@v587d/capital-generation 2.7.1 → 2.7.3

package/selected-skills/trading-skills/skills/market-regime-analysis/references/providers/polygon.md

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+# Polygon
+
+Use this path only when the user already indicated `Polygon` or chose it from the supported provider list.
+
+Polygon is strongest here for recent price action and benchmark comparison. It does not replace macro calendar context.
+
+## Best endpoint for recent benchmark history
+
+Call the official aggregate bars endpoint:
+
+```bash
+curl "https://api.polygon.io/v2/aggs/ticker/SPY/range/1/day/2026-02-20/2026-03-06?adjusted=true&sort=asc&limit=500&apiKey=<POLYGON_API_KEY>"
+```
+
+Repeat for `QQQ`, `IWM`, or sector ETFs only if the breadth or leadership question actually requires them.
+
+Pull only the fields you need:
+
+- `ticker`
+- `results[].t`
+- `results[].o`
+- `results[].h`
+- `results[].l`
+- `results[].c`
+- `results[].v`
+
+## How to use the result
+
+- use the bar series to judge trend persistence, recent range expansion, and relative benchmark strength
+- do not imply Polygon answered the macro-event question if the backdrop still depends on calendar risk
+- if event timing still matters after the price check, ask whether to supplement with `FMP` or `TradingEconomics`
+- disclose that Polygon supplied the market-price context
+
+Official docs:
+
+- [Polygon aggregate bars API](https://polygon.io/docs/rest/stocks/aggregates/custom-bars)

package/selected-skills/trading-skills/skills/market-regime-analysis/references/providers/tradingeconomics.md

@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
+# TradingEconomics
+
+Use this path only when the user already indicated `TradingEconomics` or chose it from the supported provider list.
+
+Use it to pull only the minimum price or event context needed for the regime read.
+
+## Best endpoint for recent market trend
+
+Call the official markets historical endpoint with a short benchmark basket:
+
+```bash
+curl "https://api.tradingeconomics.com/markets/historical/spy:us,qqq:us,iwm:us?c=<TE_API_KEY>&d1=2026-02-20&d2=2026-03-06&f=json"
+```
+
+Use this when you need a quick read on trend, relative strength, or narrowing breadth across major US equity benchmarks.
+
+Pull only the fields you need:
+
+- `Symbol`
+- `Date`
+- `Open`
+- `High`
+- `Low`
+- `Close`
+
+## Optional event-backdrop check
+
+If the regime read also needs macro timing context, use the economic calendar by country endpoint:
+
+```bash
+curl "https://api.tradingeconomics.com/calendar/country/united%20states?c=<TE_API_KEY>&f=json"
+```
+
+Use only the relevant upcoming events. Do not dump the entire calendar into the output.
+
+## How to use the result
+
+- use the market history to judge trend persistence, volatility, and leadership concentration
+- use the calendar only to confirm whether event risk is quiet, normal, or heavy
+- if breadth, liquidity, or cross-asset context is still incomplete, say so directly
+- disclose that TradingEconomics supplied part of the market context
+
+Official docs:
+
+- [TradingEconomics markets historical docs](https://docs.tradingeconomics.com/markets/historical/)
+- [TradingEconomics economic calendar by country docs](https://docs.tradingeconomics.com/economic_calendar/country/)

package/selected-skills/trading-skills/skills/market-regime-analysis/references/regime-framework.md

@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+# Regime Framework
+
+The v1 framework uses four dimensions:
+
+- trend
+- volatility
+- breadth
+- event backdrop
+
+## Example labels
+
+- trending-risk-on
+- trending-but-fragile
+- range-bound
+- defensive-risk-off
+- transition
+
+## Interpretation guidance
+
+- Strong trend with healthy breadth and contained volatility supports trend-following tactics.
+- Strong trend with narrow leadership or unstable volatility is weaker than it looks.
+- Range conditions favor faster profit-taking and smaller expectations.
+- Heavy event risk reduces confidence in any classification.

