decision-making
• Developing a more disciplined and systematic framework

The introductory price starts at $39 per month through Stripe. This price may gradually increase in the future if the results and value of the service remain positive.

This is intended to remain a very small group so I can provide genuine individual attention rather than manage another large public community.

If you’re interested in one of the five available spots, send me a DM and I’ll share the full details.

Thank you to everyone who has supported the community.

You can still access to my Discord where I will send updates when necessary:

https://discord.gg/eTMtyJPUq