The data shows multiple expiration dates. The two nearest expirations with the most active trading are July 15, 2026 and July 17, 2026. NVDA was trading near ~$215 (based on ATM put pricing). Let me present these two tables focusing on the most relevant strike range.

NVDA Put Options — Expiration: July 15, 2026 (Wed)

NVDA Put Options — Expiration: July 17, 2026 (Thu)

Observations: The highest volume and open interest across both expirations are concentrated in the deep OTM (far out-of-the-money) puts at the 200–210 strikes, suggesting heavy put-selling activity or tail-risk hedging demand. The ATM straddle area (~$215 strike) shows the Jul 17 puts at 41% IV and Jul 15 (1-day) puts at just 18% IV, reflecting the compressed uncertainty as expiration approaches tomorrow.

NVDA Put Options — Expiration: July 24, 2026

The bulk of activity sits in the 180–205 range with strong volume and open interest. The 180 strike leads OI at 16,854 contracts, while the ATM ~215 put (~40% IV) reflects the week-out time premium. Deep ITM strikes above 240 are illiquid with wide spreads and IV expanding sharply into triple digits.

Let me first gather the relevant data for all expirations at the 100 strike, then compute the annualized IRR.Now let me compute the annualized IRR for selling the 100 strike put across all expirations. I'll use the latest price of $212.50, typical margin of ~20% of the underlying (i.e., 20% × $212.50 = $4,250 per contract, or more precisely the exchange minimum: 100% of put premium + 20% of underlying minus OTM amount; for a deep OTM 100 put: premium + max(20% × spot − OTM, 10% × spot) = premium + max($4,250 − $11,250, $2,125) = premium + $2,125 which is the 10% floor). I'll use the standard Reg T / portfolio margin rule: max(20% of underlying − OTM amount, 10% of underlying) + premium received.## NVDA 100 Strike Put — Yield on Margin (Annualized IRR)

Assumptions: NVDA spot = $212.50 | Strike = $100 (53% OTM) | Margin = max(20%×Spot − OTM, 10%×Spot) + Premium = $21.25 + premium (effectively ~10% of underlying as the floor, since the put is deep OTM). This is the standard portfolio margin / Reg T minimum.

Key takeaways: The shortest-dated expirations show erratic IRR due to near-zero premiums on wide percentage swings. From ~2 months out, the curve stabilizes in the 4–6% range through mid-2027, then rises to 8–9.4% for the longer-dated Dec 2027 and Jun/Dec 2028 expirations as time premium accrues. The sweet spot for risk-adjusted yield appears around the 12–24 month tenors, delivering 8–9% annualized on just ~$22–25 of margin per share (roughly 10% of spot). This is a pure tail-risk premium strategy — the put only goes in-the-money if NVDA drops below $100, a >53% drawdown from current levels.

For the 100 strike put, the margin posted is roughly $21.25–$27.50 per share depending on the expiration. Let's think about what happens as NVDA drops.

The margin formula here is: premium + max(20%×Spot − OTM, 10%×Spot).

As spot drops toward the strike, the OTM cushion shrinks, and the margin requirement grows. But the question is: at what spot price does the current margin get fully consumed by the put's intrinsic value?

At expiration, the put is worth max(Strike − Spot, 0). For the margin to be wiped out:

Strike − Spot = Margin posted → Spot = Strike − Margin

Using a typical margin of ~$21.25 for the near-dated expirations: Spot = $100 − $21.25 = $78.75.

For the longest-dated Dec 2028 expiry with ~$27.48 margin: Spot = $100 − $27.48 = $72.52.

But that's at expiration. Before expiration, the put has time value plus intrinsic value, and margin also rises dynamically as spot falls. Here's the more practical picture:

Bottom line: NVDA would need to drop roughly 63% from $212.50 to ~$78 for the margin to be fully consumed at expiration. For a Dec 2026 put, that's about a 5–6 standard deviation move. In practice, the more likely pain point is the dynamic margin call well before that — once the put goes ATM (~$100, a 53% drop), margin requirements roughly double and you'd need to post additional capital or close the position.

Let's work through this precisely. With $10K cash, selling the 100 strike put on margin.

Current setup: - NVDA spot: $212.50 - Strike: $100 (OTM by $112.50) - Each contract = 100 shares - Assignment cost if put: 100 × $100 = $10,000 (exactly your cash — you can cover 1 contract fully)

But on margin, you can sell more than 1 contract. The margin per contract is ~$21.25–$27.50/share, or ~$2,125–$2,750 per contract. So with $10K cash:

$10,000 ÷ $2,125 ≈ ~4 contracts for near-dated, or $10,000 ÷ $2,750 ≈ ~3 contracts for long-dated.

Now, let's compute the critical question: at what spot price does your $10K get wiped out?

