自从川普的关税暂缓开始，美股七巨头基本都收复了大部分失地，英伟达和微软甚至创出新高，只有特斯拉和苹果的表现令人十分无语。苹果是因为在AI的布局失误，错失了这波AI浪潮，它的一蹶不振可以说得过去，但可以称作未来AI应用最强公司的特斯拉，为什么没能一飞冲天呢？我们今天就来聊一聊这个“赛博”公司。特斯拉目前情况特斯拉的股价自2024年12月的历史高点479.86美元以来，股价已下跌约38% 。关税缓和后，从214回升到368，然而没能继续保持上升，在368和280之前疯狂波动，其中因素很多，我们一一来讲。首先特斯拉的老板马斯克，他是个远大目标的人，其不喜欢美政治家的虚伪，最开始希望通过火星移民计划建立世外桃源——后来发现远离解决不了问题，便支持川普以身入局——而后川普成功当选，他晋升“一字并肩王”主持政府效率部——再到打入冷宫——现在起身反抗成立“美国党”。马斯克这段起起伏伏的经历完全映射到了特斯拉的股价上，其政治立场引发的争议，确实影响了品牌的形象。但他对特斯拉有着久远的规划，而且正在一步一步的完成，具体我们后面讲，下面先讲一下特斯拉公司运营情况。一说起特斯拉，很多人的第一反应都是“全球电动汽车的龙头”，也确实电车业务是它目前的核心业务，占了总营收75%，同时它也有其他业务，这里我们以图表形式展示出来：

电车作为其核心业务，再把特斯拉的市场份额给大家呈现出来：

我们可以看出特斯拉电车的市场份额在逐渐下降，这是因为比亚迪等中国品牌在全球的份额持续增长，提供了更多样化和价格更具竞争力的车型 。竞争能力下降是股价表现不好的原因之一。但也不能仅凭当前核心业务在下行就否定特斯拉，况且他定位本身就不是汽车公司而是科技公司，前面说到马斯克对特斯拉有着长久的规划，特斯拉不会止步于此，它会是未来最强AI应用公司，下面且听我道来。为什么特斯拉可以被称为未来AI应用最强股首先大家有没有发现个很奇怪的现象，特斯拉车主有狂热的忠诚度，你问他们推荐什么电车，他们绝对会说特斯拉，甚至你不问都会给你推荐。拥有过特斯拉不像拥有了一辆车就像拥有了一个聪明的助手。特斯拉的自动驾驶技术完全自研，而且是基于视觉模型的自动驾驶。可能国内的朋友感受不到他的强大，因为这种自动驾驶需要现实路况记录进行训练，特斯拉很难获取国内的道路数据，所以体验不到它的满血版。自动驾驶FSD是AI最成熟的商业化场景之一，特斯拉已部署数百万辆车用于数据采集+训练闭环，每天海量数据可反哺AI模型，这是Waymo、百度Apollo等无法比拟的。可以理解为他在不停的进步，卖车的同时获得驾驶数据，反哺自动驾驶系统，这样会让他的自动驾驶系统越来越完美。并且凭借出色的自驾系统，特斯拉的无人驾驶出租车项目（Robotaxi）也已经在试运行，这也将是其未来的一大成长点。然后是马斯克的另一个布局——机器人。黄仁勋在最近一次的英伟达股东给大会上表示，人工智能和机器人技术有数万亿美元的市场机会。机器人的发展面临两个问题，一是视觉训练数据，二是储能问题。特斯拉毕竟在视觉训练已有起步，而且拥有自研芯片（Dojo），可以优化神经网络训练，摆脱对英伟达GPU的依赖，体现出其AI硬科技能力。特斯拉具备了机器人全产业链条整合能力，有AI算法，芯片，真实世界数据，能自主设计机器人，能通过自身供应链来制造Optimus机器人，从大脑到身体全部自己掌握，自己一个人就打通了整个产业链。这是特斯拉在机器人这个万亿市场的立足点。

特斯拉的叙事——科技公司不是汽车公司尽管特斯拉股价最近表现并不太好，但是之前购买特斯拉股票的小伙伴，不就是相信了特斯拉的故事吗？只要故事正在变成现实那就不要怕是“鬼故事”，坚定的相信就好。至于马斯克的政治立场，是可以短期波动特斯拉的股价，但影响不到特斯拉实打实的科技进步，也就影响不到特斯拉的根基。“最强的AI应用潜力股”，我们且看他的表现吧。免责声明：GO Markets 分析师或外部发言人提供的信息基于其独立分析或个人经验。所表达的观点或交易风格仅代表其个人；并不代表 GO Markets 的观点或立场。联系方式：墨尔本 03 8658 0603悉尼 02 9188 0418中国地区(中文） 400 120 8537中国地区(英文） +248 4 671 903作者：Mill Li | GO Markets 墨尔本中文部

