{
  "model": "qwen/qwen3.6-35b-a3b",
  "started_at": "2026-06-13T12:43:45.364Z",
  "system_prompt": "You are Analyst, the thesis-judgment stage of an AI trade-ideas pipeline.\n\nScout has already gathered a JSON dossier of scoring_inputs. Your job is to\nSCORE the dossier against the methodology rubric and either draft a\nhigh-conviction idea, draft a clearly labeled paper-tracked research idea,\nor skip.\n\nOPTION B (skip) IS THE EXPECTED DEFAULT. The pipeline publishes normal\nrecommendation-grade ideas rarely and only when something clears a high bar.\nMost dossiers should return\n{ \"skip\": true, \"reason\": \"...\", \"score\": <num> }. Mediocre publishes burn\nDevil's Advocate budget and create credibility risk on the public site.\nPaper-tracked ideas are a separate measurement lane: they are zero-position,\nlow-confidence research setups used to learn whether the model's medium-grade\nsignals work over time. They must never read like a buy/sell recommendation.\n\nLOOK AT THE FULL STRUCTURE MENU. Even when Scout says 'no asymmetric long\nopportunity exists' (verdict=range_bound_or_income), there may be a clear\nINCOME structure (covered call against the high; strangle inside an IV-\nelevated band; CSP at a downside-defended strike). Don't reflex-skip just\nbecause long_stock isn't attractive. Read the dossier looking for what\nSHAPE OF TRADE fits, not just whether long is fits.\n\nSCORING RUBRIC (sum to max 100)\n\nA. SMART-MONEY CLUSTER (max 25) — from scoring_inputs.smart_money\n   • 10 pts if 3+ distinct insiders with open-market purchases (code P) in\n     last 90 days totaling ≥ $500K\n   • +3 pts if CEO is among the buyers\n   • +3 pts if CFO is among the buyers\n   • +2 pts if total purchases > $5M\n   • 5 pts for a known concentrated 13F initiation/add (Berkshire, Pershing\n     Square, Appaloosa, Greenlight, Scion, Polen, Pabrai, Tepper, etc.)\n   • +3 pts if it's in the manager's top-3 positions\n   • 2 pts for politician STOCK Act recent buy\n   • +1 pt if multiple unrelated members bought within 30 days\n   • Penalty: −10 pts if material insider SELLING > BUYING in dollars\n\nB. OPTIONS FLOW / UOA (max 10) — from scoring_inputs.options_flow\n   • 4 pts: whale_call_blocks_otm ≥ 2 with flow_directional_bias = bullish\n     and flow_strength ∈ {moderate, strong}\n   • 3 pts: bullish IV skew (call IV > put IV) consistent with thesis\n   • 2 pts: net_dollar_bias_pct > 30 (sustained call-side flow)\n   • 1 pt: large OI building at a defended price level\n   • Penalty: −5 pts if whale_put_blocks_otm ≥ 2 and bias is bearish\n     without a hedging explanation\n\nC. CATALYST (max 25) — from scoring_inputs.catalyst\n   • 10 pts: earnings within 90 days AND last 4 quarters' EPS surprise > 0%\n   • 8 pts: pending product launch / FDA / contract milestone in horizon\n   • 5 pts: recent guidance raise (last 90 days)\n   • 5 pts: quantifiable sector tailwind (named hyperscaler capex flowing\n     to this name in $)\n   Cap at 25 even if components add to more.\n\nD. MISPRICING (max 15) — from scoring_inputs.mispricing\n   • 5 pts: forward P/E ≥ 20% below sector median (with non-deteriorating\n     earnings)\n   • 4 pts: EV/EBITDA ≥ 30% below sector median\n   • 4 pts: FCF yield ≥ 7% with stable FCF\n   • 5 pts: SOTP gap ≥ 25% (replaces one of the above)\n   Cap at 15.\n\nE. QUALITY (max 15) — from scoring_inputs.quality\n   • 5 pts: ROIC ≥ 15% (or trending there)\n   • 5 pts: gross margin expanding ≥ 3pp YoY\n   • 5 pts: net debt / EBITDA ≤ 2x (or net cash)\n\nF. MOMENTUM/TECHNICAL (max 10) — from scoring_inputs.technical\n   • 3 pts: above both 50DMA and 200DMA\n   • 4 pts: 12-1 month price return positive AND beating sector\n   • 2 pts: RSI 14 in 40-65 zone\n   • 1 pt: MACD bullish cross in last 30 days\n\nRISK CLASS — choose one based on the dossier's market_cap field:\n   \"core\"        — market_cap > $5B. Standard methodology sizing.\n   \"asymmetric\"  — market_cap ≤ $5B (small-cap moonshot). 90%+ of these\n                   bets lose money or go to zero; the few that work pay\n                   for the rest. Position sizing is far more conservative\n                   to fit the variance.\n\nTHRESHOLDS — depend on risk_class\n\n  CORE risk_class:\n   ≥ 80    Publish, confidence 5, position size cap 4-5%\n   70-79   Publish, confidence 4, position size cap 2.5-3.0%\n   60-69   Publish, confidence 3, position size cap 1.5-2.0%\n   45-59   Paper-track if no hard anti-signal and the thesis is specific,\n           measurable, and falsifiable; otherwise skip\n   < 45    Skip\n\n  ASYMMETRIC risk_class — strict sizing:\n   ≥ 80    Publish, confidence 5, position size cap 1.5%\n   70-79   Publish, confidence 4, position size cap 1.0%\n   60-69   Publish, confidence 3, position size cap 0.5%\n   45-59   Paper-track only if there is a concrete dated catalyst or\n           measurable event path; otherwise skip\n   < 45    Skip\n   Structure must be long_stock (options structures are wrong shape for\n   moonshots; Compliance enforces this in code).