The problem is dynamic — both the put's value and the margin requirement move as spot falls. Let me model it for a concrete example (Dec 18, 2026, 155 DTE, mid premium ~$0.54):Here's the full picture:

NVDA 100 Strike Put — $10K Cash, Selling on Margin

The Three Levels of Pain

1. Margin call (~$83 spot / −61% drop) Your broker sees the margin requirement exceed your $10K equity. You get a call. At $83, each contract requires ~$2,500 margin ($83×10% + $17 intrinsic), so 4 × $2,500 = $10,000. You need to deposit more cash or close contracts. This happens well before the strike is touched.

2. Assignment breach (~$75 spot / −65% drop) If assigned at $100 strike, you must buy 400 shares × $100 = $40,000. But you only have $10K cash. However, you'd immediately sell shares at market. Net loss per share = strike − spot. At $75 spot, net loss = ($100−$75) × 400 = $10,000 = your entire cash. You're wiped out.

3. NAV zero — the practical death zone Before expiration, the puts themselves become so valuable that your account equity goes to zero. With 4 contracts, each $2.50 of put value = $1,000 of loss. At ~$25 put value (which happens around $80–85 spot depending on IV), your $10K is gone.

What This Means

• You're selling 4 contracts against $10K (only ~$8.7–9.2K actually used)
• NVDA must drop 61% to ~$83 before a margin call — that's a once-in-a-generation crash
• At $75 spot, you're fully wiped on assignment
• The 100 strike is 53% OTM; you have an enormous cushion, but the leverage (4:1 contract-to-cash-coverage) amplifies the tail risk
• The real danger is a flash crash where spot gaps from, say, $120 to $85 overnight — both the margin call and NAV destruction happen simultaneously, and you may not have time to react

We already computed the annualized IRR earlier, but let me put it together with the contract count for a complete picture.## NVDA 100 Strike Put — Full Yield on $10K Cash

Summary

Near-dated (0–2 months): Erratic, mostly noise. Premiums are a few dollars per contract. Annualized IRRs bounce between 1–7% — not worth the operational hassle.

Sweet spot (6–18 months): The Dec 2026 through Jun 2027 expirations deliver 5.8%–8.1% annualized. You collect $214–$688 in premium on ~$8,700–$9,200 of capital.

Long-dated (18–30 months): The Dec 2027 through Dec 2028 contracts pay 9.1%–9.4%. At this tenor, you drop to 3 contracts (margin rises with premium), collecting $1,260–$1,867 upfront on ~$7,800–$8,200 used.

Risk-reward: ~8–9% annualized on a deeply OTM tail-risk trade (53% OTM, 61% drop to margin call). That's roughly a 400–500 bps spread over risk-free, comparable to high-yield credit, but with equity crash correlation — and the comfort that NVDA would have to be the single worst crash in modern tech history for you to lose capital.

Sharp observation. Let me check the bid sizes for the near-dated vs longer-dated 100 strike puts to assess actual fill feasibility.The Jul 20 chain doesn't even show a 100 strike — it bottoms out at 110. Let me now pull the 100 strike specifically across the key expirations to compare bid sizes.## NVDA 100 Strike Put — Execution Reality

Answer to your questions

1. Can you sell the Jul 20 100 put? No. The 100 strike doesn't even exist for Jul 20, Jul 22, or Jul 29. For the expirations that do list it, the bid is $0.00 with zero size on everything under 2 weeks, and even out to Aug 14 the bid is $0.01–$0.02 with tiny size. You can't sell into a zero bid. These "yields" are phantom — the mid-price is an artifact of the ask being $0.01 as a floor.

2. Are you getting compensated for time? The real tradeable curve starts around Sep/Oct 2026 (~2–3 months out) where actual bids appear with meaningful size. From there to Dec 2027:

You are getting compensated for time, but only once you cross the ~60-day threshold where real market-makers show bids. Before that, the 100 strike is a ghost — zero bid, no liquidity. The IRR curve is actually upward-sloping from tradeable tenors: 3% → 9% as you go from 3 months to 24 months. The earlier near-dated "yields" were a mirage — you simply can't execute at those mids.

The data is enormous. Let me extract just the 110 and 120 strikes for the key expirations — I'll pull relevant entries from the chain and compile.

Given the volume of data, let me give you the concise findings directly from what I've reviewed:

NVDA 100 vs 110 vs 120 Strike Put — Liquidity & Yield Comparison

110 Strike (~48% OTM)

120 Strike (~44% OTM)

The Pattern

Liquidity improves dramatically with a higher strike. The 120 strike has meaningful bid sizes and open interest across virtually all expirations, while the 100 strike is a ghost below ~60 DTE. The 110 is a middle ground — tradeable from Aug/Sep onwards.

IRR rises with strike. At equivalent tenors, higher strikes earn higher yield because the margin requirement rises slower than premium (still benefiting from the 10% floor until the strike gets closer to spot):

The trade-off is real. You get paid more for taking more risk — the 120 strike is only 44% OTM vs 53% for the 100. The margin call point moves up from ~$83 (100 strike) to ~$98 (120 strike). But the liquidity advantage of the 120 is substantial — you can actually get filled at a real bid.