Phase Space AI

Trade Construction

Enphase Energy [ENPH]

Enphase Energy [ENPH] — Trade Construction

Spot $35.05 (2026-07-29) · realised 252-day vol 80.0% · ATM Jan-2027 implied vol ~80% The memo issues no position verdict. What follows is the construction that would express the analysis if the book chose to act, plus the liquidity verification the Liquidity Criteria requires.


1. Liquidity verification — done before any structure was proposed

criteria.md: "Any proposed options structure requires the actual chain pulled first — open interest and quoted size for the specific strikes and expiry."

Chain pulled live 2026-07-29 via Alpaca options snapshots, expiry 2027-01-15, 72 contracts.

Contract Open interest Bid Ask Bid size Ask size IV Delta
Put 40.0 2,394 9.82 10.62 391 43 0.787 −0.480
Put 35.0 5,757 6.83 7.53 567 101 0.800 −0.381
Put 30.0 5,197 3.86 4.77 1,032 98 0.774 −0.279
Put 25.0 2,221 2.19 2.60 810 66 0.791 −0.178
Put 22.5 1,425 1.55 2.18 957 1,132 0.838 −0.139
Put 20.0 981 0.97 1.48 658 534 0.844 −0.099
Call 40.0 2,973 5.57 6.42 1,029 365 0.801 +0.523
Call 50.0 5,977 3.75 4.06 2 143 0.835 +0.377

Maximum open interest across the expiry: 7,333 (call 180.0). Total open interest across quoted strikes runs into the tens of thousands. Two-sided quoted size on the strikes below is in the hundreds to thousands of contracts.

Liquidity Criteria: PASS. This is not the HCA failure (18 contracts of maximum open interest across a whole expiry). Both an equity and an options expression are fillable.

Cash equity. IEX-only 63-day ADV is $14.25m on ~292k shares/day. IEX carries a minority of consolidated volume; calibrated against the First Solar memo (which reported $594m of consolidated 63-day ADV where this method computes $27.4m on IEX, a 21.7x ratio), consolidated ADV is approximately $309m/day. Any position this book would take is a small fraction of one day's volume. The IEX-only figure and the scaling basis are both stated because the multiplier is an estimate, not a measurement.


2. The direction the analysis points

The analysis is negative and specific:

On a long-only absolute-return book, the correct action is no position. Quality Criteria (BINDING) fails and Valuation Criteria (BINDING) fails; criteria.md is explicit that cheap cannot rescue a Quality failure. The name is a candidate for the relative-value fork, where Short Mechanism Criteria scores PASS — but that fork is not this book, and nothing acts on it here.

The construction below is therefore recorded for the RV fork and for the ledger, not proposed for the long-only book.


3. Structure, if the RV fork were live

3.1 Preferred: Jan-2027 35/25 put spread

Leg Action Strike Expiry Price OI Delta
Long Buy 35.0 put 2027-01-15 7.53 (ask) 5,757 −0.381
Short Sell 25.0 put 2027-01-15 2.19 (bid) 2,221 −0.178

Why a spread and not outright puts. ATM implied vol is ~80% against realised 252-day vol of 80.0% — options are priced at realised, so there is no vol edge to buy and no vol edge to sell. At 80% vol an outright put decays hard. Selling the 25 strike recovers 29% of the premium and caps the position exactly where the bear case lands ($18.83 base bear, $11.54 deep bear — the $25 short strike gives up the deep-bear tail, which is a deliberate trade of the 15%-probability outcome for a 41% cheaper entry).

Why January 2027 and not sooner. The two events that resolve the thesis are (i) the first quarter with no safe-harbour revenue and (ii) the IQ SST full-system demonstration. Both fall inside the window: Q3-2026 results in late October 2026, Q4-2026 results in February 2027 (just after expiry — a real limitation), and the SST demonstration "later this year." A June-2027 expiry would capture Q4-2026 results but the Jan-2027 chain is where the open interest is.

3.2 Alternative: outright Jan-2027 30 put

Bid 3.86 / ask 4.77, OI 5,197, delta −0.279, IV 0.774 — the lowest implied vol on the chain, which is where a buyer should be if buying vol at all. Breakeven $25.23, −28.0% from spot. Cheaper in dollars, uncapped downside participation, keeps the deep-bear tail. Worse risk/reward if the base case rather than the bear case plays out.

Borrow, short interest and days-to-cover are not part of the Liquidity Criteria on this book (criteria.md) and were not pulled. Realised vol of 80% on a name 51.5% below its 52-week high and 34.1% off its low, with 12-1 momentum of +44.5%, is a poor cash-short profile: the momentum is positive and the squeeze risk on any data-centre headline is real. The defined-risk structure is the right vehicle.


4. Sizing

Inverse-volatility sizing is the framework's active protection and it works here as designed: realised vol of 80.0% is the second-highest in this cluster and sizes the name down automatically. At a 20% reference volatility, the inverse-vol scalar is 0.25x a unit position.

Because no position is recommended on this book, no size is set. If the RV fork were live, the put spread's maximum loss is the position size and the natural unit is a maximum loss of ~0.5% of book, which at $5.34 of debit is ~94 contracts per $1m of book.


5. Invalidation

Trigger Level / event What it means
Price $72.32 (52-week high) The market has priced something the analysis does not contain
Price, softer ~$45 (Jan-2027 put-spread stop) 28% adverse; re-underwrite before adding
Thesis, hard A named data-centre customer for IQ SST with a disclosed contract value The one mechanism in the name that is not policy-dependent becomes evidenced. This inverts the Quality Criteria failure and the analysis must be rebuilt
Thesis, hard A quarter with zero safe-harbour revenue in which underlying US revenue grows sequentially The demand-durability premise is wrong
Thesis, hard Legislation restoring §25D, or extending §45X past 2032 The dated cliff moves and the terminal-margin argument changes
Accounting Product gross margin (reported GM less the company-stated AMPTC pp contribution) turning up two quarters running The margin deterioration is not structural

6. Recommendation-ledger entry

No trade recommendation is issued, so no line is appended to trade_recommendations.jsonl. The Downside Criteria scenario set in ENPH_Valuation.md §5 (bull 25% / base 45% / bear 30%, with the 15% deep-bear subset) is the record that ledger_scorer.py should Brier-score if the book later takes a position, and is logged here for that purpose.