\n\nANTI-SIGNAL GATES (any one of these forces skip regardless of score):\n   • Going-concern audit qualification\n   • Pending material litigation (DOJ/SEC enforcement, class action with merit)\n   • Customer concentration > 30%\n   • Convertible/warrant overhang creating dilution > 10% of float\n   • Accounting irregularities (restatements, auditor changes)\n   • Avg daily volume < $5M (liquidity gate)\n   • Pump-and-dump signals (sudden volume + chat-room mentions)\n\nIf scoring_inputs has anti_signals_present non-empty, treat each entry as a\ngate; skip unless you can articulate WHY it doesn't apply to this case.\n\nEDGE CHECK (philosophical, not numeric)\n\nAfter scoring, ask: \"What does this idea say that the market doesn't already\nknow?\" If the answer is generic (it's cheap, AI is a tailwind, technicals\nlook great), the score is misleading — skip even if numerical score is 65.\nReal edge means a specific data point or interpretation the market missed.\n\nPAPER-TRACKING LANE (educational measurement, not advice)\n\nUse this lane for score 45-59 dossiers that are not strong enough for a\nnormal publication but are specific enough to evaluate later. Requirements:\n   • draft.paper_track MUST be true\n   • headline MUST begin with \"Paper Track:\"\n   • thesis_short MUST explicitly say this is a paper-tracked research setup,\n     not an actionable recommendation\n   • risk.position_size_pct MUST be 0\n   • confidence MUST be 1 or 2 (2 only when score ≥55)\n   • exit.time_horizon_months MUST be present so Monitor can close it\n   • use long_stock unless the dossier gives complete, current option\n     contract data for the chosen income structure\n\nDo not paper-track dossiers with methodology anti-signals, stale numbers,\nmissing sources, unverified catalyst dates, or generic \"cheap/AI/tailwind\"\nstories. Skip those.\n\nUPSIDE TARGET\n\nThe desk is looking for setups with a plausible 20%+ return target. For\nlong_stock, exit.target_price should be at least 20% above entry.price_at_idea\nunless the idea is explicitly a paper-tracked post-event study. If the\nsource-backed upside is less than 20%, skip rather than publishing a low-upside\nidea.\n\nSCOUT VERDICT → STRUCTURE GUIDANCE\n\nRead scoring_inputs and Scout's verdict together. The verdict tells you\nWHICH structures Scout thinks are in scope for this name:\n\n  verdict='promising'              → long_stock | csp (for asymmetric long)\n  verdict='range_bound_or_income'  → cc | strangle | csp on pullback\n                                     (DON'T default to long_stock — Scout\n                                      already said this isn't an asymmetric\n                                      long. Look at IV elevated → strangle;\n                                      stock at 52w high, fundamentals healthy\n                                      → cc against implicit long; pullback\n                                      thesis with cash → csp)\n  verdict='bearish_setup'          → naked_call (rarely; respect ceiling)\n\nIf Scout supplied structure_hints[], they're a starting point. You can\noverride with reasoning, but if you go OUTSIDE the verdict's natural set,\nexplain why in thesis_long.\n\nSTRUCTURE SELECTION — full menu:\n\n   long_stock   — multi-quarter asymmetric thesis, IV not elevated, want\n                  full upside participation\n   csp          — bullish, want to own at strike, IV elevated, ann yield ≥15%\n   cc           — range-bound or mildly bullish, IV elevated, on top of long\n                  stock leg, if-called return ≥15% ann\n   strangle     — RANGE-BOUND thesis with elevated IV. Sell OTM call + OTM\n                  put. Need: comfortable owning at put_strike, no parabolic\n                  upside expectation. Ann yield ≥12%. Compute and emit\n                  breakeven_high (call_strike + total_premium) and\n                  breakeven_low (put_strike - total_premium).\n   naked_put    — same setup as CSP but using margin. ~2x yield, margin call\n                  risk. Only for margin-equipped accounts. Note explicitly.\n   naked_call   — bearish setup with elevated IV. UNCAPPED loss if rally.\n                  Confidence ceiling 4 (Compliance enforces). Requires\n                  explicit upside-shock thesis + defense plan in conditions.\n\nMatch the structure to the thesis shape — don't reach for naked options\njust because the premium is fatter. Most candidates are best as long_stock\nor CSP. Strangles only when you have a clear range thesis backed by IV\nand fundamentals.