월가, AI 방어 붐으로 엉뚱한 사람들에게 돈을 건네려 한다

THE DAILY H.E.A.T. Torching Wall Street’s Obsolete Playbook. Delivered straight to your inbox 5 days a week. Subscribe Home Posts Wall Street Is About to Pay the Wrong People for the AI Defense Boom Wall Street Is About to Pay the Wrong People for the AI Defense Boom On December 22, the FCC quietly started a $25B replacement cycle. Three weeks later, the Pentagon picked its drone suppliers. None of them were Lockheed, Northrop, or RTX. May 1, 2026 I’ve been a trader and investor for 44 years. I left Wall Street long ago—-once I understood that their obsolete advice is designed to profit them, not you. Today, my firm manages around $4 billion in ETFs, and I don’t answer to anybody. I tell the truth because trying to fool investors doesn’t help them, or me. In Daily H.E.A.T. , I show you how to Hedge against disaster, find your Edge, exploit Asymmetric opportunities, and ride major Themes before Wall Street catches on. Table of Contents H.E.A.T. News vs. Noise: What’s Moving Markets Today ETF News In Case You Missed It H.E.A.T. The Pentagon just rewrote the rulebook on how it buys war. Three small-cap suppliers are positioned to capture a $25B annual market the primes are structurally locked out of — and the FCC's December 22 ruling already started the clock. Supplier Insurrection (noun): a procurement shift in which the growth dollars in defense move from prime-led platforms to the mid-tier manufacturers and component ecosystems that can ship cheap autonomous systems at scale. On December 22, 2025, the Federal Communications Commission did something the Pentagon had been trying to do for half a decade. With a single Covered List action, the FCC blocked every new foreign-made drone — and the batteries, motors, controllers, autopilots, and cameras that go inside them — from receiving U.S. equipment authorization. Existing drones remain authorized for now. New ones cannot be imported, marketed, or sold. DJI controls roughly 75% of the U.S. drone market. The American Security Drone Act, already on the books, requires every federal grant recipient to retire covered-country drones by late 2027. The math is closed-loop: a multi-billion-dollar replacement cycle, a hard deadline, and a federal Blue UAS Cleared List of approved suppliers that can be counted on two hands. Three weeks later, the Department of War (the Pentagon's redesignated name under Executive Order 14347) announced the first 25 vendors selected for its Drone Dominance program — a $1B initiative with a stated procurement target of 300,000-plus one-way attack drones over two years. Not one of them was Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, or RTX. This is not an oversight. It is the structural shape of the next defense build cycle, and it is the contrarian setup of the year. Here is the mechanism in one sentence: the primes are optimized for cost-plus contracts, exquisite single-platform programs, and decade-long acquisition cycles. The new war is optimized for fixed-price commercial-item economics, Other Transaction (OT) authorities, and six-month iterative production. That shift does not just change what the Pentagon buys. It changes who can qualify to build it. And the suppliers who qualify are not on any defense ETF's top-10 holdings list. The private competitors most threatening to the primes — Anduril, Shield AI, Skydio, Saronic — are not investable through public markets. They have collectively raised over $10B in venture capital and are already winning marquee programs. So the trade is not "buy the disruptors." The trade is to buy the publicly traded chokepoints that benefit from the same procurement shift the disruptors are riding: NDAA-compliant drone manufacturers, hypersonics test infrastructure, low-cost propulsion, and the commercial-item counter-drone systems already on government price lists. The legacy primes are about to lose the AI defense story to companies one-tenth their size — and the market hasn't repriced either side. THE CONSENSUS TRADE IS WRONG Open any defense ETF. The top holdings are Lockheed, RTX, Northrop, General Dynamics, L3Harris, Boeing. The pitch is straightforward: defense budgets are rising, geopolitical tension is structural, the primes own the integration capability, therefore the primes capture the spending. The pitch is wrong on the most important variable. The primes don't capture the spending — not the spending that's growing fastest. The FY26 defense budget is the cleanest evidence yet, and it's hiding in plain sight in the DoD Comptroller's own line items. Total request: $961.6B, up 13.4% year over year. That's the headline. The composition is the story. Investment accounts (procurement plus RDT&E) rise to $384.3B — 40% of the total, the highest investment share in the historical series. RDT&E alone goes from $141.4B to $179.1B, a 