SanDisk Surges 7.95% on $1.47B Volume Ranks 71st in Market Activity Amid AI Storage Demand Surge

On October 1, 2025, Sandisk (SNDK) surged 7.95% with a trading volume of $1.47 billion, ranking 71st in overall market activity. The stock's performance coincided with renewed investor focus on enterprise storage solutions amid evolving data infrastructure demands.

Recent market activity suggests heightened institutional interest in Sandisk's product roadmap, particularly its upcoming NVMe SSD launches targeting AI data centers. Analysts noted the timing aligns with broader industry trends toward high-performance storage adoption, though no direct company announcements were cited.

Trading patterns indicate temporary liquidity imbalances as large-cap tech stocks experienced sector-wide rotation. Sandisk's position in the top 500 by volume on multiple occasions this quarter has drawn strategic attention from algorithmic traders, though long-term fundamentals remain tied to enterprise hardware adoption cycles.

I understand the strategy you have in mind: every trading day, form an equal-weighted basket of the 500 highest-volume U.S. stocks, buy the basket at the next session’s open (or at the same‐day close) and liquidate it after one trading day, repeating this from 2022-01-03 through today. At the moment, the back-testing engine I can control from within this chat works on a single-ticker basis. Building and re-balancing a 500-stock portfolio automatically—while certainly feasible in a dedicated research environment—exceeds the scope of the tools we can invoke directly here. Two possible ways forward: 1. Narrow the request to a single security (for example a high-volume ETF or index proxy) so we can run a conventional back-test with the available engine; or 2. Treat “appearing in the top-500-by-volume list” as an event for individual tickers. We could then run an event study to see how a stock typically performs after it first meets that criterion. This would require less frequent re-balancing logic and is fully supported by the event-back-testing tools. Please let me know which approach you’d prefer—or suggest an alternative—and I’ll proceed accordingly.