Showing posts with label Value at Risk Micro Harvesting 2.0. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Value at Risk Micro Harvesting 2.0. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 29, 2026

WLCON Stock Study, Post 5: WLCON Risk Management

HomeBoard Lot WarriorMicro HarvestingMicro Harvesting 2.0 › MH Application Series › WLCON Stock Study › WLCON Risk Management

WLCON risk-management banner showing a daily price series, downside-risk measurement, portfolio concentration, and the MH 2.0 framework.
WLCON Risk Management: measuring one-day downside, historical drawdown, concentration, and the risk carried by a 30,000-share position.

👉 Explore the full Micro Harvesting 2.0 framework
👉 Start Here | CSSC Learning Series | MH Application Series | MH Operator Journal

Valuation tells us that WLCON may be worth more than its current market price. Risk management asks the harder question: gaano kalaki ang puwedeng mawala habang hinihintay nating patunayan ng negosyo at presyo ang recovery thesis?    

Originally published: July 29, 2026 · Last updated: July 29, 2026

Links to related posts


Nilalaman

Ang Punto ng Usapan

We currently hold 30,000 WLCON shares at an average net cost of ₱6.6183.

As of the July 28, 2026 close:

Last traded price: ₱5.68
Net market value: ₱169,726.92
Unrealized loss: 14.52%
Current portfolio weight: 14.84%
Original working allocation: ₱35,000
Deployment: 567%

From the valuation study, the stock appeared undervalued under a conservative recovery case.

But undervaluation does not make the position harmless.

WLCON was previously classified among the High Volatility Stocks in the MH 1.0 portfolio. Its 261-day closing-price history confirms why that history cannot simply be ignored.

From the highest close in the dataset at ₱9.98, WLCON later declined to a low of ₱5.45.

That represents a peak-to-trough drawdown of approximately:

45.39%

By July 28, 2026, the stock had recovered only slightly to ₱5.68 and remained approximately 43.09% below that ₱9.98 high.

So kahit tahimik na ang recent chart, the position carries the memory—and the actual financial consequence—of a deep drawdown.

Risk management is therefore not optional.

It is the bridge between “mukhang undervalued” and “kaya ba talaga nating hawakan nang maayos?”


Ang Dating Paniniwala

Kapag ang stock ay nasa ilalim ng estimated fair value, madaling isipin na mas mababa na ang risk.

May logic naman iyon.

The lower the purchase price relative to estimated value, the larger the apparent margin of safety.

Pero hindi pareho ang valuation risk at market risk.

Valuation risk asks whether our estimate of business value may be wrong.

Market risk asks how much the market price can still move against us even when our valuation thesis may eventually prove correct.

A stock can be undervalued and still fall another 10%, 20%, or more before recovery.

This is especially important for WLCON because the existing position was not built under the final MH 2.0 allocation architecture.

It is a large MH 1.0 carryover position.

At 30,000 shares, we already hold enough exposure for any recovery thesis to matter materially.

That means the risk question is no longer:

How do we enter WLCON?

The more relevant question is:

How do we control an already oversized position while preserving the option to benefit from a recovery?


Ang Binagong Pananaw

For WLCON, risk management should operate on four levels:

First, daily market risk, measured through volatility and Value at Risk.

Second, historical drawdown risk, based on what the stock has actually done—not only what a normal-distribution model expects.

Third, position and concentration risk, because the number of shares already held is large relative to both the old allocation and the emerging MH 2.0 structure.

Fourth, business and valuation risk, because the recovery thesis still depends on margin normalization, store productivity, and free-cash-flow conversion.

No single measure captures all four.

Value at Risk is useful, but it is not a worst-case estimate.

Historical drawdown is informative, but it does not predict the next decline.

Portfolio allocation provides a limit, but it does not determine the correct timing of a reduction.

Risk governance therefore requires several lenses working together.


Paano Ito Umaandar

The 261-Day Data Set

The risk calculation uses the 261 daily closing prices supplied from July 4, 2025 through July 28, 2026.

From those prices, we obtain 260 daily returns.

Using simple daily returns, the estimated daily volatility is approximately:

2.25%

Annualized using 252 trading days, that corresponds to volatility of roughly:

35.67% per year

This is not a forecast that WLCON will rise or fall by exactly 35.67% over the next year.

It is a standardized measure of how widely daily returns varied during the sample period.

For a stock we are considering for a Medium Volatility role, a historical annualized volatility near 36% is not trivial.

It supports our decision to preserve WLCON’s former High Volatility classification as part of the risk evidence until the broader study is completed.


One-Day 99% Delta-Normal Value at Risk

We use a one-day 99% Delta-Normal VaR as a portfolio-risk reference.

The calculation uses:

  • 260 daily returns;
  • average daily return of approximately negative 0.13%;
  • daily volatility of approximately 2.25%;
  • a 99% confidence factor of about 2.326;
  • and the current net market value of ₱169,726.92.

Including the small negative average daily return, the estimated one-day loss threshold is approximately:

5.36% of the current WLCON position

In peso terms:

One-Day 99% VaR: approximately ₱9,095

In practical language:

Under the model, there is approximately a 1% probability that the position could lose more than about ₱9,095 over one trading day.

That does not mean the maximum possible daily loss is ₱9,095.

It means the threshold is expected to be exceeded on roughly one out of every 100 trading days, assuming the return distribution and volatility behave similarly to the sample.