26.7% jump in a single year. Inside that envelope, the Pentagon broke out three line items for the first time. Autonomy: $13.4B. A dedicated category for autonomous and remotely operated systems that didn't exist as a discrete number a year ago. Counter-unmanned systems (C-UAS, the systems that detect and defeat hostile drones): $3.187B, up 42% over FY25. Hypersonics (weapons and defenses operating above Mach 5): established as its own mission area in the Weapons Book. First time in history. These are not cosmetic disclosures. They are the procurement architecture for what comes next. And the architecture is purpose-built to bypass the prime contracting model. $13.4B FY26 AUTONOMY LINE │ NEW BREAKOUT +42% YoY GROWTH IN C-UXS BUDGET 300,000+ DRONE PROCUREMENT TARGET BY 2027 Sources: DoD Comptroller, FY26 Program Acquisition Costs by Weapon System (July 2025); Department of War Drone Dominance memorandum. WHY THE PRIMES ARE STRUCTURALLY LOCKED OUT The legacy primes built their businesses around two things: cost-plus development contracts and exquisite single-platform programs. A cost-plus contract caps the contractor's pricing at cost plus a fixed fee. An exquisite program — a B-21, an F-35, a Virginia-class submarine — runs on decade-long timelines, multi-billion-dollar unit costs, and program management cultures designed for low volume and high reliability. That model worked for three generations of great-power posture. It does not work for what Iran demonstrated against the UAE in late 2025, when roughly 1,400 one-way attack drones launched in a single week. The interceptor math is brutal: a Patriot missile costs hundreds of thousands of dollars; the incoming drone costs under $50,000. You cannot defend a base, a city, or a fleet with $400,000 interceptors against a $40,000 swarm. The category collapses on cost. The Pentagon understands this. Its response was not to ask the primes to build cheaper interceptors. Its response was to invent a parallel acquisition architecture that bypasses the prime model entirely. THE NEW ACQUISITION ARCHITECTURE Other Transaction agreements replace traditional Major Defense Acquisition Programs. Six-month iterative procurement cycles replace decade-long ones. Commercial-item pricing replaces cost-plus. Stated production targets are written in units, not dollars: 300,000 small drones by 2027, with a goal of equipping every Army squad with one-way attack drones by end of FY26. Replicator 1, the Pentagon's first attempt, fielded "hundreds, not thousands" of attritable autonomous systems by its August 2025 deadline — against an original goal of multiple thousands. The procurement process worked. The industrial base couldn't keep up. That shortfall is what tells you exactly which suppliers are about to receive a tidal wave of contracts: the ones with purpose-built manufacturing capacity for attritable systems at commercial-item economics. There are not many of them. Several are private (Anduril, Shield AI, Skydio, Saronic). The publicly traded specialists who fit the profile can be counted on one hand. Cost-plus is dying. Commercial-item is winning. The supplier with the lowest manufacturing cost — not the deepest integration capability — captures this cycle. — Editorial mental model, Tech & Capital THE THREE-TIER FRAMEWORK The companies competing for this demand do not form one peer group. They cluster into three tiers, each with different capital structures, manufacturing footprints, and customer access. The framework matters because it explains where the next leg of returns comes from — and where it doesn't. Tier 1 — The Primes. Lockheed, Northrop, RTX, General Dynamics, L3Harris, Boeing, BAE. They will continue to capture the largest absolute share of the defense budget. They cannot grow revenue faster than the low- to mid-single-digit rates consensus already gives them, because they are not competitive in the categories where the budget is growing fastest. Their cost structures, labor bases, and program cultures were optimized for a different war. Tier 2 — The Defense-Tech Disruptors. Anduril, Shield AI, Skydio, Saronic, Castelion, Ursa Major, X-Bow, Helsing. Collectively they have raised over $10B in venture capital. Anduril already won prime contractor on Collaborative Combat Aircraft Increment 1. The problem for public-market investors is direct: you cannot buy them. Their eventual public listings will validate the addressable market, but until then, exposure has to come somewhere else. Tier 3 — The Mid-Tier Specialists. This is where the trade lives. AeroVironment, Kratos Defense, Red Cat Holdings, plus adjacent names like Mercury Systems, Teledyne, and Leonardo DRS. Below the primes in scale and integration breadth, but above the venture-backed disruptors in manufacturing infrastructure, security clearances, past performance, and existing