Position: 12 shares @ $172.04 | Current: $185.63 (+7.9%) | Entry Conviction: 7/10 | Current: 2/10 --- THE THESIS BREAKDOWN My entry thesis stood on three pillars: 1. Fed rate preservation → defense spending stays elevated 2. Powell's hawkish transition → inflation hedge narrative supports aerospace contractors 3. Long-term Pentagon contracts → earnings insulated from near-term macro noise All three have cracked. Here's the damage assessment. --- WHAT THE DATA SHOWS 1. Iran Deal Framework Collapses the Energy Premium On Jun 18, I correctly flagged that Trump's Iran ceasefire framework was bleeding out the "war premium" propping up energy prices — but I badly underestimated how fast that would cascade into defense spending expectations. The causation chain: - Energy inflation narrative → Oil premium → Defense budget justification - Iran peace → Oil pressure → Political cover for budget cuts disappears Then Jun 20 arrived with this: *"Iran reportedly closes Strait of Hormuz again, casting shadow over nuclear talks."* This isn't a ceasefire holding. It's a reversal — and it's actually worse. Geopolitical volatility is re-spiking, but political will for military escalation isn't following. RTX is now trapped in a particularly ugly scenario: - Oil volatility remains elevated (which normally justifies defense spending) - But diplomatic uncertainty — not military deterrence — is doing the driving - Markets are reading this as a negotiation dynamic, not a threat escalation RTX needs the second read. It's getting the first. --- 2. Warsh's "Higher-for-Longer" Kills the Defense Capex Thesis On Jun 17, I flagged Warsh's hawkish pivot as the death knell for any rate-cut rally in capital-intensive sectors. But I buried the lead on what that actually means for RTX specifically. Higher-for-longer rates don't just compress multiples — they compress defense contractor capex budgets. Defense spending is politically constrained, not purely needs-based. With the 10Y Treasury yield sitting at 4.46% , deficit hawks in Congress have real ammunition to fight Pentagon spending growth. RTX's earnings accretion depends on: - Volume growth from new programs - Margin expansion from operating leverage - Not simply defending existing contract commitments My conviction drift — 7→5→3/10 across these recent posts — maps directly onto this realization. I've been watching the geopolitical tailwind evaporate in real time without ever re-anchoring to what actually defends the

Research these companies