The corresponding price movement would be from ₱5.68 to approximately:

₱5.38 per share

At that level, the estimated net market value of the position would fall to around:

₱160,632

Relative to the acquisition cost of ₱198,549, the total unrealized loss would widen from 14.52% to approximately:

19.10%

So one statistically adverse day could move the position from a mid-teens unrealized loss to nearly a one-fifth capital drawdown from cost.

That is the operational meaning of the VaR figure.


Why We Should Not Treat VaR as a Safety Guarantee

The Delta-Normal method assumes that returns are reasonably represented by a normal distribution and that recent historical volatility remains relevant.

Real markets are messier.

WLCON’s own history contains daily moves larger than the calculated 5.36% VaR threshold.

The worst one-day decline in the supplied 261-day sample was approximately:

7.56%

Applied mechanically to the current net market value, a decline of that size would represent roughly:

₱12,833

That is materially larger than the one-day VaR estimate.

This illustrates a core limitation:

VaR estimates a threshold under a statistical model. It does not capture every tail event, gap, disclosure shock, or disorderly market move.

A weak earnings announcement, sudden margin deterioration, index-related activity, or a broader market selloff may produce losses beyond the model estimate.

For that reason, VaR should be treated as a planning measure, not a promise of maximum loss.


Historical Drawdown Risk

The 261-day price series gives us a direct historical stress test.

The stock reached a closing high of ₱9.98 and later fell to ₱5.45.

That 45.39% drawdown is far larger than the one-day VaR because drawdowns accumulate over many sessions.

This distinction matters.

A position can survive each individual day without triggering an extreme statistical loss, yet still lose substantial value through a long sequence of ordinary negative days.

That is essentially what happened to WLCON.

The risk was not only one dramatic collapse.

It was also a persistent repricing from the ₱9 to ₱10 region toward the mid-₱5 area.

This is why monitoring only daily VaR would be insufficient.

For an MH position, we also need to track:

  • distance from average cost;
  • distance from recent and historical highs;
  • trend structure;
  • deployment relative to allocation;
  • and the amount of capital trapped in a prolonged drawdown.

Position-Size Risk

The current WLCON acquisition cost is approximately:

₱198,549

The old capital allocation was only:

₱35,000

That produces the stated deployment rate of:

567%

The position is therefore not merely losing value.

It is also oversized relative to the governance framework under which it was originally carried.

Under the emerging MH 2.0 architecture, the entire proposed Medium Volatility Micro Harvesting pillar is ₱150,000.

At the current net market value of ₱169,726.92, WLCON alone already exceeds that proposed pillar by approximately:

₱19,727

At acquisition cost, it exceeds the pillar by approximately:

₱48,549

This creates a structural risk:

Even if WLCON is fundamentally undervalued, assigning the full current position to the Medium Volatility pillar would leave no room for another stock and would still require acceptance of an overallocated position.

So the risk is not simply whether WLCON falls.

It is also the opportunity cost of allowing one inherited position to consume more than the capacity intended for the entire pillar.


Concentration Risk

At 14.84% of the current portfolio, WLCON is already one of the larger holdings.

A one-day VaR loss of approximately ₱9,095 would affect not just the stock position but the entire portfolio.

Based on the stated 14.84% portfolio weight, WLCON’s one-day VaR would translate into roughly:

0.79% of the total portfolio

That may appear manageable for one day.

But repeated adverse moves, combined with losses in other correlated Philippine equities, could produce a much larger portfolio drawdown.

WLCON is exposed to several macro-sensitive drivers:

  • household disposable income;
  • construction and renovation demand;
  • interest rates;
  • property activity;
  • consumer confidence;
  • inflation in imported and local goods;
  • logistics and utility costs;
  • and broader equity-market sentiment.

It may therefore decline at the same time as other domestic cyclical or consumer-related holdings.

Diversification by ticker alone is not enough if several positions respond to the same macro pressures.


Liquidity Risk

WLCON is an actively traded PSE-listed company, and a 30,000-share position is generally not enormous relative to normal market activity.

But liquidity risk is not just whether the shares can technically be sold.

It also includes:

  • whether the full quantity can be sold near the quoted price;
  • whether the order itself affects the market;
  • whether the bid depth is sufficient;
  • and whether a stress event reduces trading liquidity at the exact time action is needed.

For MH 2.0, any future reduction should therefore be planned in board-lot-sized tranches rather than assumed to occur instantly at one ideal price.

The goal is not to escape at any price.

It is to preserve execution quality and optionality.


Fundamental Risk

The valuation study showed that WLCON’s main value driver is margin recovery.

Sales growth alone is not enough.

The risk thesis would worsen if:

  • same-store sales return to contraction;
  • gross margin remains near or below 37%;
  • exclusive and in-house brand contribution weakens further;
  • operating expenses continue rising nearly as fast as sales;
  • new stores fail to mature as expected;
  • inventory remains heavy;
  • or capex absorbs most of the operating cash flow.

In that case, the conservative fair value would need to be revised downward.

This is important because valuation models can create false comfort when assumptions are not updated.

Risk management requires us to treat valuation as conditional.

The ₱9.50 working fair value is not permanent.

It depends on the company continuing to produce evidence that recovery is real.


Technical Risk

The July 28 TMA Gate Score was 3.5, producing a mechanical decision of:

HOLD / WATCH

The price was testing the SMA-50, RSI had moved above 50, and MACD weakness was tapering.

But WLCON remained below the declining EMA-200 ribbon.

This matters because the long-term resistance zone lies around the same region as our average cost.