\n\nIF YOU SKIP — output exactly:\n  {\n    \"skip\": true,\n    \"score\": <0-100 composite>,\n    \"score_breakdown\": {\n      \"smart_money\": <0-25>, \"options_flow\": <0-10>, \"catalyst\": <0-25>,\n      \"mispricing\": <0-15>, \"quality\": <0-15>, \"technical\": <0-10>\n    },\n    \"reason\": \"1-2 sentences why this dossier doesn't support a thesis.\"\n  }\n\nIF YOU PROCEED — output a draft idea matching this schema (this is the same\nschema the published site renders from):\n\n{\n  \"skip\": false,\n  \"score\": <0-100 composite>,\n  \"score_breakdown\": {\n    \"smart_money\": <0-25>, \"options_flow\": <0-10>, \"catalyst\": <0-25>,\n    \"mispricing\": <0-15>, \"quality\": <0-15>, \"technical\": <0-10>\n  },\n  \"draft\": {\n    \"slug\": \"YYYY-MM-DD-symbol-keyphrase\",\n    \"paper_track\": false,\n    \"symbol\": \"TICKER\",\n    \"company\": \"Full name\",\n    \"sector\": \"semis-ai-infra\" | \"small-cap-asymmetric\",\n    \"risk_class\": \"core\" | \"asymmetric\",\n    \"headline\": \"Punchy 1-line — the news angle on the thesis\",\n    \"thesis_short\": \"1 sentence — why this trade exists.\",\n    \"thesis_long\": [\n      \"Opening paragraph framing the setup.\",\n      \"## Catalyst\",\n      \"Detailed catalyst narrative.\",\n      \"## Why the market is mispricing this\",\n      \"Edge explanation, citing dossier facts.\",\n      \"## Numbers\",\n      \"- Bullet 1 with concrete numbers from the dossier\",\n      \"- Bullet 2\",\n      \"## Risk\",\n      \"Honest description of what could go wrong.\"\n    ],\n    \"structure\": {\n      \"type\": \"long_stock\" | \"csp\" | \"cc\" | \"strangle\" | \"naked_put\" | \"naked_call\",\n      \"long_stock\":   { \"entry_zone_low\": <num>, \"entry_zone_high\": <num>, \"shares_per_unit\": 100 },\n      \"csp\":          { \"strike\": <num>, \"expiry\": \"YYYY-MM-DD\", \"premium_target\": <num>, \"annualized_yield_pct\": <num>, \"if_assigned_basis\": <num> },\n      \"cc\":           { \"underlying_basis\": <num>, \"strike\": <num>, \"expiry\": \"YYYY-MM-DD\", \"premium_target\": <num>, \"if_called_return_pct\": <num> },\n      \"strangle\":     { \"call_strike\": <num>, \"put_strike\": <num>, \"expiry\": \"YYYY-MM-DD\", \"call_premium_target\": <num>, \"put_premium_target\": <num>, \"total_premium_target\": <num>, \"breakeven_high\": <num>, \"breakeven_low\": <num>, \"annualized_yield_pct\": <num>, \"max_loss_note\": \"...\" },\n      \"naked_put\":    { \"strike\": <num>, \"expiry\": \"YYYY-MM-DD\", \"premium_target\": <num>, \"annualized_yield_pct\": <num>, \"max_loss_per_contract\": <num>, \"margin_estimate_per_contract\": <num>, \"warning\": \"...\" },\n      \"naked_call\":   { \"strike\": <num>, \"expiry\": \"YYYY-MM-DD\", \"premium_target\": <num>, \"annualized_yield_pct\": <num>, \"max_loss\": \"UNLIMITED\", \"warning\": \"...\" }\n    },\n    \"entry\": {\n      \"price_at_idea\": <last_close from dossier>,\n      \"conditions\": \"How/when to enter — e.g., 'Open starter on pullback to MA50.'\"\n    },\n    \"exit\": {\n      \"target_price\": <num or null for options structures>,\n      \"time_horizon_months\": <int 3-12>,\n      \"stop_conditions\": \"Specific signal(s) that trigger a close.\"\n    },\n    \"risk\": {\n      \"bear_case\": \"Honest, specific bear case (not generic 'market could fall').\",\n      \"what_breaks_thesis\": \"Specific event/data that invalidates the call.\",\n      \"position_size_pct\": <0.0 for paper_track, otherwise 0.5 to 5.0 conviction-weighted>\n    },\n    \"sources\": [\n      { \"label\": \"...\", \"url\": \"...\" }\n    ],\n    \"confidence\": <1-5, conservative>,\n    \"analyst\": \"research-desk\",\n    \"scout_model\": \"minimax/minimax-m2.7\",\n    \"analyst_model\": \"qwen/qwen3.6-35b-a3b\",\n    \"devils_advocate_verdict\": null\n  }\n}\n\nONLY ONE STRUCTURE TYPE. Pick long_stock, csp, OR cc and only fill that\nsub-object. Leave the others null/omitted.\n\nALL NUMBERS must be drawn from the dossier or computable from it. Do not\ninvent prices, strikes, premiums.\n\nOUTPUT ONLY VALID JSON. No surrounding prose, no markdown fences.",
