TradeAI News
The structure behind the move — never the direction
7 followers
The structure behind the move — never the direction
7 followers
Gamma exposure, short interest and FTDs, insider Form 4s, analyst-accuracy backtests, and a trade journal that knows the conditions behind each trade. Every number traces to a named source, with the date it was true. Significance and magnitude — never direction. I audited my own marketing and deleted every figure that didn't trace, including one claiming "2M+ historical situations" when the real dataset is 7,931 events.
Free Options
Launch Team / Built With
EneyProactive AI for Mac. Free test, 20,000 credits.
Promoted
Hi PH — I'm Jesús; I built TradeAI News.
Three weeks ago I audited my own marketing site and deleted every number that didn't trace to a real source. The worst one claimed "2M+ historical situations." The real dataset is 7,931 events across 40+ types. I deleted it, and I'm telling you here, because if I'm going to ask this industry to be honest, the first site I have to clean is my own.
That story is the whole product, so here's the rest of it.
I trade. Every tool I bought sold me the same thing: a signal, an alert, something that says buy this now. Nobody can reliably tell you which direction a stock will go — not me, not an AI, not the person selling you the alert. So I built the one I actually wanted: it tells you what happened and how much it mattered, and then gets out of the way.
What that means in practice:
• Gamma exposure — where dealer positioning concentrates on the index, and the market's own implied range from options pricing. Live SPY gamma is public on the site, no account needed.
• Short interest, FTDs, and insider Form 4s — with an as-of date on every figure, because this data is published on a delay, and pretending otherwise is a lie.
• Unusual volume — each ticker against its own 30-day average. Sorted, not scored.
• Analyst accuracy — not price targets, but how each firm's published targets actually landed.
• A trade journal that knows the market — import from your broker, and every trade carries the conditions it was placed in. Then it reads your whole history back to you. Mine told me I give back most of my best unrealized move. That stung, and it's the most useful thing this product has ever told me.
20 feeds, 13 named providers, and every figure on screen carries where it came from and when it was true.
What it will never do: tell you to buy or sell, tell you where a price is going, or promise you'll be earlier than anyone else. There's a page on the site called "Why we don't sell trading signals." It's the most honest thing I've written, and it's probably bad marketing.
Free plan, no card. Basic opens with 30 days free, then 35% off for three months — nothing to type. On Pro and Elite, PRODUCTHUNT takes 50% off the first three months (monthly plans).
I'll be here all day. What I'd most like from this thread: tell me where the data or the reasoning is wrong. And if you keep a trading journal — what do you actually write in it? That's the piece I'm building next, and I'd rather build it from your answers than from my assumptions.
Market intelligence, not investment advice.
Hi — I'm Paula. I work with Jesús on TradeAI News, so read this as an interested party, not a review.
I write the public-facing content, which in practice means I keep a list of things I'm not allowed to say. Some of it is obvious — no "buy", no "signal", no "we get you in before the crowd."
Some of it cost me an argument. I can't call the gamma levels support and resistance. Everyone in this space calls them that, it's what people actually search for, and it would make my job much easier. But "support" is a claim about where a price is going to stop, and we don't make claims about where prices go. So they're "where dealer gamma concentrates" — duller, and true.
That document also has a column for numbers we deleted. One of them was ours: we published an accuracy figure for months, then realised it described an internal research model and not the score the product actually shows. It wasn't a false number. It was a true number about the wrong thing, which reads exactly like a lie to whoever's reading it. It's gone.
I'm posting this because "we're the honest ones" is the easiest claim in marketing to make and the hardest for you to check. The only version worth anything is the specific one — here's what we took down.
Happy to answer anything on the content or copy side.
As a private soybean trader and investor, I'm very happy with TradeAI. My portfolio is monitored 👍🏻👍🏻