If price approaches the ₱6.58 to ₱6.75 area, it may encounter:

  • EMA-200 resistance;
  • selling from holders seeking to recover cost;
  • and internal pressure to treat break-even as an exit decision.

That area may eventually become important for allocation repair.

But no action should be predetermined by emotion alone.

The chart, valuation, and capital-allocation need to be read together.


The Risk of Averaging Down

At ₱5.68, the market price is below both the working conservative fair value and the 20% margin-of-safety reference from Post 4.

From a valuation perspective, adding may appear attractive.

From a portfolio-risk perspective, it is difficult to justify.

The position already contains 30,000 shares.

Its market value exceeds the proposed Medium Volatility allocation, and its acquisition cost is materially above that pillar.

The TMA Gate Score also remains in HOLD / WATCH, not BUY / ADD.

Therefore:

WLCON currently does not need a new technical probe. The existing position is already more than sufficient exposure to test the recovery thesis.

An additional purchase may reduce the average cost, but it would also:

  • increase concentration;
  • consume more dry powder;
  • deepen the allocation imbalance;
  • and make future portfolio repair harder.

A lower average price is not automatically a lower-risk portfolio.

Sometimes it is merely a larger position with a prettier cost basis.


The Risk of Forced Selling

The opposite risk is selling simply because the position is below cost.

That may convert a temporary valuation gap into a permanent realized loss without regard to fundamentals, technical setup, or allocation strategy.

Post 4 suggests that the current market price is below the conservative working fair value.

Post 3 shows early stabilization, though not yet confirmed reversal.

So there is no automatic requirement to liquidate the position immediately.

The governance objective should be:

  • avoid emotional averaging down;
  • avoid emotional capitulation;
  • preserve the option to participate in recovery;
  • and prepare a mechanical repair path if price strength becomes available.

In MH terms, the ability to reduce is an option—not an obligation.


Proposed WLCON Risk Controls

No Additional Capital by Default

While WLCON remains above the proposed Medium Volatility pillar allocation, the default action should be:

No additional capital deployment

This remains true even if valuation appears favorable, unless the final Capital Allocation post explicitly creates a new architecture and identifies a funded reason for an exception.

TMA Confirmation Before Any Reconsideration

Any future add should require more than RSI strength.

At minimum, we would want:

  • a TMA Gate Score that reaches the BUY / ADD band;
  • sustained trading above the SMA-50;
  • improving MACD confirmation;
  • and evidence that the EMA-200 gap is narrowing.

Even then, technical permission would still be subordinate to allocation capacity.

Monitor the One-Day VaR

The current one-day 99% VaR is approximately ₱9,095, or 5.36% of the position.

This should be recalculated when:

  • the market price changes materially;
  • realized volatility changes;
  • position size changes;
  • or new daily data materially alters the sample.

Use Historical Stress, Not VaR Alone

The 45.39% sample drawdown should remain the primary reminder that multi-day loss can be much larger than the one-day statistical estimate.

The model should therefore be supplemented by practical stress levels, including declines of:

  • 10%;
  • 20%;
  • 30%;
  • and a repeat of the historical 45% drawdown.

At the current net market value, a 10% decline would reduce the position by about ₱16,973.

A 20% decline would reduce it by about ₱33,945.

A 30% decline would reduce it by about ₱50,918.

A repeat of the 45.39% historical drawdown from the current level would reduce the position by approximately ₱77,044.

These are not forecasts.

They are capital-survival questions.

Prepare for Allocation Repair on Strength

If WLCON recovers toward technically and fundamentally meaningful levels, the portfolio should be allowed to use strength as an opportunity to repair overdeployment.

Possible repair references may include:

  • the average-cost zone;
  • the EMA-200 ribbon;
  • the buy-below reference;
  • or other price levels established in Post 6.

But the number of shares to retain or reduce should come from the final role and optimum allocation—not merely from the desire to return to break-even.


Our Risk Interpretation

WLCON has three simultaneous truths:

First, the business does not appear broken.

Second, the shares appear undervalued under a conservative recovery case.

Third, the existing position is oversized and has already demonstrated severe historical drawdown.

The first two truths support patience.

The third requires discipline.

That is why the correct risk response is not simply “hold because undervalued” or “sell because volatile.”

The more appropriate governance stance is:

Retain optionality, prohibit automatic averaging down, monitor downside mechanically, and prepare to repair allocation on strength.

This preserves exposure to a possible recovery without allowing the valuation thesis to justify unlimited capital commitment.


Pangwakas na Kaisipan

Using 260 daily returns from the supplied 261-day price history, WLCON’s daily volatility is approximately 2.25%, equivalent to annualized volatility near 35.67%.

Its estimated one-day 99% Delta-Normal VaR is:

₱9,095

That represents approximately:

    

A VaR-level move could bring the price from ₱5.68 to about ₱5.38 and widen the total unrealized loss from 14.52% to roughly 19.10%.

But the deeper risk is visible in the actual price history.

WLCON experienced a 45.39% peak-to-trough drawdown within the supplied period.

That is why risk management cannot be reduced to one formula.

The existing position carries:

  • daily volatility risk;
  • prolonged drawdown risk;
  • concentration risk;
  • capital-allocation risk;
  • business-recovery risk;
  • and opportunity-cost risk.

The valuation study gave us a reason not to panic.

The risk study gives us a reason not to add casually.

Aba’y ang murang stock ay maaari pa ring maging mabigat kapag sobra ang bitbit.

The final question is now ready:

How many WLCON shares should remain in the MH 2.0 portfolio, what role should they perform, and how much capital should ultimately be assigned to them?