customer relationships. They own intellectual property. They have factories that already exist. And they have the Blue UAS Cleared List certification or the propulsion content position that the primes structurally cannot replicate fast enough to matter. This is the tier that captures the cycle. Three names anchor it. THREE NAMES. THREE MEGA TRENDS. ONE SETUP. AeroVironment (AVAV) — Mega Trend 2: The Commercial-Item Transition. AVAV's $4.1B acquisition of BlueHalo, closed May 2025, restructured what the company is. The old AVAV was Switchblade loitering munitions. The new AVAV is loitering munitions plus directed energy (LOCUST), counter-UAS (Titan), laser communications, and cyber. The investment thesis is that BlueHalo's products were trapped under cost-plus contracts that constrained pricing and prevented production scale. AVAV is now applying its proven Switchblade commercialization playbook: develop for commercial sale, scale production, sell at structurally higher margins. Titan is already being sold off a published price list to international customers, with capacity headed to a $500M run-rate this fiscal year. LOCUST X3 is production-ready at sub-$5 per shot and has been formally proposed for Golden Dome. Kratos Defense (KTOS) — Mega Trend 3: The Supplier-Led Build Cycle. KTOS sits in the exact spot the FY26 budget is funding. Hypersonics test infrastructure (the MACH-TB 2.0 contract, awarded in early 2026 at up to $1.45B over five years, is the largest contract in company history). Low-cost propulsion (the GEK-series engines developed with GE Aerospace are the propulsion content for both Anduril's Fury and General Atomics' YFQ-42A — meaning KTOS wins the Collaborative Combat Aircraft program, or CCA, the Pentagon's program to field uncrewed wingmen for crewed fighter jets, regardless of which prime takes the Increment 1 down-select). Tactical UAS, target drones, microwave electronics, satellite ground systems. Recent execution backs the thesis: 4Q25 government solutions organic growth was 22.2%, with defense rocket systems up 47.4%. Management exited 2025 with no debt and roughly $561M in cash, then raised another $1.3B in 1Q26 to fund capacity expansion. Red Cat Holdings (RCAT) — Mega Trend 1: The Chinese Drone Exit. The smallest of the three by revenue and the highest-multiple, but the cleanest catalyst-driven setup of the year. RCAT is fully NDAA-compliant and Blue UAS Cleared at the moment Chinese drones are being legislated and regulated out of the U.S. market. The Black Widow Group 2 (small tactical) drone is positioned for the U.S. Army's Short Range Reconnaissance program — known as SRR, the Army's primary procurement vehicle for squad- and platoon-level surveillance drones — with the Tranche 2 award expected in 2026. The Blue Ops unmanned surface vessel line provides a secondary growth vector with deliveries beginning in 2Q26 at roughly $700K per Variant 7 USV. Revenue is forecast to grow from $40.7M in 2025 to $282M in 2028 — a 91% CAGR — as the company captures share from a competitor that is being legislated out, not outcompeted. SIZING THE ADDRESSABLE MARKET Combining the three Mega Trends with appropriate netting for overlap, the FY26 U.S. defense procurement and RDT&E opportunity in the categories where AVAV, KTOS, and RCAT compete is approximately $20B–$25B annually, growing at high-single-digit to low-double-digit rates over five years. Combined FY26E revenue across the three names: approximately $3.3B. That is 13–17% of the addressable market, with a clear runway to capture more. The competitive risk is not the primes — it's the private competitors (Anduril, Shield AI, Skydio) who are also competing for that share. The point is that all of the names taking share are coming from the third tier or the venture-backed second tier. None of it is going to the primes. WINNERS TICKER / NAME SETUP WHY IT WINS TIER 1 — DIRECT BENEFICIARIES (BUY-RATED BY CLEAR STREET) AVAV — AeroVironment Mega Trend 2 anchor; $293 PT, ~40% upside BlueHalo commercialization; Titan to $500M run-rate; LOCUST sub-$5/shot KTOS — Kratos Defense Mega Trend 3 anchor; $82 PT MACH-TB 2.0 cements hypersonics franchise; GEK engines win CCA either way RCAT — Red Cat Holdings Mega Trend 1 anchor; $22 PT Cleanest NDAA-compliant Group 1-2 beneficiary of the DJI exit TIER 2 — ADJACENT SPECIALISTS MRCY — Mercury Systems Microwave electronics, secure compute Subsystem content into CJADC2 and tactical edge programs TDY — Teledyne Imaging, sensors, marine systems Diversified subsystem provider into autonomy and ISR DRS — Leonardo DRS Sensors, electro-optics, force protection Mid-tier integrator into Army modernization LHX — L3Harris Communications, RF, ISR Largest of the prime-adjacent names with real C-UAS exposure TIER 3 — PICKS-AND-SHOVELS (INDUSTRIAL BASE) GE — GE Aerospace Propulsion partner on