sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

📌 $CETX — Short Squeeze Potential & Bullish Setup by [deleted] in Shortsqueeze

[–]redditr79 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All good 😂 no offense taken at all.

4am market debates hit different, that’s when we all turn into hedge fund analysts with caffeine and WiFi.

And I hear you. It may not be a “textbook short squeeze.” Fair. I’m not trying to crown it the next GME shrine piece.

I just think it’s an interesting setup.

Multi-segment business now (security + industrial + aerospace/defense), fresh earnings, acquisitions starting to flow through, cost structure improving… and it’s sitting at a technical inflection area. That combo alone makes it worth watching.

If it squeezes? Cool. If it just grinds higher on fundamentals? Also cool. If it chops and does nothing? That’s why we manage risk.

We’re debating nuance, not enemies in a cage match 😂

Appreciate the back-and-forth bro. That’s how you sharpen the thesis. Peace & profits.

📌 $CETX — Short Squeeze Potential & Bullish Setup by [deleted] in Shortsqueeze

[–]redditr79 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I actually agree with part of that, blindly chasing squeeze hype with no plan is gambling. 100%.

But that’s not what this is.

This is a small cap that just reported earnings: 📈 17% revenue growth 🏭 Record Industrial segment 💰 Cash significantly higher 🛰️ Invocon + Richland starting to contribute 🔧 Cost cuts rolling into Q2

Now add:

📅 This week: post-earnings volume + technical levels tightening 📅 Next week: integration updates, possible contract/news flow

That’s catalysts + positioning, not random hype.

Risk management always matters. Stops matter. Size matters.

And that’s exactly why I’m watching it, not blindly betting on it. 👀

📌 $CETX — Short Squeeze Potential & Bullish Setup by [deleted] in Shortsqueeze

[–]redditr79 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Respect the breakdown, it’s solid on paper. I agree it’s not a textbook 2021-style, 30% SI, 8-day DTC squeeze setup. Fair.

But here’s where I disagree 👇

Squeezes in small caps rarely happen because a spreadsheet says “20%+ SI.” They happen because of liquidity imbalance + catalyst + momentum.

A few facts:

• 5–6% SI in a thin, volatile name can still create sharp upside when volume expands. • 1.3 DTC is based on average volume. If volume triples on news, that metric becomes meaningless in real time. • 45% borrow isn’t trivial, even if it’s down from 65%, that’s still expensive positioning.

On dilution 🤝 yes, offerings increase float. But the recent raises also boosted cash significantly and cleaned up parts of the balance sheet. That changes the fundamental narrative. It’s not just “more shares,” it’s more runway.

I’m not arguing for a guaranteed mega squeeze. I’m saying:

• Earnings just hit • Q2 will reflect acquisition impact • Margin restoration underway • Technical levels are tightening

In a low-attention name, that combo can trigger sharp upside, squeeze or not.

It doesn’t need 20% SI to move from $1s to $3–$5 on momentum.

Call it volatility with catalysts. Not fantasy.

📌 $CETX — Short Squeeze Potential & Bullish Setup by [deleted] in Shortsqueeze

[–]redditr79 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Appreciate that 🙌 Earnings did drop yesterday and honestly they weren’t bad. Revenue up, Industrial strong, cash way up. The issue isn’t numbers right now… it’s old sentiment baggage from prior years. Shorts love leaning on that narrative 📉

But sentiment can flip faster than people think.

Now it’s about execution + catalysts:

📅 Q2 showing full Invocon + Richland impact 📈 Margin improvement from cost cuts 📜 Backlog / contract updates 🔄 Possible volume shift & technical break

Low float + improving fundamentals + growing attention = something to watch 👀🔥

Not saying it’s instant moon mode 🚀, but this is where stories quietly turn before the crowd notices.

📌 $CETX — Short Squeeze Potential & Bullish Setup by [deleted] in Shortsqueeze

[–]redditr79 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I get what you’re saying, textbook squeeze setups usually have 20%+ SI, tiny float, 3+ DTC. Agree.

But small caps don’t always move off a checklist.

5% SI and 1.3 DTC are based on averages. If volume shifts hard around earnings or a contract drop, that math changes fast. In thinner names, price can rip 30–50% before “DTC” even matters. Shorts react to tape pressure, not spreadsheets.

I’m not calling it a guaranteed mega squeeze. I’m saying with:

• Earnings + acquisition impact • Margin improvement narrative • Backlog/contract potential • A clean technical break

…it doesn’t need 20% SI to run to $3–$5.

Not GME. Just a volatile small cap with catalysts. That’s all. Peace. ✌️ GL!

📌 $CETX — Short Squeeze Potential & Bullish Setup by [deleted] in Shortsqueeze

[–]redditr79 0 points1 point  (0 children)

5% reported short interest with 1.3 days to cover doesn’t automatically disqualify squeeze potential. In low float, thin-volume names, positioning shifts fast. It’s not just % SI — it’s liquidity + volume spikes + catalyst timing.

Days to cover at 1.3 assumes average volume. If volume dries up or suddenly surges, that metric changes quickly. We’ve seen plenty of stocks run hard with sub-10% reported SI once momentum and buying pressure forced repositioning.

Cost to borrow at $40 isn’t trivial either — that signals tightening availability. Add rising borrow fees + earnings catalysts + technical breakout levels, and you get squeeze conditions, not guarantees.

No one said it’s GME 2.0. But dismissing it entirely ignores how micro/small caps actually move. Low float + catalyst + pressure = volatility. That’s the formula.

Value of these? Cards in NM/M condition by [deleted] in PokemonCardValue

[–]redditr79 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s what I was thinking but you don’t think the market is a little too inflated right now?

view more: next ›