  "user_prompt": "CURRENT DATE: 2026-06-13. THE YEAR IS 2026.\nDATE RULES — read before writing ANY date:\n  - Every option expiry, earnings date, catalyst date, and DTE you state MUST use the year 2026 or later. Do NOT write 2025 dates — your training prior is stale.\n  - Every option expiry MUST be a real FUTURE date relative to 2026-06-13. Copy expiries verbatim from options_expiries()/the dossier — never infer a year from memory.\n  - Before writing a date, check it: if it is earlier than 2026-06-13, it is WRONG — re-read the live tool output.\n\nHere is the dossier from Scout. Decide: skip or draft.\n\n\nLESSONS LEARNED: none yet.\n\nDOSSIER:\n{\n  \"symbol\": \"RKLB\",\n  \"company\": \"Rocket Lab Corporation\",\n  \"investigation_summary\": \"Rocket Lab is a fundamentally strong space-access company with 75 Electron launches delivered and Neutron in development, yet it has run +300% from its lows and now sits near its 52-week high at ~$102. The stock just suffered an acute -10.8% single-session selloff following the SpaceX IPO (sell-the-news on competing space names). The options flow shows genuine OTM call whale blocks (9 blocks, net $3.85M bullish bias), but insider filings reveal mostly RSU grants and trust reshuffles rather than open-market CEO/CFO purchases — only one director sale from Alexander Slusky ($4.94M at ~$123.60) in the cluster window. With forward P/E deeply negative (pre-profitability), the stock is priced for perfection after its parabolic move; Q2 earnings on Aug 6 and Nasdaq-100 index inclusion (effective June 22) are near-term catalysts, but neither guarantees upward re-rating from current levels.\",\n  \"verdict\": \"range_bound_or_income\",\n  \"confidence_in_data\": 4,\n  \"structure_hints\": [\n    \"cc\",\n    \"strangle\",\n    \"csp\"\n  ],\n  \"business_snapshot\": \"Rocket Lab is an end-to-end space company operating two reportable segments: Launch Services (Electron orbital rocket — 75 successful missions, >200 spacecraft deployed through FY2025; HASTE suborbital testbed) and Space Systems (spacecraft design/mfg, components including solar cells from SolAero, reaction wheels from Sinclair Interplanetary, separation systems from Planetary Systems Corp., optical systems from GEOST LLC acquired Aug-2025, and constellation management). The company is developing Neutron, a medium-lift reusable launch vehicle (~13,000 kg LEO capacity) expected to be key for large constellation deployments. Rocket Lab operates two pads at its private LC-1 in Mahia, New Zealand (120 launches/yr capacity), one pad at NASA's Wallops Flight Facility LC-2 (8 launches/yr), and is building LC-3 in Virginia for Neutron. The company has no revenue from US government contracts classified above de minimis thresholds. Q1 FY2026 financials: $200.3M revenue (+63% YoY), gross margin 38%, operating loss ($56M). The stock tripled from ~$39 to $150 between late 2025 and May 2026 before the recent pullback.\",\n  \"scoring_inputs\": {\n    \"smart_money\": {\n      \"insider_open_market_purchases_90d\": [],\n      \"insider_open_market_total_usd_90d\": 0,\n      \"distinct_insider_buyers_90d\": 0,\n      \"ceo_buy_present\": false,\n      \"cfo_buy_present\": false,\n      \"material_insider_selling_90d_usd\": 4944000,\n      \"notable_13f_holders\": [\n        \"pending — v2\"\n      ],\n      \"politician_recent_buys\": [\n        \"pending — v2\"\n      ]\n    },\n    \"catalyst\": {\n      \"next_earnings_date\": \"2026-08-06\",\n      \"recent_eps_surprise_pattern\": \"Last 4 quarters: -17.9% miss (Q2 FY25), +71.3% beat (Q3 FY25), +8.2% beat (Q4 FY25), +11.0% beat (Q1 FY26). Trajectory improving — Q1 beat driven by strong space systems revenue growth.\",\n      \"guidance_raise_in_last_90d\": false,\n      \"named_catalysts\": [\n        {\n          \"type\": \"index\",\n          \"description\": \"Nasdaq-100 Index inclusion effective June 22, 2026 — will trigger passive buying of ~$64B market cap name\",\n          \"date_or_window\": \"2026-06-22\",\n          \"source_urls\": [\n            \"https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/stocks/articles/why-rocket-lab-rklb-stock-213320263.html\"\n          ],\n          \"directional_bias\": \"bullish\"\n        },\n        {\n          \"type\": \"earnings\",\n          \"description\": \"Q2 FY2026 earnings — guidance and revenue trajectory for full year\",\n          \"date_or_window\": \"2026-08-06\",\n          \"source_urls\": [\n            \"https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/stocks/articles/rocket-lab-corporation-rklb-stock-221502136.html\"\n          ],\n          \"directional_bias\": \"ambiguous\"\n        },\n        {\n          \"type\": \"product\",\n          \"description\": \"Neutron development milestone — first launch pad construction at LC-3 Virginia ongoing, expected to be operational 2026\",\n          \"date_or_window\": \"2026 (H2)\",\n          \"source_urls\": [\n            \"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819994/000181999426000013/rklb-20251231.htm\"\n          ],\n          \"directional_bias\": \"bullish\"\n        },\n        {\n          \"type\": \"acquisition\",\n          \"description\": \"Mynaric AG acquisition closed April 14, 2026 — adds laser communication terminal manufacturing (strategic for constellation market)\",\n          \"date_or_window\": \"2026-04-14 (closed)\",\n          \"source_urls\": [\n            \"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819994/000175392626000654/g085683_8k.htm\"\n          ],\n          \"directional_bias\": \"bullish\"\n        },\n        {\n          \"type\": \"sector\",\n          \"description\": \"SpaceX IPO creates halo effect on space sector but also competitive narrative shift; RKLB's smallsat market position vs SpaceX's dominant share is a double-edged catalyst\",\n          \"date_or_window\": \"2026-06-12 (event)\",\n          \"source_urls\": [\n            \"https://finance.yahoo.com/m/aba015df-7cad-3143-929b-03a2cdc6a895/sell-the-news%3A-space-stocks.html\"\n          ],\n          \"directional_bias\": \"bearish\"\n        }\n      ]\n    },\n    \"mispricing\": {\n      \"forward_pe\": null,\n      \"sector_median_forward_pe\": null,\n      \"ev_to_ebitda\": -351.958,\n      \"sector_median_ev_to_ebitda\": null,\n      \"fcf_yield_pct\": null,\n      \"narrative\": \"RKLB is deeply unprofitable (negative EPS, negative FCF) with a forward P/E of -14,084 — meaningless for valuation purposes. The stock trades at an EV/Revenue of ~85x on TTM revenue, which reflects the market pricing in Neutron-scale revenues years into the future. After a 300%+ run from cycle lows and within ~3% of its all-time high, RKLB is not mispriced to the downside — it appears fully valued relative to current fundamentals. The premium is only justified if Neutron achieves commercial success and/or constellation launch demand dramatically accelerates.\"\n    },\n    \"quality\": {\n      \"roic_pct\": null,\n      \"gross_margin_trend_pp_yoy\": \"38.2% (Q1 FY26) vs 28.8% (Q1 FY25), +9.4pp improvement — strong margin expansion as space systems mix grows\",\n      \"net_debt_to_ebitda\": null,\n      \"balance_sheet_grade\": \"A\"\n    },\n    \"technical\": {\n      \"above_50dma\": true,\n      \"above_200dma\": true,\n      \"rsi_14\": 43.7,\n      \"macd_recent_bullish_cross\": false,\n      \"12_1_momentum_vs_sector_pct\": null\n    }\n  },\n  \"price_context\": {\n    \"last_close\": 102.39,\n    \"ytd_return_pct\": 75.03,\n    \"from_52w_high_pct\": -31.8\n  },\n  \"filings_reviewed\": [\n    {\n      \"form\": \"10-K\",\n      \"filed\": \"2026-02-26\",\n      \"url\": \"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819994/000181999426000013/rklb-20251231.htm\",\n      \"key_takeaways\": [\n        \"FY2025: $679.6M revenue (+63.5% YoY), 36.6% gross margin, -22.4% operating margin; Launch Services + Space Systems dual-segment; 75 successful Electron missions through FY end; Neutron development ongoing; Mynaric acquisition announced (closed April 2026); GEOST LLC acquired August 2025; $1.38B cash, $139M debt — strong balance sheet; Key customers: DoW, NASA, DARPA, NRO, commercial operators including Blacksky, Canon, Kinéis, Capella Space, Planet, OHB Group, Synspective\"\n      ]\n    },\n    {\n      \"form\": \"10-Q\",\n      \"filed\": \"2026-05-07\",\n      \"url\": \"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819994/000181999426000028/rklb-20260331.htm\",\n      \"key_takeaways\": [\n        \"Q1 FY2026: $200.3M revenue (+63% YoY), 38.2% gross margin (up from 28.8%); operating loss ($55.9M) vs ($59.2M) prior year; EPS -$0.07 vs -$0.12 YoY — improving trajectory; cash $1.21B, convertible notes $36.9M (net of issuance costs), significant debt paydown from Q4 2025 balance of $152M; shares outstanding: ~575.8M diluted; Mynaric acquisition closed April 14, 2026; Motiv Design & Manufacturing purchase announced May 6, 2026 — vertical integration into spacecraft structures\"\n      ]\n    },\n    {\n      \"form\": \"8-K\",\n      \"filed\": \"2026-06-05\",\n      \"url\": \"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819994/000181999426000056/rklb-20260603.htm\",\n      \"key_takeaways\": [\n        \"Appointment of Agostino Ricupati as VP Corporate Controller & CAO (principal accounting officer), effective June 3, 2026 — new hire from Cooper Companies; Adam Spice remains CFO\"\n      ]\n    },\n    {\n      \"form\": \"8-K\",\n      \"filed\": \"2026-04-14\",\n      \"url\": \"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819994/000175392626000654/g085683_8k.htm\",\n      \"key_takeaways\": [\n        \"Mynaric AG acquisition closed for $155.3M total consideration (nominal cash + 2,277,002 RKLB shares); Mynaric makes laser communication terminals for aerospace — strategic constellation play; 109,943 escrow shares for indemnity\"\n      ]\n    }\n  ],\n  \"options_context\": {\n    \"expiries_examined\": [\n      \"2026-07-17\",\n      \"2026-06-18\",\n      \"2026-08-21\"\n    ],\n    \"iv_summary\": \"ATM IV on near-term expiries running ~99-100%, elevated relative to historical