When: Daily close above $986 with RSI>52 and volume >1.3x 20-day average

Then: Add final 25% of target weight

Enter with 40% of target weight at $925, add second tranche at $880-900 near 200 SMA support ($899.64), and add final 25% only on confirmed weekly close above $986 with RSI above 55; stop at $845

• Coiled spring framework at 45% bull probability should not be treated as 90%; stop-loss gap risk to $760 exists if $874.76 breaks on volume
• Current stop at $868 is $31.64 below 200 SMA ($899.64) and only $6.76 below swing low; should be moved to $845 (below 2x ATR buffer of ~$86)
• 50 SMA at $986 has capped price for five months across five rejection episodes; $960 is inside the resistance zone and not a valid breakout level
• Valuation is stretched: Forward PE 36.5x, P/B 20.6x; Q1 2026 net income of $4.7B includes $4.4B in one-time items (Wood acquisition gain); PEG closer to 2.5x stripped
• $176B backlog is real but backlog-to-revenue conversion is not guaranteed and requires supply chain execution on transformers, switchgear, and skilled labor
• Fed at 95% probability of zero cuts in 2026 is the tightest monetary regime in two decades for a 36.5x forward earnings name; recession probability ticked up 2 percentage points
• September 2024 sell-off drove 24% drawdown from April highs on AI capex digestion concerns just six weeks ago; markets with demonstrated 24% drawdown vulnerability have risk of second wave
• Initial position should be 40% of target weight (not 50%) to limit damage if coiled spring resolves bearishly; scale aggressively on confirmed strength
• Final tranche confirmation gates at $986 should remain firm; paying $20-30 more per share for confirmation dramatically reduces probability of buying into failed breakouts at the resistance zone rejected five times

→ vs aggressive: The 50 SMA at $986 capping price for five months is not 'trend-following brain damage' — it is structural resistance that has rejected buyers five times; $960 is inside the supply zone and represents a worse risk-managed entry than paying up for $986 confirmation

→ vs aggressive: The coiled spring framework treats 45% bull probability as 90%; a coiled spring fires both ways and measured moves to $760 exist if $874.76 breaks on volume, exposing roughly $100 of downside beyond the stop in a market with $43 ATR

→ vs aggressive: Stop at $868 is only $6.76 below swing low and $31.64 below 200 SMA ($899.64); placing stop below structural floor means willing to absorb consequence of being wrong before exiting; conservative standards require minimum 2x ATR below entry (~$839)

Enter at $925 with 50% initial weight, stop at $855, second tranche at $880-$900, final tranche on daily close above $986 with RSI above 52 and volume 1.3x 20-day average; reassess if recession probability exceeds 20%.

• Coiled spring setup is high-quality but 45% bull probability is not certainty; direction is not specified by Bollinger squeeze alone
• TTM net income includes $4.4B in one-time items from Q1 2026 (Wood acquisition gain); adjusted PEG is ~2.5x+ versus headline 1.8x
• Stop at $855 gives 1.5x ATR buffer ($80 risk = 1.86x ATR), holds $20 below swing low at $874.76, limits total risk to ~7% of position
• 50% initial position maintained over conservative's 40% suggestion because trade structure is already scaling-in with defined stop
• Final tranche trigger adjusted from weekly close above $986 with RSI above 55 to daily close above $986 with RSI above 52 and volume at least 1.3x 20-day average for timely execution
• Macro is supportive but not marginal driver; Ratepayers Protection Act shifts grid upgrade costs to hyperscalers
• Japan-funded gas plants are signed deals, not policy proposals; turbine secondary market shows scarcity pricing
• If Polymarket recession probability pushes above 20%, reassess position sizing
• GEV at 36.5x forward earnings with execution risk on backlog conversion is not a bet-the-whole-book name
• 15% bear case from technical report is not zero; portfolio-level risk management matters more than single trade structure

→ vs aggressive: Coiled spring framework gets you to 'this setup is worth trading,' not 'this trade has asymmetric certainty'; 45% bull probability from technical report is not 90% confidence

→ vs aggressive: Final tranche trigger of 'daily close above $960 with expanding volume' is worse, not better; $960 sits inside five-month resistance zone that has rejected buyers five times and would produce false breakouts

→ vs conservative: Stop at $845 is overly generous; $70 below recent swing low means giving back ~8.7% of position value before exiting, compressing risk-reward meaningfully

→ vs conservative: Weekly close above $986 with RSI above 55 is a very high bar; by the time it prints the coiled spring has likely already expanded and you're buying after a meaningful move

→ vs conservative: Overweighting macro risks relative to structural shifts in operating environment; aggressive analyst's 40pp drop in data center moratorium probability is genuinely bullish

→ vs conservative: 40% initial position versus 50% just compresses upside without meaningfully improving downside because second and third tranches are gated; asymmetry already favors scaling in