Key Takeaways
- • Michael Burry's Scion Asset Management disclosed put options worth approximately $1.1 billion against Nvidia and Palantir Technologies in Q3 2025 regulatory filings, representing a substantial bearish bet on two major artificial intelligence leaders ahead of the hedge fund's closure.
- • The position comprised approximately $187 million in notional value against Nvidia (10,000 put contracts) and $912 million against Palantir (50,000 put contracts), according to SEC disclosures cited across multiple sources.
- • Burry publicly defended his contrarian stance against Nvidia, characterizing the company's rebuttal to his AI sector critiques as containing "one straw man after another," signaling conviction in his bearish thesis despite market headwinds.
- • The disclosed short positions highlight Burry's consistent skepticism regarding artificial intelligence valuations and market dynamics, extending his contrarian investment philosophy beyond equities into derivatives strategies during a period of significant AI sector enthusiasm.
- • Burry subsequently clarified that media characterizations of his positions as a "$1B short" reflected misinterpretations of 13F filings and options notional value presentations, underscoring technical distinctions between notional exposure and actual capital deployment.
Summary
Michael Burry's Scion Asset Management disclosed substantial put option positions totaling approximately $1.1 billion in notional value against two prominent artificial intelligence companies—Nvidia and Palantir Technologies—according to regulatory filings from Q3 2025. The position consisted of approximately 10,000 put contracts on Nvidia representing roughly $187 million in notional exposure and 50,000 put contracts on Palantir representing approximately $912 million in notional exposure. These disclosures coincided with the period surrounding Scion Asset Management's eventual closure.
The bearish positioning reflects Burry's sustained skepticism regarding artificial intelligence sector valuations and market dynamics. When Nvidia responded publicly to Burry's critiques of the AI sector, Burry countered that the company's rebuttal relied on logical fallacies, stating it contained "one straw man after another." This exchange underscored the substantive disagreement between Burry and major AI infrastructure providers regarding current market valuations and sustainability of AI-related growth narratives.
Burry subsequently addressed public characterization of his positions as a "$1 billion short," clarifying that such framing stemmed from misinterpretations of 13F filings and how options notional values are presented in regulatory disclosures. He distinguished between notional exposure—the theoretical dollar value underlying derivatives contracts—and actual capital committed to the positions. This technical clarification highlights the importance of precision when analyzing hedge fund derivative strategies, as notional values can overstate true risk exposure or capital deployment.
The timing of these disclosures positioned Burry as maintaining his historical contrarian investment stance during a period of sustained enthusiasm and valuation expansion in artificial intelligence equities. Whether these bearish bets proved prescient or premature remains subject to analysis, but they demonstrate Burry's willingness to maintain conviction in contrarian theses through structured derivative vehicles, consistent with the investment philosophy that gained prominence following his prescient housing market positioning detailed in "The Big Short."
The bearish positioning reflects Burry's sustained skepticism regarding artificial intelligence sector valuations and market dynamics. When Nvidia responded publicly to Burry's critiques of the AI sector, Burry countered that the company's rebuttal relied on logical fallacies, stating it contained "one straw man after another." This exchange underscored the substantive disagreement between Burry and major AI infrastructure providers regarding current market valuations and sustainability of AI-related growth narratives.
Burry subsequently addressed public characterization of his positions as a "$1 billion short," clarifying that such framing stemmed from misinterpretations of 13F filings and how options notional values are presented in regulatory disclosures. He distinguished between notional exposure—the theoretical dollar value underlying derivatives contracts—and actual capital committed to the positions. This technical clarification highlights the importance of precision when analyzing hedge fund derivative strategies, as notional values can overstate true risk exposure or capital deployment.
The timing of these disclosures positioned Burry as maintaining his historical contrarian investment stance during a period of sustained enthusiasm and valuation expansion in artificial intelligence equities. Whether these bearish bets proved prescient or premature remains subject to analysis, but they demonstrate Burry's willingness to maintain conviction in contrarian theses through structured derivative vehicles, consistent with the investment philosophy that gained prominence following his prescient housing market positioning detailed in "The Big Short."
Go deeper than the headline
Research every firm in this story, track the ones that matter and get the daily briefing — free for 7 days.