Despite living through one of the most chaotic political and trade environments in recent history, the ASX 200 delivered its strongest performance since the pandemic rally.The S&P/ASX 200 Index gained 9.97% in capital growth and 13.81% in total returns, hitting a record high of 8,639.1 points in June.While Trump's tariff announcements caused dramatic market swings — including the ASX plunging nearly 500 points on "Liberation Day" — Australian markets weathered the storm and managed to rally before the financial year end.The rally was driven primarily by heavyweight banks like Commonwealth Bank and Westpac, with CBA alone responsible for nearly half the index's gains.However, the performance was not uniform across all sectors — five of the 11 ASX market sectors actually lost value during the financial year.

Sector Performance Rankings

Financials

The ASX 200 financials sector was the top-performing market sector of FY25, with the Financials Index rising by 24.45% and delivering total returns including dividends of 29.39%.Sector Champion: Despite Commonwealth Bank's headline-grabbing 45% rise that captured most investor attention, it was retirement and general investment solutions provider, Generation Development Group (ASX: GDG), that led the sector with a rise of 114% in FY25.

Technology - AI Boom Continues

The Information Technology Index rose by 23.89% and provided a total return of 24.19%.Sector Champion: TechnologyOne outperformed both its FY24 and 1H25 earnings expectations — 9.8% and 11.3% on each result respectively. ASX:TNE rose 121% during FY25 to close at $41.01.

Communications

The Communications Index gained 23.4% for the year.Sector Champion:EVT topped the communication leaderboard in FY25. The stock has largely traded nowhere since 2015, but found some momentum thanks to a bump in earnings from its cinema business, with the stock rising 41%.

Industrials

The Industrials Index gained 22% during FY25.Sector Champion: Qantas Airways (ASX:QAN) shares rose 84% to close at $10.74. Lower jet fuel prices, strong international and domestic pricing, and capacity growth gave investors renewed confidence in the leading Australian airline.

Consumer Discretionary

The Consumer Discretionary Index rose 18% for the year.Sector Champion: Temple & Webster Group (ASX:TPW) dominated the sector with a 127% gain to $21.32. Improved consumer sentiment and strong sales saw the e-commerce furniture company capitalise on momentum, especially in its home improvement and B2B categories.

Real Estate & REITs

The Real Estate Index gained 10% despite volatile bond yields throughout the year.Sector Champion: Charter Hall Group (ASX:CHC) was the sector leader — closing the financial year 72% higher at $19.19 per share.[caption id="attachment_712086" align="alignnone" width="1101"]

Top-performing sectors in FY25[/caption]

Utilities

The Utilities Index fell 1.6%.Sector Champion: APA Group (ASX:APA) managed a modest 2.3% gain in FY25, but managed to come out above its peers as the sector's best performer.

Consumer Staples

The Consumer Staples Index declined 2.1%.Sector Champion: Bega Cheese (ASX:BGA) led the sector with a 28% gain, backing up its strong FY24 results.

Healthcare

The Healthcare Index fell 5.99% despite some individual standouts.Sector Champion: Sigma Healthcare's merger with Chemist Warehouse created one of the biggest rallies of the year. As the merger gained clarity, the stock's potential inclusion in the S&P/ASX 200 drove strong buying from investors. Sigma (ASX:SIG) gained 135% to close at $2.99.

Materials

The second-worst sector was materials, with the Materials Index dropping 6.04%. Sector Champion: Despite sector struggles, gold miner Regis Resources (ASX:RRL) ascended 150% to close at $4.39, benefiting from rising gold prices.

Energy - The Year's Biggest Loser

The worst-performing ASX sector was energy, with the Energy Index falling 13.52%. Influences largely by the sector's largest stock — Woodside Energy Group — crumbling by 16%, closing at $23.66. Sector Champion: Uranium explorer Deep Yellow (ASX:DYL) stood out in the struggling sector with a 25% gain.[caption id="attachment_712087" align="alignleft" width="1051"]

Worst-performing sectors in FY25[/caption]

Looking Ahead

The results of FY25 tell a simple story: execution matters more than sector. Technology and financials thrived because the best companies in these sectors did what they said they would do. Energy and materials struggled because many companies in these sectors are fighting structural headwinds, not just cyclical ones. The market is becoming more about which companies to back, rather than which sectors to back. Looking forward to FY26, this pattern could become even more pronounced as geopolitical tensions and trade wars see market uncertainty become the norm rather than the exception.