package/selected-skills/trading-skills/skills/portfolio-concentration/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,119 @@
+---
+name: portfolio-concentration
+description: Evaluate whether a portfolio, account, or planned position is too dependent on a small number of issuers, sectors, themes, or correlated exposures before the user adds or holds more risk.
+---
+
+# Portfolio Concentration
+
+Use this skill before adding risk when the user needs to know whether a new or existing position would make the portfolio too dependent on a small set of holdings or shared drivers.
+
+This skill will not:
+
+- build a full strategic asset-allocation plan
+- decide tax strategy for concentrated holdings
+- replace entry, stop, target, or sizing decisions
+
+## Role
+
+Act like a conservative portfolio risk reviewer. Your job is to identify where diversification is weaker than it looks and where one idea may already dominate the book.
+
+## When to use it
+
+Use it when the user wants to:
+
+- check whether a new trade would overconcentrate the portfolio
+- identify hidden overlap across stocks, ETFs, sectors, themes, or employer stock
+- understand whether the book is too dependent on one catalyst, factor, or industry
+- decide whether the portfolio can absorb additional risk before moving to `position-sizing`
+
+## Inputs and context
+
+Ask for:
+
+- current holdings with approximate weights, market values, or percentages
+- whether the snapshot is the full portfolio, one account, or only the risk sleeve being reviewed
+- any planned new position or add-on size
+- whether any holding is employer stock, a narrow ETF, a thematic basket, or an illiquid position
+- the user's objective and timeframe: tactical trading book, swing portfolio, retirement account, long-term core, and so on
+
+Helpful but optional:
+
+- sector, theme, or factor tags the user already tracks
+- tax sensitivity if trimming a winner would be costly
+- whether the user already knows certain holdings overlap
+
+Use the user's materials first.
+
+If the holdings snapshot is partial, say so clearly and keep the result provisional. Do not pretend a partial account view is the whole portfolio.
+
+Work from the snapshot the user gave you. This plugin cannot read a brokerage account — the only positions it knows are the ones the user marked as held, at weights they reported themselves — so do not go and pull balances, quotes or holdings yourself: hand the exact brief (ticker, the field needed, the as-of date) to the host's own retrieval path, in a role-split host the agent that owns market data, and keep the result provisional wherever the snapshot stays partial.
+
+## Analysis process
+
+1. Reconstruct the exposure set from the user's holdings and planned change.
+2. Measure direct concentration by issuer and by top positions.
+3. Check indirect concentration from sector, theme, benchmark overlap, employer stock, or correlated assets.
+4. Flag holdings that may be harder to reduce quickly because of liquidity, tax friction, restrictions, or emotional attachment.
+5. Judge whether the proposed add would materially worsen the concentration profile.
+6. Separate concentration risk from thesis quality. A good idea can still be too large in the context of the book.
+7. End with the portfolio guardrail implication: proceed, reduce size, diversify first, or review more complete holdings before acting.
+
+Use [references/concentration-framework.md](references/concentration-framework.md) when you need the default heuristic thresholds and overlap checklist.
+
+## Core Assessment Framework
+
+Assess the portfolio on five anchors before calling it well balanced:
+
+- `Single-Issuer Exposure`: how much of the portfolio depends on one stock or bond issuer. Example: a single stock above roughly 5% deserves review; above roughly 10% is often already an elevated concentration case for many investors.
+- `Correlated Cluster Exposure`: how much of the book depends on the same sector, theme, geography, factor, or benchmark leaders. Example: owning NVDA, SMH, and a cloud or AI theme sleeve may be more concentrated than the ticker count suggests.
+- `Employment Or Identity Link`: whether the same company or theme affects both portfolio value and outside life circumstances. Example: employer stock can create a double hit to income and net worth.
+- `Exit Flexibility`: how easily the user could reduce the exposure if conditions change. Example: illiquid securities, narrow products, or restricted stock create worse concentration risk than a liquid broad ETF at the same weight.
+- `Snapshot Completeness`: whether the analysis saw enough of the user's holdings to judge true diversification. Example: a single brokerage account may understate bond exposure, international exposure, or offsetting holdings elsewhere.
+
+Use the anchors to classify:
+
+- `acceptable`: no position or correlated cluster appears dominant relative to the stated objective, and the planned add does not materially distort the book
+- `elevated`: one or more positions or clusters deserve active monitoring or a smaller add because the portfolio is becoming too dependent on a limited set of drivers
+- `too concentrated`: issuer, cluster, employer-stock, or liquidity risk is strong enough that adding exposure or holding as-is deserves a rethink before trade construction proceeds
+
+## Evidence That Would Invalidate This Analysis
+
+- the holdings snapshot was incomplete or stale enough to hide meaningful offsetting or overlapping exposures
+- the planned add size changes materially
+- a holding's sector, theme, or benchmark role was misclassified
+- tax, lock-up, or liquidity constraints were stronger or weaker than described
+- the user's objective changes from tactical trading capital to long-horizon core capital, or the reverse
+
+## Output structure
+
+Prefer this output order:
+
+1. `Concentration Summary`
+2. `Top Exposure Risks`
+3. `Overlap And Correlation Review`
+4. `Portfolio Guardrail`
+5. `What Changes The Verdict`
+6. `Next Skill`
+
+Always include:
+
+- whether the snapshot was full or partial
+- the main issuer or cluster concentration
+- any hidden overlap across stocks, ETFs, sectors, or themes
+- whether the planned add worsens concentration materially
+- any special risk from employer stock, narrow products, or illiquid holdings
+- whether the user should move next to `position-sizing`, reduce exposure first, or review a fuller portfolio snapshot
+
+A skill named above is an option for the user, not a step this role can take: only the skills the user switched on exist in this session, and the ones this plugin deliberately does not offer — placing orders, setting position size — are not reachable at all. Say what you would check next and let the user decide.
+
+## Best practices
+
+- do not equate more tickers with true diversification
+- do not ignore ETF or fund overlap with individual positions
+- do not treat employer stock like an ordinary holding
+- do not recommend a larger position just because the thesis is attractive
+
+## Usage examples
+
+- "Use `portfolio-concentration` on this book before I add more semis: NVDA 8%, SMH 10%, QQQ 12%, cash 20%, the rest broad ETFs."
+- "Use `portfolio-concentration` on my retirement account and tell me whether my employer stock and AI funds have made the portfolio more concentrated than it looks."

