Resume af analyse fra Bank of America:
- Nasdaq nærmer sig et boble-signal: Bank of Americas Bubble Risk Indicator for Nasdaq er steget til omkring 0,8, et niveau hvor banken historisk ser forhøjede kortsigtede risici – både for yderligere stigninger og kraftige fald.
- AI-rallyet driver udviklingen: Nasdaq fortsætter op trods højere renter, geopolitisk usikkerhed og mere høgeagtig Fed-kommunikation. Ifølge BofA er det især AI-temaet og investorernes momentumjagt, der holder rallyet i live.
- Halvlederaktier er centrale: Nasdaq-100’s outperformance skyldes især stor vægt i halvleder- og techaktier som Micron, AMD og Intel, der både har høje bobleindikatorer og høj realiseret volatilitet.
- Risikoen for bratte tilbageslag stiger: BofA fremhæver, at bobleopbygning typisk er kendetegnet ved skarpe korrektioner efterfulgt af hurtige rebounds. Banken anbefaler derfor options- og volatilitetsstrategier frem for simple lange aktiepositioner.
- BofA anbefaler specifik afdækning mod AI-nedside: Banken peger især på en relativ optionshandel: lang QQQ Dec26 put mod kort SPY Dec26 put, som skal beskytte mod et Nasdaq-ledet fald, samtidig med at investorer kan bevare eksponering mod AI-temaet.
Uddrag af analyse:
As Bank of America’s derivatives team writes in its latest weekly note, while last week’s hawkish FOMC meeting triggered a re-pricing of Fed policy and pushed front-end rates higher, the Nasdaq continued its broad trend higher, and “the AI bubble continues to expand” as BofA puts it, despite macro headwinds and geopolitical uncertainty (which, as the bank says, is “typical of bubbles building”).
The breakneck rally has also pushed the Nasdaq’s Bubble Risk Indicator closer to the top quintile, beyond which we typically see rising near-term risks in both tails.
As an aside, the BofA Bubble Risk Indicator (BRI) is a price-based measure designed to detect bubble-like asset dynamics. Inspired by the way the first four moments describe a statistical distribution, the BRI distils an asset’s returns, volatility, momentum, and fragility into a single bubble-risk reading on a 0 to 1 scale; 1 represents extreme bubble-like price action while 0 represents none. Historic asset bubbles have exhibited high BRI levels as they formed and peaked
The bank observes that the Nasdaq’s Bubble Risk Indicator (BRI) has risen to the key 0.8 level, “beyond which we typically see elevated near-term risks in both tails.”
While the S&P has also been resilient in its rally, the Nasdaq remains at the center of the AI trade, having outperformed in both return and vol since the March lows.
What has driven NDX outperformance on both metrics? The usual suspects: overweight exposure to semis stocks like MU, AMD & INTC, which have some of the highest BRI readings…
… and which are notably overweight in NDX vs SPX, have been striking outperformers in the US large cap universe, both in terms of returns and realized vol.
Note that while ultra-low correlation has been a key suppressor of SPX realized vol, NDX stock correlation has also reached historically low levels, hence the NDX vs SPX index vol divergence looks to be primarily driven by higher NDX single stock vol.
More broadly, many of the large cap US stocks with the highest Bubble Risk Indicator readings are overweight in NDX vs SPX (8 out of the top 10, see chart below), and are hence driving NDX’s spot & vol outperformance vs SPX and the overall rise in bubble-like dynamics in the NDX relative to SPX.
At the thematic level, US TMT momentum, EU semis & memory, and Japanese management transformation are the global themes showing bubble-like price action as per their high BRIs.
The BofA strategists note that today’s reflexive markets continue to create upside risk in US tech as investors chase momentum and want to avoid missing out on owning an AI-enabled future. However, with sharp pullbacks being a key feature of bubble builds, the bank recommends the use of options and vol-based structures as better-positioned to navigate this environment with less risk. In this context, the derivatives team likes:
- Long QQQ call spreads, which offer asymmetric upside exposure with limited risk while being cheaper than outright calls (whose premiums can be unpalatable today given the sharp rise in vol) and benefiting from relatively flat call skew.
- NDX higher, rates higher and/or NDX higher, EURUSD lower hybrids, which exploit attractive implied correlation entry points to provide ~60% cheapening vs vanilla calls
- QQQ expanding put spreads, which can mitigate strike risk and reset protection levels higher as the market rallies. For those looking to cheapen such resettable strike options further, BofA likes adding an up & in contingency to the structure (which can offer ~50% discounts).