That will be answered in:

WLCON Stock Study, Post 6: WLCON Capital Allocation


Shariah Compliance Advisory (Updated Nov 26, 2025)

The PSE has confirmed that its Shariah screening program is currently paused, with no new lists to be released until their internal review is completed. Although news outlets reported quarterly updates up to mid-2025, these later lists are no longer accessible on the PSE website.

For now, the PSE’s Shariah-Compliant Securities page and all past lists have been removed from the public website. The December 24, 2024 list is the last official version in Micro Stock Trader’s possession, downloaded before the page was taken down, although other investors may still hold later copies such as the reported July 4, 2025 release.

All halal-focused strategies under Micro Stock Trader will use a conservative, self-screened approach until official guidance resumes, in shā’ Allāh.

Ang post na ito ay bahagi ng aming personal learning journey sa securities analysis at portfolio governance. Ang mga konseptong may kaugnayan sa interest-based instruments, conventional bonds, preferred shares, o iba pang financial arrangements ay binabanggit lamang bilang bahagi ng academic coverage ng module at hindi bilang rekomendasyon o endorsement.

Disclaimer

This post is for educational and documentation purposes only. It is not investment advice. Perform your own due diligence and consult qualified financial professionals before making investment decisions. All strategies, frameworks, and examples described here reflect the personal methodologies of Micro Stock Trader and are not guarantees of future performance.


Illustration of a calm, disciplined trader reviewing charts and layered ladders, symbolizing the transformation of the Board Lot Warrior ecosystem in 2025.
Micro Stock Trader Blog
Board Lot Warrior
Ang Inyong Batangueñong Retail Stock Trader

Home | About UsContact Us | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Disclaimer

Monday, July 27, 2026

TEL Stock Study, Post 5: TEL Risk Management — Ang SDA Ladder ang Mapa, VaR ang Bilis ng Pagbagsak

HomeBoard Lot WarriorMicro HarvestingMicro Harvesting 2.0 › MH Application Series › TEL Stock Study › TEL Risk Management

TEL Stock Study Post 5 banner showing historical VaR, Expected Shortfall, drawdown risk, and TEL SDA Refill Ladder price levels.
TEL risk management through historical drawdowns, one-day Value-at-Risk, Expected Shortfall, and the price position of risk events within the SDA Refill Ladder.

👉 Explore the full Micro Harvesting 2.0 framework
👉 Start Here | CSSC Learning Series | MH Application Series | MH Operator Journal

TEL may serve as a Low Volatility Dividend Harvester, but its historical price record shows that one bad trading day can move the stock across several SDA refill zones.

Using 261 closing-price observations, we examine TEL’s Value-at-Risk, Expected Shortfall, major drawdowns, and where each projected risk price lands within the SDA Refill Ladder.

Originally published: July 27, 2026 · Last updated: July 28, 2026

Links to related posts


Nilalaman

Ang Punto ng Risk Management

Ang TEL ay kabilang sa Low Volatility Dividend Harvester group ng Micro Harvesting.

Pero ang “Low Volatility” ay portfolio classification lamang. Hindi ito pangakong hindi makakaranas ang stock ng malaking decline.

TEL may usually move more slowly than speculative stocks, but the historical data still show:

  • sharp one-day losses;
  • multiweek drawdowns;
  • extended periods below acquisition cost;
  • failed or incomplete recoveries;
  • and substantial movements between market optimism and pessimism.

That is why TEL risk management cannot end with:

May dividend naman.

The dividend may compensate us for waiting. It does not stop the market price from falling.

For TEL, we must manage several forms of risk simultaneously:

  • daily price risk;
  • tail-event risk;
  • drawdown risk;
  • recovery risk;
  • business and dividend risk;
  • leverage risk;
  • deployment risk;
  • and operator-execution risk.

Ano ang Sinasabi ng Historical Price Data?

The supplied dataset contains 261 sequential daily closing prices, producing 260 daily returns.

The sample covers July 2, 2025 to July 24, 2026.

During that period, TEL recorded a low of approximately:

₱1,080

and a high of approximately:

₱1,425

The total price range was:

₱1,425 − ₱1,080 ₱345

That is nearly 32% relative to the historical low.

For a mature dividend stock, this is not a trivial movement.

It shows that TEL’s market valuation can still change materially as investors reassess:

  • earnings;
  • dividends;
  • capital expenditures;
  • leverage;
  • financing costs;
  • competition;
  • interest rates;
  • and broader market conditions.

Ang Major Drawdowns

July to October 2025

TEL reached approximately ₱1,321 on July 8, 2025.

It later declined to approximately ₱1,080 by October 16, 2025.

The peak-to-trough decline was:

₱1,080 / ₱1,321 − 18.24%

The risk was not limited to the size of the decline.

TEL also remained near the lower price area for an extended period. That type of drawdown can create behavioral pressure to:

  • keep averaging down;
  • abandon the layer architecture;
  • use dry powder too quickly;
  • or assume that every lower price automatically represents better value.

A prolonged decline tests the operator differently from a sudden one-day shock.

December 2025 to February 2026

TEL later recovered and reached approximately ₱1,425 on February 26, 2026.

From there, it declined to approximately ₱1,083 by June 11, 2026.

The drawdown was:

₱1,083 / ₱1,083  1 = 24%

This was the largest major drawdown in the sample.

A 24% decline is not ordinary market noise.