在海啸来临之前，最前端的波浪往往会形成一个低压波，导致海水被向外拉走，呈现出短暂的退潮现象。此时，海面看似风平浪静、海浪减弱，实则是一场巨大浪潮的前奏，正在暗中积蓄力量。TradingView上有一个技术指标正是基于这种原理设计的。它由知名交易员John Carter创造，旨在识别波动率收缩之后的爆发性行情，通过结合布林带与Keltner通道的特性，精准捕捉趋势启动前的蓄势阶段。这个指标被命名为 挤压动量指标（Squeeze Momentum Indicator），并已成为 TradingView 上点赞数最多的技术指标。

接下来，我们将深入解析这个指标的核心逻辑、实际用途与典型应用场景。挤压动量指标的核心逻辑是通过对布林带和Keltner通道的相对位置进行判断，从而识别市场是否处于波动率压缩状态。当布林带的上下轨收窄，并且整体位于Keltner通道的上下轨之内时，表明市场波动性极低，处于所谓的挤压状态。在这种情况下，多空双方处于短暂均衡，但价格随时可能因资金推动或消息驱动而突破平衡区间，引发强趋势行情。当布林带重新张开，并突破Keltner通道的边界时，说明挤压解除，市场进入动量释放阶段。这一压缩到爆发的过程，正是挤压动量指标用来捕捉关键入场时机的核心逻辑。

布林带的计算方法基于统计标准差。其中心线为一定周期（通常为 20）的简单移动平均线（SMA），上下轨分别为该均线加减两倍标准差。具体计算为：中轨 = SMA(20)，上轨 = SMA(20) + 2 × 标准差，下轨 = SMA(20) − 2 × 标准差。标准差反映的是价格在一定时间窗口内的波动程度，因此布林带在市场波动增强时会变宽，波动减弱时收窄。相比之下，Keltner 通道的构建是基于平均真实波幅（ATR），更注重价格的实际波动范围。其中心线通常是 20 日的指数移动平均线（EMA），上下轨分别为该均线加减 1.5 倍的 ATR。计算方式为：中轨 = EMA(20)，上轨 = EMA(20) + 1.5 × ATR(20)，下轨 = EMA(20) − 1.5 × ATR(20)。ATR 的计算以“真实波幅”（True Range, TR）为基础。具体来说，单日的 TR 是以下三者中的最大值：当日最高价减去最低价、当日最高价与前一日收盘价的差值（取绝对值）、以及当日最低价与前一日收盘价的差值（同样取绝对值）。这种计算方式不仅考虑了当日的价格波动，也将跳空缺口带来的剧烈波动纳入衡量范围。将过去若干周期（例如 20 日）的 TR 进行移动平均，便得到了 ATR 值。挤压动量指标的判定条件就是比较这两个通道的位置关系：当布林带的上轨低于 Keltner 上轨，且布林带下轨高于 Keltner 下轨时，即为“挤压开启”，意味着市场波动率达到低点；而当布林带的任何一条轨道重新突破 Keltner 通道的边界时，则被视为“挤压解除”。此外，该指标还会通过柱状图显示动量方向与强度，绿色代表上涨动能增强，红色则表示下跌动能增强，柱子的高度反映动能大小。尽管挤压动量指标因其独特的波动率收缩与动量判断逻辑在TradingView上收获了大量点赞和认可，但它并非万能。挤压动量指标在周期性较为明确、趋势延续性强的品种上表现出较高的准确率，例如一些主流货币对、指数或大宗商品。这些市场的波动节奏相对稳定，趋势启动和结束的信号更加清晰，使得通过波动率压缩捕捉突破的思路更加有效。然而，在那些价格经常出现快速反转、震荡频繁且缺乏明显趋势的品种上，挤压动量指标的准确率则相对较低。由于市场行情反复无常，挤压状态往往被多次反复触发，导致信号出现较多假突破，交易者可能会面临更多噪音和误判的风险。因此，单纯依赖该指标进行买卖决策时，需要结合其他工具或技术面进行辅助确认，以避免被频繁的波动干扰。事实上，TradingView社区中对挤压动量指标的大量点赞更多的是对其背后核心思想的认可。很多交易者欣赏它通过量化波动率变化，揭示潜在巨大波幅行情的思路，这种基于统计学和市场行为结合的计算方法满足了每个投资者对何时行情会爆发的根本关注。正是这份理念，让挤压动量指标成为了众多技术指标中极具启发性和实用价值的一员，值得交易者深入理解和灵活应用，而非盲目追求完美信号。联系方式：墨尔本 03 8658 0603悉尼 02 9188 0418中国地区(中文） 400 120 8537中国地区(英文） +248 4 671 903作者：Michael Miao | GO Markets 悉尼中文部

