June became the first real stress test of the portfolio.

Five separate assignments landed within eight trading days. IONQ, AMZN, ONDS, SOFI, and AKAM all converted from cash-secured puts into owned shares between June 5 and June 12.

A large portion of capital shifted from cash into equities almost simultaneously. That was not a coincidence.

It was the Wheel doing exactly what it is designed to do when multiple option cycles mature at once.

The market did not make it easy.

VIX spiked above 21 mid-month.

SPY lost short-term support.

QQQ broke lower, with growth and high-beta names leading the weakness.

By June 26, the S&P 500 had pulled back roughly 3.5% from its May highs.

The account followed.

That is the story of June: a portfolio absorbing a meaningful pullback while continuing to collect premium on schedule, without forcing a single trade to compensate.

The Numbers

June snapshot Stress month
Trades Closed 17
Expired / Early Profit 12
Assigned 5
Realized Premium $8,109
Average Real APR 147%
Median Real APR 118%
NAV on July 3 $257,637
Period Return -2.7%
Since Inception +3.1%
S&P 500 Since Inception +17.9%
Framework Premium kept flowing while assigned equity absorbed the first real stress test.

17 trades closed in June, covering Week 22 through Week 27 and including July 2.

12 expired worthless or were closed early for profit.

5 were assigned.

$8,109 in realized premium was collected.

$5,131 came from cash-secured puts.

$2,978 came from covered calls.

Zero realized losses occurred on the options themselves.

Every assignment landed at a strike that had already been accepted before entry.

Portfolio NAV moved from $264,749 on May 29 to $256,709 on June 26.

By July 3, including early July trades, NAV stood at $257,637.

The account return for the period was -2.7%.

The S&P 500 over the same window was -1.4%.

Since inception on April 1, the account is up 3.1%.

The S&P 500 over the same period is up 17.9%.

The gap versus the index widened as capital rotated from cash into assigned shares during the June pullback.

The account is not designed to hedge broad market declines.

It is designed to continue generating premium while positions transition through the Wheel cycle.

June tested that objective for the first time.

What Worked

GLXY — The May Mistake, Closed Correctly

GLXY was the flagged mistake from May.

Premium became more important than structure, and that violated the process.

June closed that chapter correctly.

One covered call expired worthless, collecting $344.

A second call at the $32 strike captured another $480 before the shares were called away above assignment basis.

The position is now closed.

Capital is free again.

The lesson from May was simple: high premium never compensates for weakening structure.

The lesson from June was equally important: disciplined management can still produce a clean exit after a poor entry.

ABNB — Full Cycle, Clean Exit

Assigned in May at $138.

Covered call opened in early June at $141, above cost basis and inside a recovering EMA/SMA support cluster.

Shares were called away at expiration.

$510 in premium was collected plus roughly $600 in appreciation above assignment price.

Total realized on the second leg was approximately $1,110.

This remains the ideal Wheel outcome.

Assignment is not a loss event.

It is the midpoint of a longer trade.

IONQ and SOFI — Repeated Covered Call Discipline

Both names completed multiple covered-call cycles during June, following the same management rules: calls written only above assignment basis, with room for upside, never forcing premium at the expense of exits.

IONQ completed three covered-call cycles at the $65, $65, and $59 strikes, collecting $430, $610, and $310.

Two expired worthless.

Current cost basis sits at $47.95 versus a current share price of $49.12.

SOFI completed two covered-call cycles at the $18.5 strike, collecting $432 and $216.

Shares now sit roughly 13.6% above the $16.06 net cost basis.

Neither position generated a process warning.

Both continue to demonstrate that the covered-call phase remains the portfolio’s most consistent source of premium.

High-APR Short-Duration CSPs

RDDT at the $160 strike, 9 DTE, collected $800 and expired worthless.

BTDR at the $17 strike, 4 DTE, collected $600 with a Real APR above 280%.

HOOD at the $98 strike, 2 DTE, collected $290 with an even higher annualized return.

These remain the preferred entries within the process: short duration, defined support, earnings outside the option cycle, and elevated premium supported by structure rather than desperation.

What Hurt

AKAM — The Largest Drawdown in the Book

Assigned June 12 at the $152.50 strike.