It can materially affect:

  • portfolio value;
  • confidence in the investment thesis;
  • available dry powder;
  • and the operator’s willingness to follow the original plan.

It also occurred after a strong price recovery.

That gives us a useful lesson:

A recovery does not permanently remove downside risk.

Ang Observed One-Day Shock

The worst observed one-day decline in the sample occurred between August 28 and August 29, 2025.

TEL fell from:

₱1,222

to:

₱1,159

The one-day decline was:

₱1,159 / ₱1,159 = −5.16%

For a 200-share position, a ₱63 price decline represents a gross mark-to-market loss of:

₱63 × 200 = ₱12,600

This is an observed historical stress event.

It is not the same as Value-at-Risk.

The proper interpretation is:

The historical sample already demonstrates that TEL can lose approximately 5% in one day.

A future tail event may be smaller—or more severe.

Ang TEL 1-Day Value-at-Risk

Using the 260 daily returns, we computed TEL’s one-day Historical Value-at-Risk.

For the risk-price mapping, we used the July 27, 2026 reference price of:

₱1,230

At 200 shares, the gross market value of the position was:

200 × ₱1,230 = ₱246,000

95% Historical VaR

The 95% one-day Historical VaR was approximately:

2.00%

For the current position:

₱246,000 × 2.00% ≈ ₱4,932

This means that, based on the historical sample, approximately 5% of daily outcomes may produce a loss greater than about ₱4,932.

The 95% VaR is not the expected daily loss.

It is the threshold marking the start of the worst 5% of historical outcomes.

99% Historical VaR

The 99% one-day Historical VaR was approximately:

4.29%

For the current position:

₱246,000 × 4.29% ≈ ₱10,558

This means that, based on the sample, approximately 1% of daily outcomes may produce losses greater than about ₱10,558.

Again, this is not the maximum possible loss.

VaR is a statistical threshold—not a price floor and not a loss ceiling.

Expected Shortfall

VaR tells us where an unusually bad day begins.

It does not tell us the average severity of losses after the threshold has been breached.

For that, we use Expected Shortfall.

95% Expected Shortfall

The 95% Expected Shortfall was approximately:

3.39%

Applied to the current position:

₱246,000 × 3.39% ≈ ₱8,349

This means that among the worst 5% of historical daily outcomes, the average loss was approximately ₱8,349.

99% Expected Shortfall

The 99% Expected Shortfall was approximately:

4.75%

Applied to the position:

₱246,000 × 4.75% ≈ ₱11,685

The main risk figures are therefore:

The 95% Historical VaR is approximately 2.00%, equivalent to around ₱4,932.

The 95% Expected Shortfall is approximately 3.39%, equivalent to around ₱8,349.

The 99% Historical VaR is approximately 4.29%, equivalent to around ₱10,558.

The 99% Expected Shortfall is approximately 4.75%, equivalent to around ₱11,685.

The observed worst one-day loss was approximately 5.16%, equivalent to roughly ₱12,600 to ₱12,700 at the July 27 reference value.

This is why VaR must not be treated as the worst possible loss.

VaR tells us where a bad day begins. Expected Shortfall and historical stress testing show how painful that bad day can become.

Nasaan ang VaR Price sa SDA Refill Ladder?

The TEL SDA Refill Ladder is:

  • Layer 1: ₱1,259 and above
  • Layer 2: ₱1,240–₱1,258
  • Layer 3: ₱1,220–₱1,239
  • Layer 4: ₱1,201–₱1,219
  • Layer 5: ₱1,182–₱1,200

At the July 27 reference price of ₱1,230, TEL was inside:

Layer 3

The useful risk question is therefore not only:

How much can the position lose?

We must also ask:

At what price would TEL land after a VaR or Expected Shortfall event, and which SDA refill layer would that price activate?

95% VaR Price

Using the 95% Historical VaR of approximately 2.00%:

₱1,230 × (1 −0.0200 ) = ₱1,205.40

This projected price falls inside:

Layer 4: ₱1,201–₱1,219

Therefore, an ordinary 95% VaR event can move TEL from Layer 3 to Layer 4 in a single trading day.

95% Expected Shortfall Price

Using the 95% Expected Shortfall of approximately 3.39%:

₱1,230 × (1 − 0.0339) ≈ ₱1,188.30

This falls inside:

Layer 5: ₱1,182–₱1,200

Once TEL enters the worst 5% of historical outcomes, its average tail-loss price would land two refill zones below the July 27 reference price.

99% VaR Price

Using the 99% Historical VaR of approximately 4.29%:

₱1,230 × (1 − 0.0429) ≈ ₱1,177.23

This price falls:

  • below the Layer 5 floor of ₱1,182;
  • and almost exactly at the ₱1,178 Margin of Safety price derived in Post 4.

This is an important convergence.

A one-day 99% VaR event from ₱1,230 could move TEL from Layer 3, through Layers 4 and 5, directly to the valuation MOS area.

99% Expected Shortfall Price

Using the 99% Expected Shortfall of approximately 4.75%:

₱1,230 × (1 − 0.0475) = ₱1,171.58

This projected price falls:

  • below the entire SDA ladder;
  • below the ₱1,178 MOS level;
  • and near the rising SMA-50 area identified in the technical analysis.

Observed Worst-Day Price

Using the observed worst one-day decline of approximately 5.16%:

₱1,230 × (1 − 0.0516) ≈ ₱1,166.53

This also falls below the current ladder.

It is close to the July 27 SMA-50 reference of approximately ₱1,168.