The ASX 200 closed out the 2025 financial year on a high, reaching a new intra-month peak of 8,592 in June and within touching distance of the all-time record. The index delivered a 1.4% total return for the month, rounding off a strong final quarter with a 9.5% return and locking in a full-year gain of 13.8% — its best performance since 2021.This strong finish all came down to the postponement of the Liberation Day tariffs. From the April 7 lows through to the end of the financial year, the ASX followed the rest of the world. Mid-cap stocks were the standout performers, beating both large and small caps as investors sought growth opportunities away from the extremes of the market. Among the sectors, Industrials outperformed Resources, benefiting from more stable earnings and supportive macroeconomic trends tied to infrastructure and logistics.But the clear winner was Financials, which contributed an incredible 921 basis points to the overall index return. CBA was clearly the leader here, dominating everything with 457 basis points on its own. Westpac, NAB, and others also played a role, but nothing even remotely close to CBA. The Industrials and Consumer Discretionary sectors made meaningful contributions, adding 176 and 153 basis points, respectively. While Materials, Healthcare, and Energy all lagged, each detracting around 45 to 49 basis points. Looking at the final quarter of the financial year, Financials were by far the biggest player again, adding 524 basis points — more than half the quarter’s total return of 9.5%. Apart from a slight drag from the Materials sector, all other parts of the market made positive contributions. Real Estate, Technology, and Consumer Discretionary followed behind as key drivers. Once again, CBA was the largest individual contributor, adding 243 basis points in the quarter, while NAB, WBC, and Macquarie Group added a combined 384 basis points. On the other side of the ledger, key underperformers included BHP, CSL, Rio Tinto, Treasury Wine Estates, and IDP Education, which all weighed on quarterly performance.One of the most defining features of the 2025 financial year was the dominance of price momentum as a market driver — something we as traders must be aware of. Momentum strategies far outpaced more traditional, fundamental-based approaches such as Growth, Value, and Quality. The most effective signal was a nine-month momentum measure (less the most recent month), which delivered a 31.2% long-short return. The more commonly used 12-month price momentum factor was also highly effective, returning 23.6%. By contrast, short-term reversals buying last month’s losers and selling last month’s winners was the worst-performing approach, with a negative 16.4% return. Compared to the rest of the world, the Australian market was one of the strongest trades for momentum globally, well ahead of both the US and Europe, despite its relatively slow overall performance.Note: these strategies are prone to reversal, and in the early days of the new financial year, there has been a notable shift away from momentum-based trading to other areas. Now is probably too early to say whether this marks a sustained change, but it cannot be ignored, and caution is always advised.The second big story of FY26 will be CBA. CBA’s growing influence was a key story of FY25. Its weight in the index rose by an average of 2.1 percentage points across the year, reaching an average of 11.5% by June. That helped push the spread between the Financials and Resources sectors to 15.8 percentage points — the widest gap since 2018. Despite the strong cash returns, market valuations are eye-watering; at one point during June, CBA became the world’s most expensive bank on price metrics. The forward price-to-earnings multiple now sits at 18.9 times. This is well above the long-term average of 14.7 and higher than the 10-year benchmark of 16.1. Meanwhile, the dividend yield has slipped to 3.4%, down from the historical average of 4.4%. Earnings momentum remains soft, with FY25 growth estimates still tracking at 1.4%, and FY26 forecast at a moderate 5.4%. This suggests that recent gains have come more from expanding valuation multiples than from actual earnings upgrades, making the August reporting date a catalyst day for it and, by its size, the market as a whole.On the macro front, attention now turns to the Reserve Bank of Australia. The central bank cut the cash rate by 25 basis points to 3.6% at its July meeting. Recent commentary from the RBA has taken on a more dovish tone, with benign inflation data and ongoing global uncertainty expected to outweigh the strength of the labour market. The RBA appears to be steering toward a neutral policy stance, and markets will be watching for further signals on how that shift will be managed. Recent economic data has been mixed. May retail sales were weaker than expected, while broader household spending indicators held up slightly better. Building approvals saw a smaller-than-hoped-for bounce, employment remains strong, but productivity is low. Inflation is now at a 3-year low and falling; all this points to underlying support from the RBA’s easing bias both now and into the first half of FY26.As we move into FY26, the key questions are:

1. Can fundamentals wrestle back control over momentum?
2. Will earnings growth catch up to price to justify valuations?
3. How will policy decisions from the RBA and other central banks shape investor sentiment in an ever-volatile world?