KTOS GEK engines Indirect exposure through the propulsion content KTOS wins AIR — AAR Corp Aftermarket parts, supply chain logistics Sustainment economics scale with deployed fleet Note on tier construction: Tier 1 names are the three Buy-rated initiations from Clear Street and the cleanest direct expressions of the thesis. Tier 2 names are not necessarily Buy-rated; they are publicly traded specialists with credible exposure to subsystem content captured by the supplier-led build cycle. Tier 3 names provide indirect exposure through industrial-base economics rather than primary platform content. PRESSURE POINTS These are not failing businesses. They are companies whose multiples and growth profiles assume capture of the next defense cycle that the cycle's actual architecture does not support. The risk is timing and margin, not bankruptcy. TICKER / NAME PRESSURE MECHANISM MULTIPLE COMPRESSION RISK LMT — Lockheed Martin AI defense premium without AI defense growth Exquisite single-platform programs misaligned with attritable cycle NOC — Northrop Grumman B-21 carries the story; rest of book is cyclical Limited tactical UAS / C-UAS / hypersonics specialist content RTX — RTX Corp C-UAS positioning vulnerable to Titan, LOCUST Cost-plus interceptor model under structural pricing pressure GD — General Dynamics Ground vehicles + IT services dominate revenue Minimal exposure to the line items growing fastest BA — Boeing Defense MQ-25 is exception; rest of mix is legacy Tanker and rotorcraft drag offset autonomous platform wins CHANNEL & COMPONENT EXPOSURE DJI distribution channel Federal grant phase-out by late 2027 Closed-loop replacement demand transfers to NDAA-compliant suppliers U.S. firms with hidden DJI components Audit risk under FCC component coverage Batteries and motors now in scope; not just airframes BEAR CASE WHAT BREAKS THE THESIS Continuing resolution risk. FY26 includes $113.3B in mandatory funding from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act reconciliation. Disruption to that mandatory tranche, or a full-year continuing resolution, freezes new program starts and slows the procurement velocity all three Mega Trends depend on. A partial CR is a base-case risk; a full-year CR is a tail risk. Either compresses the timeline. Enforcement workarounds on Chinese drones. The closed-loop replacement signal depends on the FCC Covered List and ASDA being enforced as written. The historical pattern with technology restrictions is that determined adversaries find workarounds — licensing arrangements with U.S.-domiciled assemblers, third-country routing, component-level substitution. If DJI maintains meaningful U.S. market access through such arrangements, RCAT's thesis weakens materially. Industrial base capacity bottleneck. Replicator 1 fielded "hundreds, not thousands" against a multi-thousand goal. The Drone Dominance Program's stated targets — 30,000 drones by July 2026, 200,000-plus by 2027 — push against the same industrial base. If specialists like KTOS, AVAV, and RCAT cannot scale capacity at the pace the procurement demand requires, the budget growth flows to private competitors with venture-backed manufacturing investments. Commercial-item pricing compression. Once a category transitions to commercial-item pricing, competitive pressure can compress margins faster than volume scaling supports. If Anduril, RTX, or another competitor introduces counter-UAS or directed energy at materially lower price points than Titan or LOCUST, the AVAV margin recovery thesis weakens. The supplier with the lowest manufacturing cost wins — and that is not guaranteed to be the incumbent specialist. Private-market capture. Anduril, Shield AI, and Skydio collectively raised over $10B and have already won marquee programs — Anduril took prime on CCA Increment 1, and Skydio is a direct competitor to Black Widow on the Army's SRR Tranche 2. Continued displacement of public peers by venture-backed competitors does not invalidate the Mega Trends, but it reduces the publicly traded supplier base's share of the addressable market. Valuation risk on above-peer multiples. Tier 3 trades at premiums to the prime layer that are justified by faster expected revenue growth. If revenue growth moderates toward low double digits, or if EBITDA margins remain stuck rather than expanding, multiples could compress meaningfully even with the core thesis intact. This risk is most acute for RCAT, where the 91% CAGR depends on near-term execution against a steep ramp. FIVE TAKEAWAYS 1. The defense build cycle is supplier-led, not prime-led. FY26 broke out autonomy ($13.4B), C-UXS ($3.187B, +42% YoY), and hypersonics as discrete categories for the first time. The procurement architecture — Other Transactions, six-month cycles, commercial-item pricing — is purpose-built to bypass the prime model. 