Directory / ProgramComputer/earnings-trade-automation

ProgramComputer/earnings-trade-automation

Automated Python trading bot for earnings calendar spread options with Kelly Criterion, Alpaca API integration, and Google Sheets tracking.

Reviewed Bot 85/100

Not financial advice. A grade measures public repo hygiene only (license, upkeep, tests, paper mode, risk limits, docs). It does not measure returns, safety or suitability. Options trading can lose more than you invest. Read the full policy.

Reviewed. Grok Bot read the code and docs and checked or adjusted each judged factor. Nothing was executed. This is not a human audit. Reviewed on 2026-10-24 against commit f667983, rubric v1.1.

Reviewer summary: Earnings calendar-spread automation for Alpaca with documented exposure caps, quote-age limits and an Alpaca paper default. No kill switch or circuit breaker found.

Facts

Repository	https://github.com/ProgramComputer/earnings-trade-automation
Type	Bot
Strategies	Earnings plays, Calendar spreads
Brokers	Alpaca
License	ISC
Language	Python
Last commit	2026-10-23 (1 days before the scan)
Last scanned	2026-10-24
Stars	24 (shown for context, never scored)

Score breakdown

Factor	Points	How it was decided
Risk limits and kill switch	10 / 20	README documents MAX_AGGREGATE_EXPOSURE_PCT (36 percent of equity) and quote and spread limits, enforced in trade_workflow.py (10). No kill switch or approval gate found. The scanner's single hit was a false positive. Reviewer confirmed the scanner result. Scanner evidence (2, automated, can include false matches) `trade_workflow.py:49` [max notional or exposure] MAX_AGGREGATE_EXPOSURE_PCT = Decimal(os.environ.get("MAX_AGGREGATE_EXPOSURE_PCT") or "0.36") `trade_workflow.py:1499` [position limit] print(f"Position sizing: {sizing_basis}.")
License	15 / 15	ISC (OSI approved) Reviewer confirmed the scanner result. Scanner evidence (1, automated, can include false matches) `LICENSE:1` License file
Last commit on default branch	15 / 15	1 days since last commit Fact from the commit date, no judgment involved. Scanner evidence (1, automated, can include false matches) `default branch HEAD` 2026-10-23 (1 days ago)
Tests	10 / 15	107 test cases found in 3 test files; CI test step not found Reviewer confirmed the scanner result. Scanner evidence (3, automated, can include false matches) `test_entry_window.py:1` 6 test cases `test_quote_resilience.py:1` 24 test cases `test_workflow_resilience.py:1` 77 test cases
Paper or dry-run mode	15 / 15	README documents ALPACA_PAPER=true and a paper API base URL. Reviewer confirmed the scanner result. Scanner evidence (3, automated, can include false matches) `README.md:54` ALPACA_PAPER=true # 'false' for live trading, with the live APCA_API_BASE_URL and a separate TRADES_DB_PATH `alpaca_integration.py:179` [paper-mode flag] setting = os.environ.get("ALPACA_PAPER") `trade_workflow.py:340` [paper endpoint] expected_url="[link] if paper_mode else "[link]
README quality	10 / 10	install steps, config or env vars, explains what it does, risk disclaimer, 11697 chars Reviewer confirmed the scanner result. Scanner evidence (2, automated, can include false matches) `README.md:1` README with 11697 characters `README.md:139` ## Disclaimer
Broker detection	10 / 10	Alpaca (deps, code, readme) Reviewer confirmed the scanner result. Scanner evidence (1, automated, can include false matches) `requirements.txt:1` [Alpaca: deps+code+readme] alpaca-py
Total	85 / 100	Grades: A 85+, B 70+, C 55+, D 40+, F below.

Grades measure public repo hygiene on the scan date. They say nothing about profits, safety or security. We did not run this code. Full rubric and patterns.

Something wrong?

Report a correction Request removal (maintainers)

Corrections and removals are public GitHub issues. We reply within 7 days and every change is in the repo history. Sponsors get no special treatment: see our policy.

Badge for your README

Once the site has a public address, shields.io can read /badge/programcomputer--earnings-trade-automation.json from it. Badges show the grade and whether it was reviewed. Maintainers may use one without asking.