While the early signs suggest a possible rotation, the jury is still out on whether this marks a new phase for the Australian market or just a brief pause in the rally that defined FY25.

周一晚间，美股三大指数集体收跌，打破连日上涨节奏，市场情绪再度转向谨慎。尽管市场普遍预期关税暂停将获延长，但原本预测会延至9月的政策实际仅延至8月1日，较预期提前一个月，也引发市场对中长期贸易政策走向的再评估。与此同时，美国方面正式发布关税通知，对部分亚太及非洲国家的出口产品提升关税，包括对日韩征收25%，部分转运货物关税更高，对马来西亚、哈萨克斯坦、南非、老挝、缅甸等也有不同幅度的加征，未来48小时仍有更多消息公布。尽管欧盟方面释放出谈判进展的信号，但在关税延长期限确定的背景下，短期达成协议的可能性降低。在政策强刺激与关税不确定性交织的背景下，市场对通胀预期重燃。新一轮财政刺激计划预计将释放逾4万亿美元流动性，短期对股市构成支撑，但中长期则可能加剧资产价格波动，市场对“泡沫风险”的讨论升温。板块方面，科技与资源类板块整体回调，AI与量子计算个股普遍承压，特斯拉跌幅接近7%。不过，核能与清洁能源板块表现亮眼，OKLO连续三周回落后强势反弹，测试10周均线支撑成功，VST与CEG也维持稳健走势，铀矿巨头CCJ继续获机构资金青睐，中长期配置逻辑仍在强化。Image另一个亮点来自数字资产赛道。稳定币概念龙头Circle反弹近10%，重回200美元上方，月内有望迎来政策法案的明确进展，若顺利通过，或将成为板块下一轮行情的核心催化。技术形态上，Circle本轮回撤后已完成筑底，七月值得持续关注。商品方面，资源股随期货价格回落调整，铜、铝、稀土及新能源材料表现不佳。公共事业板块则展现出一定抗跌性，在大盘回撤中表现稳定。油价强劲反弹，黄金价格波动不大，市场恐慌指数小幅回升。汇市方面，美元指数反弹站上97关口，澳元兑美元虽短线承压，但日内快速回稳，仍守住0.65上方，美日汇率逼近146，美元兑人民币重新回到7.17之上。今日澳洲市场的焦点将转向澳联储利率决议。市场普遍预期将落地25基点的降息，若如期兑现，预计有望在下午推动股指反弹，特别是对地产、金融等利率敏感型板块形成支撑。联系方式：墨尔本 03 8658 0603悉尼 02 9188 0418中国地区(中文） 400 120 8537中国地区(英文） +248 4 671 903作者：Xavier Zhang | GO Markets 高级分析师

In the world of trading, few stories are as famous as the one behind the Turtle Traders. The Turtle experiment was simple in concept — could absolute beginners, given nothing but a set of rules and two weeks of training, beat the markets?The results of the experiment were extraordinary. Even today, four decades later, many of their principles still echo through our algorithm-dominated trading world.In this article, we’ll revisit the original Turtle strategy, examine how it worked, and explore how this legendary approach could be reimagined for modern traders.

Who Were the Turtles?

The Turtle Traders were the product of a famous bet between trading legend Richard Dennis and his partner William Eckhardt. Dennis believed that trading could be taught; Eckhardt thought that the ability to trade was a set of skills that you are born with. To settle the debate, Dennis placed an ad in the newspaper and selected a group of everyday individuals, none of whom had any prior trading experience.These recruits underwent a two-week crash course in trading, during which they were taught a complete, mechanical system. It was based on trend-following logic, relying on breakouts, strict entry and exit rules, and position sizing based on market volatility. The idea was simple — eliminate emotion, follow the rules, and let the trends do the work.The experiment was a runaway success. As a group, the Turtles reportedly achieved an average annual return of 80%, managing millions in capital and building one of the most talked-about trading systems in history.

