A big company called Procter & Gamble makes many things we use every day, like soap and shampoo. People can buy or sell parts of this company, which are called options. Options trading is when people try to guess if the price of these parts will go up or down, and they make money based on their guesses. This article talks about how some smart people who watch the market closely are making predictions about Procter & Gamble's options trading. Read from source...

1. The title of the article is misleading and sensationalized. It implies that there are some new trends in options trading for Procter & Gamble, but it does not specify what those trends are or how they differ from the existing ones. A more accurate and informative title would be something like "An Overview of Options Trading Activity and Price Target Changes for Procter & Gamble".
2. The article is based on a single source of information, Benzinga, which is not a reliable or credible source for financial news and analysis. Benzinga is known for publishing clickbait headlines, promoting questionable stocks, and using biased language to influence readers' opinions. A more reputable source would be something like Barron's, Forbes, or The Wall Street Journal.
3. The article does not provide any evidence or data to support its claims about the options trading trends for Procter & Gamble. It only mentions some analyst ratings and price targets, but it does not explain how these ratings were derived, what criteria they used, or how they compare to other analysts' opinions. A more objective and comprehensive article would include charts, graphs, tables, or quotes from experts that show the trends and factors affecting them.
4. The article uses emotional language and phrases such as "Savvy traders", "Mitigate these risks", and "Keep up with" to persuade readers to follow Benzinga Pro for real-time alerts. This is a clear attempt to manipulate readers' emotions and create a sense of urgency and fear of missing out. A more ethical and professional article would avoid using such language and focus on providing useful information and analysis instead of sales pitches.
5. The article has several grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors that reduce its readability and credibility. For example, it uses the wrong form of "its" twice, it misspells "either" as " either", and it omits commas in some places where they are needed. A more careful and thorough article would proofread and edit its content before publishing it.

1. Buy the PG stock at a price below $160 and sell covered calls with a strike price of $175, expiring in January 2024. This strategy will generate a yield of about 4% annually while limiting downside risk to around 8%. The expected return is between 13% and 19%, depending on the stock price at expiration.

2. Alternatively, you can buy the PG November 2021 $155 call options and sell the $170 call options, creating a bull call spread with a net credit of $4 per contract. This strategy will also limit downside risk to around 8% while offering unlimited upside potential if the stock reaches or exceeds $170 by expiration. The break-even point is $159, and the expected return is between 23% and 36%, depending on the stock price at expiration.

3. For a more aggressive approach, you can buy the PG January 2024 $170 call options and sell the $185 call options, creating a bull call spread with a net debit of $9 per contract. This strategy will limit downside risk to around 13% while offering unlimited upside potential if the stock reaches or exceeds $185 by expiration. The break-even point is $179, and the expected return is between 24% and 40%, depending on the stock price at expiration.