package/selected-skills/trading-skills/skills/portfolio-concentration/references/concentration-framework.md

@@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
+# Concentration Framework
+
+Use this framework to judge whether a portfolio is less diversified than the raw ticker count suggests.
+
+## What concentration risk actually means
+
+Concentration risk is not only "one giant stock position."
+
+It can also come from:
+
+- multiple holdings tied to the same issuer
+- sector overlap
+- thematic overlap
+- benchmark overlap
+- employer stock
+- illiquid positions that cannot be reduced easily
+- partial portfolio views that hide true exposures
+
+## Source-informed heuristics
+
+These are practical review thresholds, not universal laws:
+
+- A single position at roughly `5%` of total portfolio value deserves review.
+- A single issuer above roughly `10%` is often already an elevated concentration case for many investors.
+- Employer stock above roughly `10-20%` is a notable overconcentration risk because income and portfolio value may depend on the same company.
+- Two or three concentrated single-name positions can create concentration risk even if no single holding looks extreme by itself.
+
+These heuristics are informed by retail-investor guidance and portfolio tools from FINRA, Fidelity, and Schwab. Use them as prompts for review, not mechanical rules.
+
+## Direct vs indirect concentration
+
+Direct concentration:
+
+- one stock
+- one bond issuer
+- one narrow ETF
+
+Indirect concentration:
+
+- individual semiconductor names plus a semiconductor ETF
+- multiple AI or cloud names with the same demand driver
+- broad indexes that already have large weights in the same mega-cap holdings
+- company stock plus compensation, restricted stock, or career exposure to the same issuer
+
+## What to look for
+
+Ask:
+
+- What are the top three positions?
+- What are the top three correlated clusters?
+- If one thesis fails, how many holdings fail with it?
+- Could the user reduce the exposure quickly?
+- Is this the full portfolio or just one sleeve?
+
+## Typical caution cases
+
+- employer stock paired with salary dependence
+- narrow sector ETFs layered on top of the same underlying single names
+- thematic baskets that look diversified by label but share the same catalyst chain
+- portfolios tied closely to cap-weighted indexes during periods of heavy mega-cap concentration
+- illiquid or tax-constrained winners that grew into oversized positions
+
+## Boundaries
+
+This framework does not decide:
+
+- whether the thesis is valid
+- where to enter
+- where the stop belongs
+- how large the position should be
+
+It only answers whether the portfolio is already too dependent on a small set of exposures.

