When: Close below $290 with no recovery within 3-5 sessions

Then: Fresh reassessment of position (does not automatically force full exit given September structural-floor history)

SELL — Trim 50-60% of position using rallies to 10 EMA at $316 as preferred exit; mandatory market-on-close execution if $316 not reclaimed within 3 trading sessions; define hard re-evaluation triggers at $323 (re-engagement) or $295 (full exit)

• Trading at 36.5x trailing earnings; multiple unsupported by current macro/rate environment
• 16.8% off highs; neutral analyst's 'buy on 3-5% pullback' trigger is already violated
• Beta of 1.35 with negatively skewed Q3 earnings setup: 5% miss with 10% multiple compression equals -25% versus +5-10% upside
• Technical structure broken: lost 200 SMA September 30, confirmed October 2 on volume; 10 EMA below 200 SMA; 50 SMA rolling over at negative $17/month
• Aggressive analyst's 30-50% trim is insufficient — true conservatism requires being 'meaningfully smaller, not marginally smaller'
• Aggressive analyst's stop at $328 is a trade-management stop, not protection for residual long position
• Residual position should be small enough that 10-15% continued drawdown is recoverable and explainable to risk committee
• Aggressive analyst's 'trim into rallies' plan assumes rallies will materialize; no guaranteed bounce in confirmed downtrend
• Defense spending tailwinds are priced in at 50% above sector multiples; neutral analyst's framework is backward
• Capital preservation requires planning for path where stock keeps falling, not waiting for optimal exit that may never come

→ vs aggressive: Trim 30-50% is insufficient — true conservatism requires 50-60% reduction; residual 50-70% without defined hedge is 'exposure management with one hand tied behind your back'

→ vs aggressive: Plan to exit into rallies assumes the stock will bounce; in confirmed downtrend without catalyst, stock can grind lower from 309 to 295 to 290 without giving those technical retracements

→ vs neutral: HOLD with bullish bias anchored on soft-landing consensus, defense spending, and 58% Polymarket Fed cut probability is 'not a thesis, it's a prayer' — paying 36.5x earnings through a death cross for a potential rate cut nine months out is backwards risk management

→ vs neutral: Defense spending tailwinds are already priced in; at 50% above sector multiples, investors don't receive credit for tailwinds that have been capitalized

Moderate trim to 40-45% of current allocation; hold core position with defined re-entry and exit triggers

• 36.5x trailing earnings vs sector range of 15-22x confirms valuation disconnect; multiple lacks cushion against compression
• Death cross, 50 SMA rolling over at negative seventeen dollars per month, and institutional distribution on 4.15 million share down-day confirm technical breakdown
• Counter-scenario to aggressive thesis: clean beat with guidance reaffirmation could expand multiple to 38-40x and generate 15-20% upside
• Aggressive plan's reliance on rallies to 316 or 323 is fragile given confirmed downtrend; price cooperation is not guaranteed
• Conservative plan's 295 hard exit trigger forces capitulation selling at historically significant support level where buyers emerge
• Conservative plan's 3-session market-on-close mandate ignores how bottoms actually form through consolidation
• Moderate trim to 40-45% of current allocation splits the difference between aggressive and conservative positions
• Accept execution in 312-316 range rather than waiting for perfect retest of 10 EMA
• First re-evaluation trigger: close above 323 on volume >4 million shares signals technical repair and warrants adding back
• Second re-evaluation trigger: sustained close below 290 with no buyers over 3 sessions signals regime change requiring further reduction
• Fundamentals remain durable: 21% revenue growth, 48% ROE, $6.5 billion free cash flow, 0.85x net debt to EBITDA
• 290 level preferred over conservative analyst's 295 as it respects historical support without creating forced selling

→ vs aggressive: Aggressive plan prices worst case as base case and relies on price cooperation (rallies to 316 or 323) that may not materialize in a confirmed downtrend with death cross; one sharp dead-cat bounce then bleeding lower is the more common pattern

→ vs conservative: Conservative plan's 295 hard exit trigger guarantees selling into capitulation phase at a level where buyers historically emerge; 60% sizing target has no empirical basis and represents arbitrary upper bound rather than conviction-based allocation

→ vs conservative: Conservative plan's 3-session market-onclose mandate ignores how bottoms actually form through timeconsuming consolidation and chop rather than quick reclamation of broken support