baseline; OTM calls (25-46% OTM) have IV of 101-105% — rich premium available for covered call writing\",\n    \"notable_skew_or_flow\": \"9 OTM call whale blocks identified, net directional bias +$3.85M bullish (25% net); top open interest on calls: $130 strike (8,578), $140 (6,375); puts: $110 strike heavy at 7,177 — mixed signals; IV elevated enough to support CC or strangle strategy\"\n  },\n  \"competitive_landscape\": \"Rocket Lab competes in the small-to-medium launch market primarily against SpaceX (Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy), with secondary competition from Astra, Relativity Space, and emerging Chinese/European alternatives. In space systems/components, it serves a merchant market alongside players like Maxar, MDA Group, and Northrop Grumman. The key competitive moat is the bilateral US-NZ treaty enabling LC-1 operations with US technology, proven flight heritage (75 missions), vertically integrated manufacturing (3D printing, carbon composites), and an expanding component catalogue via acquisitions. SpaceX's IPO on June 12, 2026 ($135 pricing, ~$1.8T valuation) creates both competitive pressure narrative and halo effect for the sector — but RKLB is uniquely positioned as the only US-commercial small launch provider with proven cadence.\",\n  \"key_risks\": [\n    \"Pre-profitability company dependent on capital markets to fund Neutron development; FCF highly negative\",\n    \"Neutron development delay or failure would eliminate the medium-lift revenue thesis entirely\",\n    \"Concentration risk: government customers (DoW, NASA, DARPA, NRO) subject to budget appropriations and political risk\",\n    \"Dilution risk from ongoing ATM equity offerings (raised capital multiple times in 2025-26)\",\n    \"SpaceX IPO competitive narrative could reprice RKLB's valuation relative to a now-public peer\",\n    \"Launch failure of Electron or Neutron would materially impact revenue trajectory and customer confidence\",\n    \"Mynaric acquisition integration risk — German laser comm company may not achieve synergies as quickly as modeled\",\n    \"At ~85x EV/Revenue, the stock is priced for near-perfect execution with no margin of safety\"\n  ],\n  \"what_the_market_might_be_missing\": \"The Mynaric + Motiv acquisitions signal an underappreciated strategic shift from a pure-play launcher to an integrated space infrastructure provider — if Rocket Lab successfully cross-sells laser comm terminals (Mynaric) and spacecraft structures (Motiv) alongside launches, the revenue per mission could multiply without requiring new customers. The Motiv acquisition particularly deserves attention: it was only announced May 6, 2026 with minimal coverage and adds vertical integration into spacecraft structural components that Rocket Lab can both use internally and sell to third parties. However, this edge is partially offset by valuation — even if the thesis is correct, current multiples leave little room for execution setbacks.\",\n  \"anti_signals_present\": [\n    \"dilution\",\n    \"going_concern (pre-profitability)\"\n  ],\n  \"sources\": [\n    {\n      \"label\": \"10-K FY2025 Annual Report\",\n      \"url\": \"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819994/000181999426000013/rklb-20251231.htm\"\n    },\n    {\n      \"label\": \"10-Q Q1 FY2026\",\n      \"url\": \"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819994/000181999426000028/rklb-20260331.htm\"\n    },\n    {\n      \"label\": \"Form 4 - Alexander Slusky (director sale)\",\n      \"url\": \"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819994/000200101126000095/xslF345X06/edgardoc.xml\"\n    },\n    {\n      \"label\": \"Form 4 - Adam Spice CFO (RSU grant, trust reshuffle)\",\n      \"url\": \"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819994/000200101126000094/xslF345X06/edgardoc.xml\"\n    },\n    {\n      \"label\": \"Form 4 - Edward Frank director (trust transfer, no cash)\",\n      \"url\": \"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819994/000200101126000084/xslF345X06/edgardoc.xml\"\n    },\n    {\n      \"label\": \"8-K Mynaric acquisition close\",\n      \"url\": \"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819994/000175392626000654/g085683_8k.htm\"\n    },\n    {\n      \"label\": \"8-K CAO appointment Ricupati\",\n      \"url\": \"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819994/000181999426000056/rklb-20260603.htm\"\n    },\n    {\n      \"label\": \"Yahoo Finance: RKLB NasdaX 100 inclusion + SpaceX IPO sell-off\",\n      \"url\": \"https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/stocks/articles/why-rocket-lab-rklb-stock-213320263.html\"\n    }\n  ],\n  \"unfetched_signals\": [\n    \"13f_deltas\",\n    \"politician_trades\",\n    \"sentiment_score\"\n  ]\n}\n\nOutput ONLY the decision JSON described in the system prompt. Do NOT\ninclude <think>...</think> reasoning blocks — they eat the output token\nbudget and produce truncated, unparseable decisions.",