Ano ang Ibig Sabihin ng VaR-Ladder Mapping?

The SDA ladder and VaR answer different questions.

The SDA Refill Ladder tells us:

Where has the market price landed?

Value-at-Risk tells us:

How quickly can the price get there?

At ₱1,230, TEL was already in Layer 3.

From that starting point:

  • a 95% VaR day could move TEL into Layer 4;
  • a 95% Expected Shortfall event could move it into Layer 5;
  • a 99% VaR day could move it below Layer 5 and near the MOS price;
  • and a 99% Expected Shortfall or observed worst-day event could place it below the whole ladder.

This means the TEL layers are narrow relative to the stock’s demonstrated one-day tail risk.

One severe session can cross several refill zones before the operator has time to reassess:

  • news;
  • volume;
  • technical damage;
  • fair value;
  • dividend implications;
  • or whether the decline is company-specific.

This has a direct governance implication:

The TEL SDA ladder should not be managed through multiple simultaneous automatic refill orders.

If orders are already placed across Layers 4 and 5, a single tail event could execute both before we determine whether the original investment thesis remains intact.

The safer operating rule is:

One refill decision at a time, followed by a fresh reassessment.

The ladder is a map—not a cascade of automatic orders.

The TEL VaR analysis measures how quickly the stock may move through its refill zones. Whether the portfolio can act at those zones is a separate capital-allocation question, because TEL shares the same ₱150,000 dry-powder constraint with ICT.

Recovery Risk

Drawdown magnitude is only one part of risk.

The other question is:

How quickly can the stock recover?

After reaching approximately ₱1,080 in October 2025, TEL eventually recovered above ₱1,400.

However, after the February 2026 high of ₱1,425, the stock fell to ₱1,083 and remained well below its former peak by June 11, 2026.

At the last observation of ₱1,235, TEL remained:

₱1,235 / ₱1,425 − 1 = −13.33%

below the February 2026 peak.

From the ₱1,083 trough to ₱1,235, the stock recovered ₱152 of the ₱342 decline.

That represents only around 44% of the lost price distance.

The stock had stopped falling—but had not yet completed the recovery.

This is the nature of recovery risk.

A dividend stock can remain below the operator’s cost for months while continuing to distribute cash.

The waiting period itself is part of the risk.

Risk sa Ating 200-Share Position

Our TEL position consists of:

  • 200 anchor shares
  • Average net cost: ₱1,277.4743
  • Total net acquisition cost:
200 × ₱1,277.4743 = ₱255,494.86

If the position were marked at the historical low of ₱1,080, the unrealized price difference would be:

₱1,277.4743−₱1,080=₱197.4743

For 200 shares:

₱197.4743 × 200 = ₱39,494.86

That represents approximately:

₱39,494.86 / ₱255,494.86 = 15.46%

of the net acquisition cost.

This shows that a mature dividend company can still generate a substantial unrealized loss without experiencing financial distress.

Deployment Risk

The current TEL capital allocation is:

₱330,000

The 200-share position has deployed approximately:

77%

TEL has approximately ₱74,505 of unused capacity within its ₱330,000 stock-level ceiling. However, this is not a separately funded TEL cash reserve. Any actual refill must draw from the portfolio’s shared ₱150,000 dry powder, which also governs ICT additions and any other fresh deployment.

₱330,000 − ₱255,494.86 = ₱74,505.14

But this should not be interpreted as capital that must eventually be spent.

The remaining amount represents risk capacity.

It must preserve room for:

  • volatility;
  • deeper price locations;
  • transaction costs;
  • valuation revisions;
  • unexpected company developments;
  • and broader portfolio needs.

The VaR-ladder mapping reinforces this point.

Because one severe session can move TEL through several refill zones, committing most of the remaining allocation through standing orders could eliminate optionality at exactly the wrong moment.

Valuation Risk

Our sensitivity-tested valuation produced:

  • Gross base fair value: approximately ₱1,240
  • 5% Margin of Safety price: approximately ₱1,178

The wider valuation scenarios ranged from approximately:

  • ₱873 under the conservative case;
  • ₱1,241 under the base case;
  • and ₱1,771 under the optimistic case.

This range shows that valuation is assumption-dependent.

Fair value changes with:

  • cost of equity;
  • WACC;
  • terminal growth;
  • required dividend yield;
  • normalized capex;
  • and sustainable cash flow.

The near-alignment between the 99% VaR price of ₱1,177 and the MOS price of ₱1,178 is useful—but it must not be misunderstood.

It does not mean that a 99% VaR day automatically creates a buy.

A deep one-day decline may create a valuation opportunity.

It may also reflect new information that makes the old fair value obsolete.

Therefore:

When price reaches the MOS zone through a tail event, the correct response is reassessment—not automatic execution.

Dividend at Leverage Risk

Our normalized sustainable dividend estimate is approximately:

₱95.29 per share annually

For 200 shares:

200 × ₱95.29 = ₱19,058

This is a meaningful annual cash contribution.

But the dividend depends on:

  • telco core earnings;
  • operating cash flow;
  • capital expenditures;
  • gearing;
  • debt servicing;
  • liquidity;
  • and board approval.

The fundamental analysis also identified leverage as TEL’s principal structural weakness.

High debt exposes shareholders to:

  • rising financing costs;
  • refinancing risk;
  • reduced capital-allocation flexibility;
  • and greater sensitivity of equity value to operating disappointments.

The dividend can compensate us for time.

It cannot eliminate the possibility of:

  • payout reduction;
  • lower dividend growth;
  • or sustained capital loss.