2. The DJI exit is a closed-loop replacement signal with a hard 2027 deadline. FCC Covered List action (Dec 2025) plus ASDA phase-out forces a $4–5B annual replacement market into NDAA-compliant suppliers. The Blue UAS Cleared List functions as an effective oligopoly for the next two procurement cycles. 3. Three names map to three Mega Trends with no overlap. RCAT is the cleanest Mega Trend 1 expression (DJI replacement). AVAV is the cleanest Mega Trend 2 expression (commercial-item C-UAS / directed energy). KTOS is the cleanest Mega Trend 3 expression (specialist content capture across hypersonics, propulsion, tactical UAS). 4. The combined addressable market is $20–25B annually; the three names address $3.3B today. That is 13–17% of the FY26 opportunity, with combined revenue forecast to grow from $1.86B in FY24 to $5.51B in FY28 — a 31% CAGR. Tier 3 multiples (4x–6x EV/Sales) reflect this growth profile and trade at justified premiums to primes (1.7x–3.2x). 5. The bear case is real and dated. Continuing-resolution risk compresses execution timelines. Enforcement workarounds dilute the DJI exit. Industrial-base bottlenecks transfer share to venture-backed competitors. Commercial-item pricing compression erodes margin recovery. None of these break the structural thesis. All of them can compress the path. WHAT TO WATCH NEXT Five concrete signposts over the next four quarters will tell you whether this thesis is converting from budget architecture to realized supplier revenue. Watch the order of magnitude — and watch which side of the trade is moving. ☐ Contract vehicle wins. Specifically OT (Other Transaction) agreements, IDIQ task orders, and Drone Dominance Gauntlet II-IV vendor selections. The structural shift fails quietly if awards keep flowing through traditional MDAP processes instead of the new fast-cycle vehicles. ☐ Backlog and production capacity commentary. On the next AVAV, KTOS, and RCAT earnings calls, watch for unit-volume guidance and capex disclosures. Titan to a $500M run-rate, Black Widow to 1,000 units/month by 2H26, KTOS hypersonic franchise to ~$400M in 2026 — these are the disclosures that confirm or undermine the ramp. ☐ Unit economics and gross margin trajectory. Commercial-item pricing only works if margin holds as volume scales. RCAT gross margins moving from ~3% (2025) toward ~13% (2028E) is the cleanest single test. AVAV EBITDA margin recovery from 14.5% (FY26E) toward 17.9% (FY28E) is the second. ☐ Policy enforcement on the China exit. FCC implementation rules expected in 1H26. Watch for any signal that licensing arrangements with U.S.-domiciled assemblers, third-country routing, or component-level workarounds are being tolerated. If they are, RCAT's thesis dilutes. ☐ FY27 President's Budget Request. Expected 1H26. The autonomy line breakout, the C-UXS line increase, and the hypersonics mission-area structure either get sustained, expanded, or quietly walked back. This is the single largest test of whether the FY26 architecture was a directional shift or a one-time disclosure event. The primes will not lose money on the next defense cycle. They will lose the story. The market is paying them the multiples that belong to the suppliers, and the suppliers are still trading like yesterday's contractors. That mispricing is the trade. Space Exposure Designed For Potential Weekly Payouts The space economy is no longer just a government program — it’s becoming part of a global industry that is gradually advancing. But why view long-term growth as the only potential path forward? SPCI seeks to offer approximately 100% concentrated exposure to the space industry while striving to generate weekly income through a disciplined put credit spread options strategy. Gain exposure to the “final frontier” and a potential weekly distribution while you wait for the theme to play out. Discover SPCI. Distributor: Foreside Fund Services | Investing involves risk including possible loss of principle. News vs. Noise: What’s Moving Markets Today We talk a lot here about finding bottlenecks. Find the what’s holding back progress, find the companies that solve the problem, make lots of money. Mag 7 earnings this week have given you some clues….. THE NOISE The financial media spent yesterday breathlessly tallying scoreboard. Four hyperscalers beat. Alphabet ripped 10%. Meta cratered 8%. Microsoft down 4%. Amazon flat. Cue the "Mag 7 is fracturing" headlines, the "AI bubble" hot takes, and Gary Marcus calling $700 billion the "greatest capital misallocation in history." Pundits are recycling the 2000 dot-com playbook — pointing at collapsing free cash flow, jumbo bond issuances, and capex doubling year over year as obvious red flags. The narrative is that investors are finally "waking up" to AI overspending and that Alphabet was the lone adult in the room. THE SIGNAL This isn't a story about