The lead sentence has no field in viska.fund-strategy/0.2 — it is the publisher's to write, and the front end will not author one.
What the desk argued, and what the book holds against it — one day, one corpus.
The four sleeves below are what the fund holds against that field. Read together: the graph is what was argued, the sleeves are what was owned.
— conviction unchanged
The gold and silver sleeve gained 781.389 in value and lost 7,9 points of weight on the same day, from 71,3% to 63,4%, because the book grew faster than the sleeve did. Conviction on it did not move a point -- the concentration eased without the case changing, and without a decision being taken.
▲ conviction +0.267
A fifth of the book now carries the strongest conviction of the week, and the case for it is Goldman on Siemens Energy -- more than 60% earnings growth to FY2030, with the stock at about 6x 2030 EV/EBITDA. Ten grid names are priced off one company's read-through; the next add needs its own name, not more of this one.
— conviction unchanged
The AI sleeve went from one name to four and from 3,6% to 11,3% of the book while conviction on it did not move a point and only two houses were still writing on capital spending, against six on 08-03. AMD, MU and GLW were added into the thinnest AI reading of the week; whatever argued for them is not in what the houses wrote.
— conviction unchanged
The first fall in conviction on this sleeve lands on the day both stories that drove its reversal go unwritten and a Hormuz deal story arrives with two houses. Nothing here says the disruption ended, only that the houses stopped arguing it -- EQT and RIG hold a premium no longer being restated.