Net cost basis after premium: $149.50.

By month-end, AKAM traded at $113.17.

That was a decline of approximately 24.3% from cost basis, representing an unrealized loss of roughly $7,266.

The setup was graded A-.

Setup Valid was flagged Y.

This was not another GLXY.

The entry followed the process.

The market simply continued lower.

That distinction matters.

It does not change the unrealized loss.

The question entering July is different: at what point does a valid setup become a sizing lesson, regardless of whether the original entry was correct?

Read: AKAM trade log

ONDS — Still Underwater, Still Speculative

Assigned at $11.

Net cost basis after premium: $9.96.

Current price: $7.41.

Unrealized loss: approximately $3,825.

ONDS has always belonged to the speculative bucket.

One covered call generated $405 in premium before being closed early after capturing roughly 74% of the available value in only three trading days.

That management decision was correct.

The underlying simply has not recovered.

The position remains the portfolio’s second-largest unrealized drawdown.

It reinforces an important principle: speculative positions deserve their own sizing limits, regardless of how attractive the premium appears.

EQNR and AMZN — Capital Parked, Not Losing, Not Working

EQNR: 600 shares at a $36.55 cost basis, currently trading near $32.04.

AMZN: 200 shares at a $251.97 cost basis, currently trading near $242.67.

Neither position currently offers an acceptable covered-call strike above assignment basis.

The correct decision has been to wait.

That patience preserves process discipline, even though it leaves meaningful capital temporarily inactive.

Open Positions Entering July

Open positions Entering July

Shares

Ticker EQNR
Position Shares
Basis $39.00
Size 600
Status No Covered Call Yet

Note: 600 shares held at a $39.00 cost basis. No covered call is active yet.

Ticker IONQ
Position Shares
Basis $57.00
Size 200
Status CC $59 Until July 10

Note: 200 shares held at a $57.00 cost basis. Covered call at $59 remains active through July 10.

Ticker SOFI
Position Shares
Basis $17.00
Size 1,200
Status Ready for Next CC Cycle

Note: 1,200 shares held at a $17.00 cost basis. Position is ready for the next covered call cycle.

Ticker AMZN
Position Shares
Basis $262.50
Size 200
Status No Covered Call Yet

Note: 200 shares held at a $262.50 cost basis. No covered call is active yet.

Ticker ONDS
Position Shares
Basis $11.00
Size 1,500
Status No Covered Call Yet

Note: 1,500 shares held at an $11.00 cost basis. No covered call is active yet.

Ticker AKAM
Position Shares
Basis $152.50
Size 200
Status No Covered Call Yet

Note: 200 shares held at a $152.50 cost basis. No covered call is active yet.

Open CSPs

Ticker RXRX
Position CSP
Strike $3.50
Expiry July 10
Premium $600

Note: RXRX remains the only open cash-secured put, with $600 in premium collected into the July 10 expiration.

Open CCs

Ticker IONQ
Position CC
Strike $59
Expiry July 10
Premium $310

Note: IONQ remains the only open covered call, with $310 in premium collected into the July 10 expiration.

Total open exposure: $164,900.

Total pending premium on open positions: $910.

Process Note

No Setup Valid = N.

No Would Repeat = N.

Not a single process violation occurred across seventeen completed trades.

That is the biggest difference versus May.

May contained one trade where premium overrode structure.

June contained none.

Every assignment entered the portfolio at a price that had already been accepted before the trade was opened.

June did not test whether the Wheel can generate premium.

It tested whether the process could continue while unrealized losses expanded across several positions simultaneously.

Realized premium reached $8,109.

The equity book finished the month lower.

Both statements can be true at the same time.

The account finished June down 2.7%.

None of that decline came from realizing bad option trades.

It came from temporarily holding assigned shares through a broad market pullback, the exact scenario the Wheel is built to accommodate.

The gap versus the index widened.

That is the tradeoff being made deliberately: accepting mark-to-market volatility in exchange for systematically collecting option premium without forcing trades or chasing returns.

The book is red.

The process is intact.

Wizolver.log documents a personal trading process and is provided for educational and informational purposes only. Nothing here is financial advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Trading options involves significant risk. Do your own research.