This methodology has many applicability in investment, and the most important thing is that I need to be aware of it clearly at all times: Good assets ≠ good prices ≠ good positions ≠ always correct! This is the problem of defining good assets. How to define good assets? Everyone is different, and we cannot copy homework or carve a boat for a sword. Because what I currently consider a good asset may not be suitable for your allocation, it's not that this asset is bad, but rather that it's not good for you within the framework of the conditions. For example, when some friends ask me if I should buy Bitcoin, I mostly refuse because their perception and current asset allocation do not constitute a condition for buying Bitcoin, so Bitcoin is a bad asset for them, not Bitcoin itself. So the size of any asset's position should be determined by the combination of "asset opportunity x personal conditions", rather than just how optimistic you are about it. Put it in another specific situation, For example, the misconception of many people that they will replenish their positions when the price drops is also a big mistake. It must be that the price has fallen and the first fact has not changed or even improved in order to replenish the position. For example, semiconductors and storage are known to be the best investment targets during the AI explosion period, in line with the long-term trend and my definition of good assets. However, because the current prices are too expensive, I may not be able to sleep after buying them, so I won't buy any. There is another scenario where investing is particularly prone to one thing: For example, when I bought HYPE and saw a 30% increase after purchase, I said, 'I made the right judgment. I'm really awesome, isn't that right?'? Not necessarily right! Perhaps it's just a market beta. Conversely, if I buy Ethereum and it drops by 30% in three months, it doesn't necessarily prove me wrong. This judgment is contradictory. The review of investment cannot only focus on P&L, but must also review whether the process is correct. For example, I thought demand would increase at the time, but did demand really increase later on? I think the profits of a certain company will increase. Has the profit increased? I think the market underestimates a certain asset. Has the valuation difference converged? If the logic is wrong but the money is earned, it is a bad decision+good luck. If the logic is correct but temporarily losing money, it may be a good decision+short-term bad luck. What truly needs to be optimized in the long run is the quality of decision-making, not a single win or loss. Finally, a trading system should be established: Starting from the goal → Fact → Cause and effect → Conditions → Position → Verification → Correction → Return to the target. In summary, Do not hold heavy positions due to optimism, and do not replenish positions due to a decline; Bet solely based on improved odds, matching conditions, and acceptable risk. Investment is not about proving oneself right, but about generating sufficient returns through correct judgments in an uncertain world, and allowing incorrect judgments to only pay limited tuition fees.