  "completions": [
    {
      "ts": "2026-06-13T12:45:00.764Z",
      "raw_content": "<think>The dossier is for RKLB (Rocket Lab Corporation).\nLet's score it against the rubric.\n\nA. SMART-MONEY CLUSTER (max 25)\n- insider_open_market_purchases_90d: [] -> 0 pts\n- material_insider_selling_90d_usd: 4,944,000 -> Penalty: -10 pts (if > buying, which is 0)\n- notable_13f_holders: pending\n- politician_recent_buys: pending\nScore: 0 - 10 = -10. Cap at 0. (Actually, rubric says penalty -10 if material insider SELLING > BUYING. I'll give 0.)\n\nB. OPTIONS FLOW / UOA (max 10)\n- whale_call_blocks_otm: 9 blocks, net $3.85M bullish bias. flow_directional_bias = bullish. flow_strength = moderate/strong? It says \"9 OTM call whale blocks identified, net directional bias +$3.85M bullish\". I'll give 4 pts.\n- bullish IV skew: not explicitly stated, but ATM IV ~99-100%, OTM calls 101-105%. Let's give 3 pts for IV skew/structure hint or 0 if not explicit. I'll give 2 pts for net_dollar_bias_pct > 30 (bullish bias).\n- large OI building: $130 strike calls (8,578), $110 puts (7,177). Not clearly a defended level.\nScore: ~4-5. Let's say 4.\n\nC. CATALYST (max 25)\n- next_earnings_date: 2026-08-06 (within 90 days). Last 4 quarters EPS surprise: -17.9%, +71.3%, +8.2%, +11.0%. Not all > 0%. So 0 for that specific 10 pt.\n- pending product launch / FDA / contract: Neutron development milestone (H2 2026). 8 pts? Or 5 pts for recent guidance raise (false).\n- quantifiable sector tailwind: SpaceX IPO halo effect. 5 pts.\n- Nasdaq-100 inclusion (June 22). This is a strong catalyst. I'll give it 8 pts for pending event.\nTotal CATALYST: ~13 pts. (Cap 25)\n\nD. MISPRICING (max 15)\n- forward P/E: null/negative. EV/EBITDA: -351. FCF yield: null. SOTP gap: not mentioned.\nScore: 0.\n\nE. QUALITY (max 15)\n- ROIC: null.\n- gross margin expanding: +9.4pp YoY. 5 pts.\n- net debt/EBITDA: null, but balance sheet grade A, cash $1.21B vs $139M debt. 5 pts.\nScore: 10.\n\nF. MOMENTUM/TECHNICAL (max 10)\n- above 50DMA & 200DMA: true. 3 pts.\n- 12-1 month return: ytd 75%, but from 52w high -31.8%. Not beating sector necessarily. 0 pts.\n- RSI 14: 43.7. In 40-65 zone. 2 pts.\n- MACD bullish cross: false.\nScore: 5.\n\nTotal Score: A(0) + B(4) + C(13) + D(0) + E(10) + F(5) = 32.\nWait, let's re-evaluate A. The penalty is -10 if selling > buying. I'll cap A at 0.\nScore is around 32.\nThresholds: < 45 -> Skip.\nAnti-signals present: \"dilution\", \"going_concern (pre-profitability)\".\nThe dossier explicitly says: \"anti_signals_present: [\"dilution\", \"going_concern (pre-profitability)\"]\".\nAlso, \"The stock is priced for perfection after its parabolic move... not mispriced to the downside\".\nUpside target: needs 20%+. Current price $102.39. Target would be >$122. With negative earnings and dilution risk, it's hard to justify.\nScout verdict: range_bound_or_income. Structure hints: cc, strangle, csp.\nBut score is low (<45). Skip is the default and expected.\nI will skip.\n\nLet's double check the scoring rubric for A.\n\"Penalty: −10 pts if material insider SELLING > BUYING in dollars\"\nInsider buying: 0. Selling: 4.94M. So -10. Max is 25, min effectively 0 or negative. I'll put 0.\nScore breakdown: smart_money: 0, options_flow: 4, catalyst: 13, mispricing: 0, quality: 10, technical: 5. Total: 32.\nReason: Deeply unprofitable with dilution risks, priced for perfection after a 300% run, and lacks insider buying or clear downside mispricing. While options flow is bullish, the risk/reward profile and anti-signals (dilution, pre-profitability) make it unsuitable for publication.\n\nWait, should I consider the strangle/CC structure? The prompt says \"LOOK AT THE FULL STRUCTURE MENU. Even when Scout says 'no asymmetric long opportunity exists'... there may be a clear INCOME structure\". But the score is 32, which is < 45. The threshold for paper-track is 45-59. For <45, skip.\nAlso, anti-signal \"dilution\" and \"going_concern (pre-profitability)\" are present. The prompt says: \"If scoring_inputs has anti_signals_present non-empty, treat each entry as a gate; skip unless you can articulate WHY it doesn't apply to this case.\"\nDilution is a major risk for RKLB (ATM offerings). Pre-profitability is a concern for a company at 85x EV/Sales. I will skip.\n\nLet's verify the score calculation carefully.\nA: 0\nB: 4 (whale call blocks)\nC: 13 (earnings in 90d + Nasdaq inclusion + sector tailwind)\nD: 0\nE: 10 (margin expansion + strong balance sheet)\nF: 5 (above DMAs + RSI)\nTotal: 32.\n\nI will output the skip JSON.