Showing journal schema alpaca. Portfolio figures are unavailable: no Alpaca credentials are configured here, and this page never needs them — it only reads the journal.
From candidate to trade
Candidates priced
110,401
every viable strike pair, every expiry, every scan
Reached the AI
63
0.06% of everything priced — the rest failed a deterministic gate first
Approved to trade
43
0.04% of everything priced
AI calls avoided
110,338
pre-screening before spending a token
What the risk engine turned away
The deterministic gates, ranked by how many candidates each one stopped. A candidate can fail several at once, so the shares add up to more than 100% — the tallest bar is the constraint actually binding. This is the whole design in one table: the gates do the deciding, and only 63 of 110,401 candidates were ever worth asking the AI about.
| Why it was turned away | Gate | Candidates | Share | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Already exposed to this underlying | duplicate_exposure | 103,534 | 93.8% | |
| Open interest too thin | open_interest | 72,672 | 65.9% | |
| Volume too thin | volume | 67,089 | 60.8% | |
| Portfolio risk budget spent | portfolio_risk | 32,856 | 29.8% | |
| Bid/ask spread too wide | liquidity_spread | 29,159 | 26.4% | |
| Credit received too small | credit | 776 | 0.7% |