topcing OP : this should be up $5 today no problem!!!!  what the heck...

MANIPULATOR OP : OK, so I’m gonna answer my own question. I decided to ask ChatGPT and this is the answer and it makes perfect sense.
An ETF (Exchange-Traded Fund) like XRT, which tracks the S&P 500 or other index baskets, is less likely to experience a classic short squeeze compared to an individual stock. Here’s why:
1. Diversified Basket: ETFs represent a collection of stocks rather than a single stock. For an ETF to experience a short squeeze, all or a significant portion of the underlying stocks would need to face the same upward pressure from short interest. For example, in the case of XRT, it tracks the S&P 500 Retail Index, so the squeeze would need to affect the majority of its holdings, which is highly unlikely.
2. Creation and Redemption Mechanism: ETFs have an open-ended structure, meaning that new shares can be created or redeemed as needed by authorized participants (typically large financial institutions). This allows the ETF to adjust to market demand and keeps the price close to the net asset value (NAV) of the underlying securities. If a short squeeze were to occur, new shares could be created to meet demand, making it hard for a supply squeeze to impact the ETF’s price significantly.
3. Tracking an Index: Since XRT tracks the S&P 500, its price moves are designed to mirror the index. For an ETF like this to squeeze, the entire S&P 500 would need to experience an immense rally caused by the short covering of many or all of its constituent companies, which is improbable due to the diversified nature of the index.
4. Naked Short Selling and Market Mechanics: Naked short selling, while illegal in most regulated markets, refers to selling shares that have not been borrowed or located. In ETFs, the ability to create new shares if demand increases makes it less likely that naked short selling would lead to a squeeze. There’s simply more liquidity available to prevent the scarcity of shares that typically drives a short squeeze.

Red Man : so no basically