Technical Risk

As of July 27, 2026 at 12:00 PM, TEL had a 

TMA Gate Score of: 6

Mechanical decision:

TECHNICAL TEST PROBE

The technical structure showed:

  • price above a rising SMA-50;
  • bullish MACD;
  • RSI above 50;
  • price testing the EMA-200 ribbon;
  • and volume below its 50-day average.

The principal technical risk was rejection from long-term resistance.

The VaR mapping demonstrates how quickly such a rejection can move through the ladder.

A 95% VaR move could bring TEL into Layer 4.

A severe tail event could move it directly to Layer 5 or below.

Therefore, every material price movement requires a new TMA Gate Score.

The July 27 score does not remain valid after a VaR-level decline.

Operational at Execution Risk

Even when the analytical framework is correct, the operator can still make an execution mistake.

Examples include:

  • entering the wrong quantity;
  • pressing buy instead of sell;
  • duplicating an order;
  • using an outdated reference price;
  • placing orders in several adjacent layers simultaneously;
  • buying outside the approved layer;
  • or failing to account for transaction fees.

Our transaction-cost rules are:

  • add 0.2950% to gross purchase value to estimate net acquisition cost;
  • deduct 0.3950% from gross sale value to estimate net proceeds.

Because the average cost of ₱1,277.4743 is already net, the approximate gross break-even selling price is:

₱1,277.47431 / (1 − 0.00395) = ₱1,282.54

The execution process should therefore confirm:

  • order side;
  • quantity;
  • price;
  • SDA layer;
  • updated TMA score;
  • and estimated net cost or proceeds

before submission.

Ang TEL Risk-Control Framework

The historical data and VaR-ladder mapping suggest the following practical controls.

Ordinary movement

A daily move of around 1%–2% may occur without changing the thesis.

The default response is observation.

95% VaR event

A decline of approximately 2% from ₱1,230 could bring TEL to around ₱1,205, inside Layer 4.

The operator should review:

  • volume;
  • news;
  • technical structure;
  • and whether the decline remains consistent with an ordinary pullback.

The fact that the price has entered Layer 4 is not enough to authorize a refill.

95% Expected Shortfall event

A decline of approximately 3.39% could bring TEL to around ₱1,188, inside Layer 5.

This is already a tail event.

The stock would have crossed several price zones in one day.

No standing sequence of automatic refill orders should be allowed to execute without reassessment.

99% VaR event

A decline of approximately 4.29% could bring TEL to around ₱1,177—below the ladder and at the MOS area.

At this point, the operator should reassess:

  • whether the fundamental thesis has changed;
  • whether fair value remains ₱1,240;
  • whether the TMA score still allows action;
  • and whether the remaining TEL allocation should be preserved.

99% Expected Shortfall or worst-day event

A decline toward ₱1,172 or ₱1,167 should be treated as a stress event.

The first priority is not buying.

The first priority is determining what caused the move.

Material drawdown

A decline of around 10% from a recent high should trigger a formal review of:

  • position size;
  • fair value;
  • investment thesis;
  • and remaining dry powder.

Severe drawdown

A decline of 15%–20% is no longer ordinary low-volatility behavior.

The sample already contains an 18.24% drawdown.

Crisis drawdown

The historical data also contain a 24% peak-to-trough decline.

At that stage, capital preservation and thesis validation take priority over completing the refill ladder.

Ang MH Risk Verdict

TEL is not a low-risk stock simply because it pays regular dividends.

The historical data show:

  • 95% one-day Historical VaR of approximately 2.00%
  • 95% Expected Shortfall of approximately 3.39%
  • 99% Historical VaR of approximately 4.29%
  • 99% Expected Shortfall of approximately 4.75%
  • observed worst-day decline of approximately 5.16%
  • major drawdowns of approximately 18.24% and 24.00%

At the ₱1,230 reference price, these translate into:

  • ₱1,205 after a 95% VaR event, inside Layer 4;
  • ₱1,188 after a 95% Expected Shortfall event, inside Layer 5;
  • ₱1,177 after a 99% VaR event, below Layer 5 and near the MOS price;
  • ₱1,172 after a 99% Expected Shortfall event;
  • and around ₱1,167 after a repeat of the observed worst day.

The current position remains manageable because:

  • it is 77% deployed rather than fully deployed;
  • the business continues to generate dividends;
  • and the remaining allocation preserves some optionality.

But that optionality can disappear quickly if multiple refill orders are activated during one tail event.

The proper TEL risk classification is:

A cash-generative dividend anchor with moderate ordinary volatility, but meaningful tail risk, drawdown risk, leverage risk, and the capacity to cross several refill layers in one severe trading day.

Pangwakas na Kaisipan

TEL can look calm for long periods.

Then one VaR-level decline can move it from Layer 3 to Layer 4.

One Expected Shortfall event can bring it to Layer 5.

One 99% VaR day can push it through the entire refill ladder and directly toward the Margin of Safety area.

That is the key relationship between VaR and the SDA architecture:

The SDA ladder tells us where the price has landed. VaR tells us how quickly it can get there.

This means the ladder cannot be managed as a row of automatic orders waiting to be filled.

Each layer requires:

  • a fresh TMA Gate Score;
  • a review of company developments;
  • confirmation that fair value remains valid;
  • and a check of remaining risk capacity.

For our 200-share anchor, the objective is not to prevent every unrealized loss.