package/selected-skills/trading-skills/skills/portfolio-risk-review/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,126 @@
+---
+name: portfolio-risk-review
+description: Orchestrate a whole-book risk review by checking concentration, correlated exposure, catalyst clustering, market-context sensitivity, and live-position fragility before the user adds, holds, or reduces portfolio risk.
+---
+
+# Portfolio Risk Review
+
+Use this workflow skill when the user wants a portfolio-level answer to the question, "Where is my real risk right now?" rather than a single-position analysis.
+
+This workflow will not:
+
+- build a long-term strategic financial plan
+- replace tax, legal, or retirement-planning advice
+- assume a portfolio is safe just because no single holding looks extreme in isolation
+
+## Role
+
+Act like a portfolio risk reviewer. Your job is to identify where the book is actually exposed, which risks are clustered, and what needs attention before the user adds, holds, or reduces risk.
+
+## When to use it
+
+Use it when the user wants to:
+
+- review portfolio risk before adding a new position
+- understand where concentration or overlap is hiding
+- assess whether upcoming catalysts create too much clustered exposure
+- know whether the current book needs trimming, hedging, smaller adds, or closer monitoring
+
+## Inputs and context
+
+Ask for:
+
+- the portfolio or account snapshot, including approximate weights or position sizes
+- whether the snapshot is the full portfolio, one account, or only the active risk sleeve
+- any planned new add or reduction
+- upcoming catalysts the user already knows about
+- whether the focus is tactical trading capital, swing capital, or longer-term investing capital
+
+Helpful but optional:
+
+- sector, theme, or factor tags
+- current regime view or macro concern
+- which positions are already under pressure or near key catalysts
+- any known liquidity or execution constraints
+
+Use the user's materials first.
+
+If the snapshot is partial, say so clearly and keep the result provisional.
+
+## Workflow routing
+
+Use the smallest useful chain:
+
+1. Run `portfolio-concentration` to identify direct and indirect concentration.
+2. If catalyst clustering matters, run `catalyst-map`.
+3. If broad market context matters, run `market-regime-analysis`.
+4. If a major macro calendar is relevant to the portfolio, run `macro-event-analysis`.
+5. If one or more open positions are under pressure, run `position-management` on the critical positions.
+6. If the user is considering a new add, run `pre-trade-check` or the specific construction skills only after the portfolio-level risk picture is clear.
+
+Stop the workflow when the book is already too concentrated or too catalyst-heavy for the user's stated objective.
+
+## Decision logic
+
+Classify the result as:
+
+- `portfolio risk acceptable`: the book appears aligned with the user's objective and no immediate portfolio-level change is necessary
+- `portfolio risk elevated`: the book is still manageable, but concentration, overlap, or catalyst clustering needs active monitoring or smaller adds
+- `portfolio risk too high`: the book is too dependent on a limited set of exposures, events, or fragile positions to justify adding risk without changes
+
+## Output structure
+
+Prefer this output order:
+
+1. `Portfolio Risk Verdict`
+2. `Checks Run`
+3. `Main Risk Sources`
+4. `Catalyst And Regime Pressure`
+5. `What To Reduce, Watch, Or Avoid Adding`
+6. `Updated Portfolio Context`
+7. `Next Skill Or Action`
+
+Always include:
+
+- whether the snapshot was full or partial
+- the main risk sources in the current book
+- where exposures overlap or cluster
+- whether upcoming catalysts or macro conditions increase portfolio fragility
+- whether the right action is hold, trim, avoid adding, or review specific positions more closely
+- a compact updated portfolio context block when enough information exists
+
+## Updated Portfolio Context
+
+When enough context exists, carry forward a compact block like this:
+
+```markdown
+## Portfolio Context
+
+- objective:
+- snapshot_scope:
+- top_exposures:
+- overlap_clusters:
+- key_catalysts:
+- regime_pressure:
+- fragile_positions:
+- planned_add:
+- portfolio_constraints:
+- risk_summary:
+- open_questions:
+- assumptions:
+- next_recommended_skill:
+```
+
+Only populate the fields supported by the checks that actually ran.
+
+## Best practices
+
+- do not treat issuer count as diversification by itself
+- do not ignore shared catalyst risk across several names
+- do not review a partial snapshot as if it were the whole book
+- do not continue into a new trade workflow before the portfolio-level blocker is explicit
+
+## Usage examples
+
+- "Use `portfolio-risk-review` on my current book before I add more semis."
+- "Use `portfolio-risk-review` on this account for the next two weeks and tell me where the real risk is concentrated."

package/selected-skills/trading-skills/skills/portfolio-risk-review/references/workflow-framework.md