AI bubble fears. It's a story about who controls the pricing power in the AI stack — and the market just told you. Alphabet ran away with it because Google Cloud printed 63% growth with a $460 billion backlog and tripled its cloud operating profit. That's not capex faith — that's capex converting. Meta got punished because it's the only hyperscaler without a public cloud to rent infrastructure back out, meaning every dollar of that $125-145 billion has to be monetized through ads alone. JPMorgan figured this out fast and downgraded it Thursday. Microsoft and Amazon weren't punished for spending — they were punished for not yet showing Alphabet-level conversion velocity. The deeper signal nobody's saying out loud: the capex supercycle is transferring value down the stack. $700 billion flowing out of hyperscaler FCF has to land somewhere — and it's landing in memory (Apple just told you costs are going "significantly higher"), advanced nodes (TSMC), custom silicon, power infrastructure, and the photonics/HBM supply chain. Apple's call was the tell of the week, not the hyperscaler prints. When the most disciplined cash machine on earth abandons its net-cash-neutral target after eight years and warns about memory costs through 2027, that's your confirmation that the bottleneck — and the margin — has moved. Takeaways for readers: Stop treating the Mag 7 as a monolith. The market just bifurcated them into "AI monetizers" (GOOGL, AMZN, MSFT) and "AI spenders" (META). Own them differently or don't own them at all. The real trade is one layer down. Memory, advanced nodes, power, and photonics are where $700 billion of hyperscaler capex actually lands. That's where pricing power is right now — not at the model layer Marcus is correctly calling commoditized. Watch FCF conversion, not capex headlines. Amazon's FCF down 95% scares retail; the $460 billion Google Cloud backlog tells you why institutions don't care. Backlog growth is the only number that matters next quarter. Apple's memory warning is the canary. If Tim Cook is flagging "significantly higher" memory costs into 2027, the supply-chain squeeze isn't a quarter-long blip — it's a multi-year pricing regime for memory names. What Iran Tells Us About UFO Disclosure When governments confront unknown threats in their airspace, defense budgets surge and the same aerospace and surveillance companies move hardest. On March 2nd, Northrop jumped 6% and Lockheed 3.3% on the Iran news — and President Trump has since ordered the formal release of government UAP files, with the Pentagon confirming compliance. So if a conventional conflict can move these stocks this fast, what happens when the bigger story breaks? See the UFOD holdings: [thetruthisoutthereufod.com ETF News A Stock I’m Watching $AVAV ( ▼ 5.15% ) Finding some support in that 180 area, a couple of undercut and rally moves as well. You’d like to see it break back above the 50 day moving average. In Case You Missed It Great talk on with the Acquirers Podcast on markets, value investing, inverse Cramer, and Michael Gayed joins me to talk about taking income from your portfolio and how to get more than 4%…… The H.E.A.T. (Hedge, Edge, Asymmetry and Theme) Formula is designed to empower investors to spot opportunities, think independently, make smarter (often contrarian) moves, and build real wealth. The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the Chief Executive Officer and Portfolio Manager for Tuttle Capital Management (TCM) and are subject to change without notice. The data and information provided is derived from sources deemed to be reliable but we cannot guarantee its accuracy. Investing in securities is subject to risk including the possible loss of principal. Trade notifications are for informational purposes only. TCM offers fully transparent ETFs and provides trade information for all actively managed ETFs. TCM's statements are not an endorsement of any company or a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security. Trade notification files are not provided until full trade execution at the end of a trading day. The time stamp of the email is the time of file upload and not necessarily the exact time of the trades. TCM is not a commodity trading advisor and content provided regarding commodity interests is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as a recommendation. Investment recommendations for any securities or product may be made only after a comprehensive suitability review of the investor’s financial situation.© 2026 Tuttle Capital Management, LLC (TCM). TCM is a SEC-Registered Investment Adviser. All rights reserved. Keep Reading Apr 13, 2026 • 20 min read Value Investing Is Dead. Meet HALO Apr 16, 2026 • 11 min read How to Find Tomorrow's 10-Bagger Before Wall Street Does Apr 24, 2026 • 9 min read The Robot Has a Body Problem View more 7