- Owning gamma in high BRI stocks, which continues to perform well and positions for the elevated realized vol that typically follows such bubble-like instability.
Having suggested several broad trades, BofA next drills down on a specific recommendation urging clients to hedge AI downside risk via long QQQ Dec26 $600 (~14d) put vs short SPY $600 (9d)
Why does BofA prefer Nasdaq as the fulcrum bubble hedge? Several reason:
The Nasdaq-100 has surged ~32% since end of March (nearly 2x the SPX’s ~18%), and the bank’s traders see scope for further outperformance should the AI trade continue to drive the narrative for risk assets. Moreover, Nasdaq’s new index methodology with fast-entry for megacap IPOs (which was ruled out for the SPX) gives the NDX an edge over the SPX in gearing it even further to the fortunes of the AI trade, especially given an AI-heavy IPO pipeline in the coming months.
At the same time, Bank of America’s derivatives traders warn that the pace/ferocity of the NDX rally is starting to unsettle some investors, and understandably so, as sharp drawdowns and quick snapbacks are typical features of how bubbles form and extend. For
those looking to remain long the AI theme while managing downside risk, the bank recommends the abovementioned Dec26 QQQ–SPY relative value put switch to the list of trades in this domain.
Now, the QQQ vs SPY 6m ATMf vol spread sits above the recent (last 3m) realized vol spread (Exhibit 20), but better value emerges when looking at put options. Indeed, for OTM puts, the implied vol spread is tighter, both relative to ATMf and to calls (Exhibit 21).
The next chart shows that at current levels, the hypothetical backtest of a QQQ vs SPY Dec26 equivalent put switch would have delivered positive P&L during the Dotcom bubble era (2000) as well as the 2022 drawdown, for a ~4.3x reward-to-risk ratio.
Why Dec26? Higher gamma to midterm risks & less autocallification impact
Nasdaq-linked income issuance has grown materially in recent years, exceeding $2.5bn per quarter and now accounting for ~10% of total index-linked income issuance.(Exhibit 23). At the same time, NDX-linked autocalls (autocallables are an equity-linked structured investment that pays a high regular income, provided the underlying asset (like the Nasdaq) stays above a certain threshold. If the asset hits or exceeds a predefined price on scheduled dates, the investment automatically matures early and returns your full principal) are also entering the mainstream via the ETF route, with growth outpacing other autocall ETFs, which themselves are among the fastest-growing segments of the ETF industry (Exhibit 24).
This matters for choosing option tenors for fixed strike NDX protection. The rise in structured product activity has increased the impact of dealer hedging flows on long-dated NDX vol. BofA notes that while peak vanna in NDX is only around half of that in SPX, it still represents a meaningful share (~12%) of total listed vega traded across NDX and QQQ options (for 6m+ tenors), making these flows an important driver of long‑dated volatility (Exhibit 25; for reference, SPX share is ~4%).
In practice, this hedging tends to dampen OTM put vol as spot declines toward peak vanna (currently only ~6% below spot), contributing to flatter long-dated put skew. Both effects have been visible recently: on 5 June, when NDX fell ~5% (its largest drawdown since Liberation Day), longer-dated fixed‑strike vols declined (Exhibit 26), with the result that long-dated put vols have become positively correlated with spot (Exhibit 27).
Relative to SPX, these autocallification effects appear more pronounced in NDX, with a more positive spot–vol correlation and flatter put skew.
Against this backdrop, choosing Dec-26 allows for greater gamma exposure to nearer-term catalysts (such as midterm elections), while reducing exposure to the abovementioned autocall-driven vol dampening effects that can hurt fixed strike long put trades further out the curve.
2 md. adgang for
2 x 49 kr.
Få straks adgang til denne artikel og derefter 2 måneder til alle artikler på ugebrev.dk
- Alle artikler på ugebrev.dk
- Om investering, finans, ledelse, samfundsansvar, life science og Bestyrelsesguiden.dk
- Daglige nyhedsmails med nyheder og analyser
Tilbuddet gælder til 31. juni 2026. Abonnement fortsætter til normalpris på 249 kr. efter bindingsperiode på to måneder. Opsig når du vil - til udgang af den anden måned. Tilbud gælder kun, hvis du ikke har haft abonnement på ØU udgivelser de seneste tre måneder
Allerede abonnent? Log ind her