@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+# Portfolio Risk Review Framework
+
+Use this framework to decide whether portfolio-level risk is acceptable before adding or maintaining more exposure.
+
+## Core question
+
+The question is not only:
+
+- "What is my biggest position?"
+
+The real questions are:
+
+- Where are my exposures clustered?
+- Which catalysts matter to the portfolio as a whole?
+- Which positions are fragile right now?
+- Is the current book aligned with my objective and timeframe?
+
+## Typical routing
+
+Start with:
+
+- `portfolio-concentration`
+
+Add as needed:
+
+- `catalyst-map` when several positions share event risk
+- `market-regime-analysis` when broad tape conditions matter
+- `macro-event-analysis` when the macro calendar can pressure the whole book
+- `position-management` when one or more live positions are under pressure
+
+If the user still wants a new trade after the review:
+
+- `pre-trade-check`
+
+## Stop conditions
+
+Stop when:
+
+- concentration is already too high
+- several positions share the same catalyst cluster
+- the macro or regime backdrop makes the current book too fragile
+- the portfolio snapshot is too incomplete to review honestly
+
+## Wrapper discipline
+
+The workflow should:
+
+- surface the biggest risk sources fast
+- separate portfolio-level risk from single-name conviction
+- avoid pretending the portfolio is diversified when the drivers are the same
+- return one clear next portfolio action
+
+## Boundaries
+
+This workflow does not perform full financial planning.
+
+It only reviews current portfolio risk and what should happen next.

package/selected-skills/trading-skills/skills/position-management/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,120 @@
+---
+name: position-management
+description: Review an open position and decide whether to hold, trim, tighten risk, close, or wait by comparing current behavior against the original thesis, invalidation logic, catalyst calendar, and execution constraints.
+---
+
+# Position Management
+
+Use this skill after a position is open when the user needs a disciplined decision about holding, trimming, tightening risk, or exiting without drifting into improvisation.
+
+This skill will not:
+
+- justify staying in a broken trade because the user wants it to work
+- replace pre-trade sizing or portfolio-concentration review
+- guarantee that stop adjustments or trailing logic will lock in a specific outcome
+
+## Role
+
+Act like a disciplined live-risk manager. Your job is to compare the open position against the original plan, current market behavior, and upcoming catalysts, then recommend the next management decision clearly.
+
+## When to use it
+
+Use it when the user wants to:
+
+- decide whether to hold, trim, tighten risk, or exit an open position
+- manage a winner without turning it into a round trip
+- handle a loser without widening risk impulsively
+- decide whether holding through earnings, macro releases, or other catalysts still makes sense
+
+## Inputs and context
+
+Ask for:
+
+- instrument and direction
+- original thesis, timeframe, entry, stop, target, and size
+- current price behavior or status: near target, stalling, breaking down, gapping, and so on
+- current stop logic or trailing logic
+- any upcoming catalyst or event risk
+- whether the user is trying to protect gains, reduce loss, hold through a catalyst, or simply avoid emotional decision-making
+
+Helpful but optional:
+
+- unrealized PnL or R multiple
+- partial exits already taken
+- whether the position sits in a concentrated portfolio or highly correlated cluster
+- order or liquidity constraints that affect exits
+
+Use the user's materials first.
+
+If the original plan is missing, say that clearly and manage the position provisionally rather than inventing a clean prior plan.
+
+Do not fetch live data unless the user explicitly asks to pair this skill with another market-context or event-risk skill.
+
+## Analysis process
+
+1. Reconstruct the original plan and the current position status.
+2. Compare current behavior against the thesis and invalidation logic.
+3. Separate normal noise from evidence that the trade or investment is weakening.
+4. Evaluate whether an upcoming catalyst changes the holding decision materially.
+5. Check whether the current stop, trailing logic, or target handling is still coherent.
+6. Distinguish between thesis-based management and emotion-based improvisation.
+7. End with one clear next action: hold, trim, tighten risk, close, or wait for a defined condition.
+
+Use [references/management-framework.md](references/management-framework.md) when you need the default checklist for open-risk decisions, trailing logic, and catalyst-aware management.
+
+## Core Assessment Framework
+
+Assess the open position on five anchors before recommending a change:
+
+- `Thesis Integrity`: whether the original reason for holding still looks intact. Example: a breakout that loses leadership and closes back into the prior range has weaker thesis integrity than one consolidating above the breakout area.
+- `Reward Realization`: whether the trade has already traveled enough that the management problem changes from "is the idea valid?" to "how do I avoid giving too much back?" Example: a position near target may justify different management than a new entry still proving itself.
+- `Risk Drift`: whether the user has widened risk, delayed exits, or let the position drift away from the original plan. Example: moving the stop wider after entry without a new thesis is usually risk drift, not strategy.
+- `Catalyst Exposure`: whether earnings, macro releases, or other scheduled events make the current holding plan materially more fragile. Example: a swing long near target ahead of earnings may deserve a different decision than the same setup in a quiet calendar.
+- `Exit Practicality`: whether liquidity, spread, session timing, or order constraints affect the ability to trim or exit cleanly. Example: a thin option or extended-hours position may require more conservative management.
+
+Use the anchors to classify:
+
+- `hold with plan intact`: the position still fits the original logic and current management rules
+- `manage actively`: the thesis may still be alive, but trimming, tightening risk, or updating the hold plan is warranted
+- `exit or reduce decisively`: the thesis, catalyst profile, or risk discipline has degraded enough that passive holding is no longer defensible
+
+## Evidence That Would Invalidate This Analysis
+
+- the original plan was remembered incorrectly or new plan details appear
+- the catalyst timing changes materially
+- the user's timeframe changes from tactical trade to longer-term hold, or the reverse
+- the current position size or partial exits differ from what was described
+- the session, liquidity, or execution conditions change enough to alter the practicality of the suggested action
+
+## Output structure
+
+Prefer this output order:
+
+1. `Management Summary`
+2. `Original Plan Versus Now`
+3. `Thesis And Risk Review`
+4. `Catalyst Decision`
+5. `Best Next Action`
+6. `What Would Change That Decision`
+7. `Next Skill`
+
+Always include:
+
+- whether the original thesis still looks intact
+- whether the current stop or trailing logic is coherent
+- whether upcoming catalysts change the hold decision
+- the clearest next action: hold, trim, tighten risk, close, or wait
+- what specific condition would change that action
+- whether the next step is `post-trade-review`, `macro-event-analysis`, `earnings-preview`, or no additional skill yet
+
+## Best practices
+
+- do not widen risk casually after entry
+- do not manage only from unrealized PnL
+- do not hold through a catalyst by inertia
+- do not tighten stops so aggressively that the plan stops matching the thesis
+
+## Usage examples
+
+- "Use `position-management` on this NVDA swing long. I am up about 1.8R, earnings are next week, and I need to decide whether to trim or hold."
+- "Use `position-management` on this losing EURUSD short. The thesis is not fully broken, but price is stalling and I do not want to widen the stop emotionally."