Turtle Trading Rules and Instruments

Entry Rules:

The Turtles followed mechanical entry rules based on the concept of trading with the trend. The initial entry criteria were:

1. Enter a long position if the price breaks above the 20-day high.
2. Enter a short position if the price falls below the 20-day low.
3. For a more conservative approach, a second strategy of a 55-day breakout was used as an alternative.
4. Orders were placed using buy/sell stop orders triggered by the breakout.

Markets Traded:

The system was applied across a wide range of liquid futures markets:

• Currency Futures: EUR/USD, JPY/USD, GBP/USD, CHF/USD, CAD/USD
• Commodity Futures: Gold, Silver, Crude Oil, Heating Oil, Corn, Wheat, Soybeans, Sugar, Cocoa, Cotton
• Stock Index Futures: S&P 500, Nikkei 225, Dow Jones (DJIA)
• Interest Rate Futures: U.S. Treasury Bonds, Eurodollars

The Importance of Volatility:

They used the Average True Range (ATR) of a 20-days, termed “N”, in many of their calculations to account for the impact of volatility.

Pyramiding (accumulation): Adding to Winning Trades:

The Turtles were also taught to scale into winning trades. This method, known as pyramiding or accumulation, involved adding to a trade if the price moved in their favour. If N (ATR) was 40 points, they would add 0.5 × the Average True Range to the trade. For example, accumulation of a new position would be actioned at 20 and then again at another 20, adding up to a maximum of four positions: the original trade plus three additional entries.

Exits and Risk Management

Initial Stop Loss:

Each trade was initiated with a stop loss placed 2N away from the entry price. This ensured that no single trade risked more than 2% of the account balance.

Trailing Stop:

As the trade progressed and additional units were added, the stop loss was dynamically adjusted using the most recent entry as a reference.The trailing stop for all positions was 2N on the latest (most recent) added position. If the stop was hit, all positions in that trade were closed simultaneously, locking in gains and controlling downside risk.

How Have Markets Changed Since the 1980s?

1. Algorithmic and high-frequency trading (HFT) now dominate markets, often resulting in faster and more erratic price movements.
2. Trading costs (commissions, spreads) have significantly decreased, enabling more frequent entries and tighter stops.
3. Trend persistence has diminished. Markets often reverse more quickly, making it harder for long-trend strategies to succeed without adaptation.
4. Forex and futures markets are more liquid, making it easier to execute large positions with less slippage.
5. Futures markets have seen changes in volume and type, enabling a greater selection of asset choices.
6. Stock indices tend to exhibit more mean reversion, demanding smarter trend filters.
7. Breakouts from common levels are less reliable, often resulting in quick reversals due to stop hunting and market manipulation.
8. A greater need for confirmation signals before acting on a breakout.
9. ATR-based sizing remains relevant but may benefit from more dynamic scaling.
10. Rigid stop-loss rules (like 2× ATR) are more likely to be hit due to shorter trend durations.

How Could the Turtle System Be Used Today?

Although the principles underpinning the turtle systems remain valid for trading today, some tweaking of the original criteria and parameter levels would be worth exploring.

Entry Modifications:

Requiring confirmation from trend filters, such as price being above the 200 EMA or RSI values above 55, or perhaps looking for confirmation on larger timeframes, could reduce false signals and improve win rates.Additional volume filters, including relative volume, OBV, and average volume, may add value to decision-makingIncorporating indicators developed since the turtle experiment, such as other variations of the ATR and RSI, Bollinger bands, and Keltner channels, may be worth consideration for the confluence of the basic trend following structure.

Exit and Risk Enhancements:

In the turtles experiment, the ATR was static once the initial trade was entered; the N value remained fixed for that position and all subsequent accumulated positions. Arguably a dynamic ATR instead of a fixed level may be worth consideration to adjust to changing volatility over time.This especially makes sense if you are considering adding additional confluence from other indicators for the initial position.

Trade Like a Turtle

Using the original Turtle approach could be considered a checklist for good practice. Especially when it comes to rule-based system designs, risk management, emotional discipline in execution, and equal attention to entry, accumulation, and exit.Consider testing a “Turtle-inspired” strategy using current instruments and enhanced filters before taking it live. The spirit of the Turtle experiment lives on not just in its rules, but in the key message that trading can be taught. You can learn it, but success depends on sticking to a well-thought-out plan and adhering to the golden rules of trading that still apply today.