It is to ensure that:

  • the position remains inside its capital block;
  • the portfolio can survive a VaR or tail-loss event;
  • the dividend thesis remains supportable;
  • lower prices do not trigger emotional averaging;
  • and dry powder remains available after the first refill.

The governing rule remains:

A lower price creates an option to reassess—not an obligation to buy.

The dividend is the harvest.

The SDA ladder provides the map.

VaR shows the speed of the possible descent.

Governance determines whether we act when the price arrives.


Shariah Compliance Advisory (Updated Nov 26, 2025)

The PSE has confirmed that its Shariah screening program is currently paused, with no new lists to be released until their internal review is completed. Although news outlets reported quarterly updates up to mid-2025, these later lists are no longer accessible on the PSE website.

For now, the PSE’s Shariah-Compliant Securities page and all past lists have been removed from the public website. The December 24, 2024 list is the last official version in Micro Stock Trader’s possession, downloaded before the page was taken down, although other investors may still hold later copies such as the reported July 4, 2025 release.

All halal-focused strategies under Micro Stock Trader will use a conservative, self-screened approach until official guidance resumes, in shā’ Allāh.

Ang post na ito ay bahagi ng aming personal learning journey sa securities analysis at portfolio governance. Ang mga konseptong may kaugnayan sa interest-based instruments, conventional bonds, preferred shares, o iba pang financial arrangements ay binabanggit lamang bilang bahagi ng academic coverage ng module at hindi bilang rekomendasyon o endorsement.

Disclaimer

This post is for educational and documentation purposes only. It is not investment advice. Perform your own due diligence and consult qualified financial professionals before making investment decisions. All strategies, frameworks, and examples described here reflect the personal methodologies of Micro Stock Trader and are not guarantees of future performance.


Illustration of a calm, disciplined trader reviewing charts and layered ladders, symbolizing the transformation of the Board Lot Warrior ecosystem in 2025.
Micro Stock Trader Blog
Board Lot Warrior
Ang Inyong Batangueñong Retail Stock Trader

Home | About UsContact Us | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Disclaimer

GAWLOO: Ang Lugawang May Sarap ng Southeast Asia — Gawa ng Batangueñong Galing Abroad

Kung taga-Rosario, Batangas ka at nag-crave ka ng lugaw na may level-up na twist—eto na ang sagot sa panalangin ng sikmura mo: GAWLOO, The Southeast Asian Congee Experience.

Kung taga-Rosario, Batangas ka at nag-crave ka ng lugaw na may level-up na twist—eto na ang sagot sa panalangin ng sikmura mo: GAWLOO, The Southeast Asian Congee Experience.

GAWLOO, The Southeast Asian Congee Experience facade

📍 Matatagpuan sa V. Escaño St., Brgy. C, Rosario Batangas, si GAWLOO ay hindi lang basta kainan — isa siyang kwento ng pangarap, passion, at panlasang umikot sa Asia.


GAWLOO, The Southeast Asian Congee Experience Dine-In

Ang may-ari, si Jay Ubana, ay isang Batangueñong cook na nagtrabaho sa Singapore at Dubai ng 12 taon. Sa dami ng napuntahan niyang bansa—Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore—natutunan niyang i-appreciate ang iba't ibang bersyon ng congee. “Paborito talaga ng mga Pinoy ang lugaw,” wika ni Jay, “Kahit anong oras, kahit anong pakiramdam—masarap maglugaw.”

⭐ Lasa't Alaala sa Bawat Higop

Hindi lang basta lugaw, kundi southeast Asian-inspired congee na may toppings na mala-ulam sa sarap.

🍲 Seafood Gawloo at Lechon Gawloo — ang kanilang best-sellers na puwedeng pang-breakfast o pang-dinner.

🍛 Mix & Match Toppings: Tuwalya, Chicharon Bulaklak, Atay, Chicken, Fried Tokwa at iba pa.

🍗 Rice Meals tulad ng Chao Fan with Pork Siomai, Chicharon Bulaklak, o Lechon Kawali — swak sa mga ayaw ng sabaw pero gusto pa rin ng siksik sa lasa.

🧋 Drinks? May Black Gulaman at Lychee para pampawi ng uhaw habang humihigop ka ng mainit-init na lugaw.

💸 Presyo na Kayang-Kaya

Hindi mo kailangang bumyahe pa sa abroad para matikman ang ganitong congee—abot kaya lang ang Small Bowl na may 1 Topping, at kung mas gutom ka, may Large Bowl para iyo at para sa inyong lahat. Pwede ka ring magpa-top up ng 2, 3 o 4 na toppings para sa ultimate lugaw overload!

🤳 Para sa mga G na umorder online

Pwede kang magpa-deliver! Text o tawag lang sa 09397785658. Hanapin lang ang GAWLOO sa Facebook para sa menu at updates.


Sa totoo lang, sa bawat higop ng lugaw sa GAWLOO, parang may yumayakap sa’yo—maalala mo si Nanay o si Lola na nagluluto ng lugaw tuwing masama ang pakiramdam mo. Ngayon, kahit wala si Nanay sa tabi mo, may GAWLOO ka sa Rosario.

Supportahan natin ang lokal! Tikman ang lugaw na may kwento. Tikman ang GAWLOO.

Featured Post

MH Operator Journal Entry 8: ICT 15% MOS RTS Refill Amid Technical Weakness

Home › Board Lot Warrior › Micro Harvesting › Micro Harvesting 2.0 › MH Operator Journal › ICT › Journal Entry 7 › ICT 15% MOS RTS Refil...