In the era of geopolitical games, how should we analyze and evaluate the direction of geopolitical games, and how to assess the impact on market trends. In March, when the situation in Iran was the most intense, we will see many statements: Iran will win, Trump will lose, the United States will collapse, and the financial system will be settled for 70 years. Now it can also be seen that Iran was going to talk from the beginning. Actually, both of these statements are somewhat biased. Since the outbreak of the situation in Iran, I have been closely monitoring and analyzing it. I believe that my analysis at several critical moments was quite accurate, and some of my predictions have been verified afterwards, 1. Several key judgments since the outbreak of the situation in Iran: 1) On March 1st and 2nd, here is https://(((((((x.com))))/qinbufark/status/2028343749873668349? S=46&t=k6rimWs Ebo2D2TXolYcM-A Talks about: After the death of Khamenei, Iran's hardliners will take the lead, and the situation may become more severe. The ultimate direction of the situation depends on the resistance will of Iran's hardliners. 2) On March 13th, here is https://(((((((x.com))))/qinbank/status/2032481443839160383? S=46&t=k6rimWsEbo2D2tXolYcM-A said: Trump was obviously in a dilemma at that time, would he accept it or would he go wild? He is very flexible and has various excuses and knowledge, but this obvious failure is probably something he cannot accept. So going berserk and increasing attacks became an inevitable option. It cannot be assumed that Trump has no cards. He still has many cards to play. That night, the US military bombed Halk Island. 4) On March 14th, here is https://((((((x.com)))/bitcoinfor0637/status/2044566866052386836? S=46&t=k6rimWsEbo2D2tXolYcM-A proposed a concept several days earlier than Dario, which is the "Suez Canal Moment" of the United States. At that time, we talked about (see Figure 1 below) that Iran was very tough, but actually forced Trump to be more tough. Intensify efforts to bomb Iran's military facilities, military industrial enterprises, and even key civilian facilities such as power grids, ports, and oil fields. It is possible to hurt Iran and then negotiate a better condition from the perspective of the United States. And it is also explicitly mentioned that Iran has many practical constraints, such as economic sustainability issues, regime stability issues, etc. All of these are prerequisites that can be achieved through negotiations. 5) On March 20th, here is https://((((((x.com))))/qinbank/status/2034957766415327586? When it comes to further weakening Iran's power, there are still talks about hurting Iran. 6) On April 1st, here is https://((((((x.com))))/qinbafrank/status/2039168223208468580? S=46&t=k6rimWs Ebo2D2TXolYcM-A proposes the baseline scenario of promoting negotiations and conditional cooperation. Looking back at the assessment made in March regarding the situation in Iran: At the beginning of the war, the killing of Ayatollah Khamenei did not mean that the situation was over, but rather that it was becoming more severe; In the medium term, when Trump is in trouble, he doesn't think he will give in, but will be stronger. Proposed the views of radical escalation, Taino model, and using violence to promote dialogue; Subsequently, it was suggested that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, facing constraints on economic sustainability and political stability, could potentially negotiate a more dignified outcome for the US in order to facilitate talks. 2. Now that these predictions and deductions have been basically validated, what is the core framework? 1) Requires objectivity and comprehensiveness Geopolitical conflicts and games are influenced by many factors. It is easy for people to put in many personal preferences, such as being very disgusted with Trump, and also being very disgusted with Iran. It is difficult to be objective when there is a personal emotional color inside. We need to comprehensively examine all publicly available information, evaluate the true direction, and understand the demands of several parties. 2) Do not extrapolate linearly The United States, with its strong power, believes that it can quickly win like Venezuela, ignoring the fact that Iran and Venezuela have completely different political systems. Iran controls the partial asymmetric advantage, so it thinks that Trump and the United States are helpless, ignoring that Trump still has cards to play, and ignoring the strong practical constraints and restrictions within Iran. Last year, the tariff station Trump TACO was effective. It was believed that Trump's unilateral TACO was also effective in this year's Iran war, ignoring that the war requires mutual concessions and joint TACO. 3) From the perspective of game theory To understand the changes in mentality of both parties: Trump was arrogant in the early period of the Iran War and believed that he would make a quick decision. But soon he fell into a dilemma and understood the change in his mentality: no longer seeking regime change, he would withdraw in order to obtain a dignified result, but he would not blindly back down if the result was not dignified; After Khamenei's death, the Iranian hardliners came to power and controlled the asymmetric advantage through the Strait of Hormuz. But with the escalation of Trump's rampage and constant attacks, the Iranian hardliners should also take into account the domestic economic sustainability and political stability; Nowadays, geopolitical conflicts have long exceeded the scope of seizing land, population, and resources. Infrastructure and industrial facilities have become the focus of both sides in the game, and financial and public opinion wars are also the main battlefields. In this situation, both parties will not die endlessly. Trump's rampage escalates in order to get a decent result in order to escape; Iran's tough stance is aimed at gaining sufficient living space. So this is the foundation of conditional union. 4) Pay attention to the dynamic changes in the strength and mentality of both parties The US military is strong, and the narrow Strait of Hormuz does not provide Iran with an advantageous pivot for control. Iran is tough, but it cannot withstand the continuous bombing by the US military. After all, the country has been bombed to pieces and there is a possibility of its own collapse. In essence, neither side wants to waste it for a long time. 3. Of course, I'm not entirely right either 1) On March 31st, here is https://((((((x.com))))/qinbafrank/status/203880464118672221? S=46&t=k6rimWSEbo2D2TXolYcM-A I am also worried that the spring market will turn into a summer market, and if the situation escalates, the market will continue to be under pressure. Looking back now, that day was actually the starting point of the market's counterattack. My opinion on the 'Spring Robbery Market' has been raised since early February 2) The point that made me change is here: On April 1st, here is https://((((((x.com))))/qinbufark/status/2039143388503744701? S=46&t=k6rimWsEbo2D2tXolYcM-A talked about the possibility that Trump is ready to win the narrative. 3) Then on April 3rd, it was mentioned in Space that many targets in the US stock market have entered the high cost performance range, and the US is the first in terms of fundamentals. Actually, we can ignore the overall market and start buying now Then on the early morning of April 8th, both sides truly backed down and agreed to negotiate. On that day, here is https://((((((x.com)))/qinbufark/status/2041776052167483750? S=46&t=k6rimWSEbo2D2TXolYcM-A explicitly states that with the end of the 'spring market crash', it is highly likely that negotiations will be facilitated and conditional deals will be reached. Trump still has a time constraint, which will be seen by the market in the future, and the impact of the war itself on the market will begin to diminish. At that time, they also gave me sectors and stocks that I was optimistic about, and basically, they have been the best performing sectors in the past week. If there is such a judgment on that day, quickly add back the position. The core points are: 1) The fundamental factors that affect the US stock market come first, while macro and geopolitical factors are only second; We must have a fundamental perspective, and once the stock price enters the high cost-effectiveness range, we can gradually build positions;