\nCheck format:\n{\n  \"skip\": true,\n  \"score\": 32,\n  \"score_breakdown\": {\n    \"smart_money\": 0,\n    \"options_flow\": 4,\n    \"catalyst\": 13,\n    \"mispricing\": 0,\n    \"quality\": 10,\n    \"technical\": 5\n  },\n  \"reason\": \"Score falls below the 45-point threshold due to zero insider buying, material insider selling, negative profitability, and active dilution risks. Despite bullish options flow and near-term catalysts (Nasdaq inclusion, earnings), the stock is priced for perfection after a 300% run, leaving no margin of safety or asymmetric risk/reward for publication.\"\n}\n\nWait, should I adjust score to reflect the structure potential? The rubric is fixed. I'll stick to 32.\nIs there any reason to give it a higher score? Maybe options flow gets 4, catalyst gets 13. Quality 10. Technical 5. Total 32. It's clearly a skip.\nI will produce the skip JSON.\nOne minor thing: The prompt says \"If scoring_inputs has anti_signals_present non-empty, treat each entry as a gate; skip unless you can articulate WHY it doesn't apply to this case.\" I will mention dilution and pre-profitability in the reason.\nAll good.\nOutput matches exactly.\nProceed. \nLet's quickly verify dates: 2026-06-13 is current. Earnings 2026-08-06. Nasdaq inclusion 2026-06-22. All future.\nThe JSON structure for skip is exact.\nReady. \nOutput matches request.✅\nI will generate the JSON now. \nSelf-Correction/Refinement during thought: \nCould the strangle/CC be viable enough to publish? The prompt says \"OPTION B (skip) IS THE EXPECTED DEFAULT.\" and \"< 45 Skip\". I will strictly follow the threshold. The score is 32. Skip is correct.\nI will format exactly as requested.\nAll numbers and structure match.\nProceed. \nOutput Generation. \n```json\n{\n  \"skip\": true,\n  \"score\": 32,\n  \"score_breakdown\": {\n    \"smart_money\": 0,\n    \"options_flow\": 4,\n    \"catalyst\": 13,\n    \"mispricing\": 0,\n    \"quality\": 10,\n    \"technical\": 5\n  },\n  \"reason\": \"Score falls well below the 45-point threshold due to zero insider buying, material insider selling, negative profitability, and active dilution risks. Despite bullish options flow and near-term catalysts (Nasdaq inclusion, earnings), the stock is priced for perfection after a 300% run, leaving no margin of safety or asymmetric risk/reward for publication.\"\n}\n```\nWait, let's verify the exact rubric for A: \"Penalty: −10 pts if material insider SELLING > BUYING in dollars\". I'll put -10? The prompt says score 0-100 composite. I'll cap at 0 for that component or just put 0. I'll put 0.\nActually, I'll just put 0 for smart_money.\nEverything else is fine.\nProceed. \nOutput matches. \nDone. \n[Output Generation] -> *Proceeds*\n</think>\n\n{\n  \"skip\": true,\n  \"score\": 32,\n  \"score_breakdown\": {\n    \"smart_money\": 0,\n    \"options_flow\": 4,\n    \"catalyst\": 13,\n    \"mispricing\": 0,\n    \"quality\": 10,\n    \"technical\": 5\n  },\n  \"reason\": \"Score falls well below the 45-point threshold due to zero insider buying, material insider selling, negative profitability, and active dilution risks. Despite bullish options flow and near-term catalysts (Nasdaq inclusion, earnings), the stock is priced for perfection after a 300% run, leaving no margin of safety or asymmetric risk/reward for publication.\"\n}",
      "cleaned_content": "{\n  \"skip\": true,\n  \"score\": 32,\n  \"score_breakdown\": {\n    \"smart_money\": 0,\n    \"options_flow\": 4,\n    \"catalyst\": 13,\n    \"mispricing\": 0,\n    \"quality\": 10,\n    \"technical\": 5\n  },\n  \"reason\": \"Score falls well below the 45-point threshold due to zero insider buying, material insider selling, negative profitability, and active dilution risks. Despite bullish options flow and near-term catalysts (Nasdaq inclusion, earnings), the stock is priced for perfection after a 300% run, leaving no margin of safety or asymmetric risk/reward for publication.\"\n}",
      "tool_calls": null,
      "finish_reason": "stop"
    }
  ],
  "tool_results": [],
  "final_message": "{\n  \"skip\": true,\n  \"score\": 32,\n  \"score_breakdown\": {\n    \"smart_money\": 0,\n    \"options_flow\": 4,\n    \"catalyst\": 13,\n    \"mispricing\": 0,\n    \"quality\": 10,\n    \"technical\": 5\n  },\n  \"reason\": \"Score falls well below the 45-point threshold due to zero insider buying, material insider selling, negative profitability, and active dilution risks. Despite bullish options flow and near-term catalysts (Nasdaq inclusion, earnings), the stock is priced for perfection after a 300% run, leaving no margin of safety or asymmetric risk/reward for publication.\"\n}",
  "tool_calls_total": 0,
  "walltime_ms": 75401,
  "stop_reason": "stop",
  "completed_at": "2026-06-13T12:45:00.765Z"
}