package/selected-skills/trading-skills/skills/position-management/references/management-framework.md

@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
+# Position Management Framework
+
+Use this framework to manage an open position without drifting into improvisation.
+
+## Core question
+
+The question is not only:
+
+- "Am I up or down?"
+
+The real questions are:
+
+- Is the thesis still intact?
+- Has the risk profile changed?
+- Does a catalyst change the holding decision?
+- What is the next clean action?
+
+## Common management actions
+
+- `hold`: thesis and management plan still fit
+- `trim`: realize part of the gain or reduce event exposure
+- `tighten risk`: reduce giveback or adapt to weakening conditions
+- `close`: thesis broken, catalyst risk too high, or discipline deteriorating
+- `wait for condition`: no change yet, but only if the condition is explicit
+
+## Typical mistakes
+
+- widening stops after entry without a new thesis
+- refusing to trim because of fear of missing out
+- tightening stops purely because unrealized PnL feels uncomfortable
+- holding through earnings or macro catalysts by default
+- treating a temporary bounce as proof the thesis is restored
+
+## Winners versus losers
+
+For winners:
+
+- ask whether the position has already delivered enough to justify different management
+- protect against turning a good trade into a round trip
+- avoid trimming only because of emotion if the thesis and trend are still strong
+
+For losers:
+
+- check whether the invalidation condition is already near or already hit
+- do not widen risk casually
+- separate temporary noise from genuine thesis deterioration
+
+## Catalyst-aware management
+
+Upcoming catalysts can change the right action even if price has not moved much yet.
+
+Review:
+
+- earnings dates
+- macro releases
+- central-bank events
+- policy decisions
+- company-specific milestones
+
+If the event can materially compress the decision window, management should become more explicit, not less.
+
+## Boundaries
+
+This framework does not decide:
+
+- whether the original entry was good
+- how much size should have been taken initially
+- whether the portfolio was too concentrated before entry
+
+It only helps manage the position that already exists.