MEXA  โ€ข  NASDAQ  โ€ข  NAMI US equities ยท completed weekly research
MEXA
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ NASDAQ ยท Communication Services ยท Internet Content & Information

NAMI beta and relative strength

Jinxin Technology Holding Company American Depositary Shares

NAMI is weakening below benchmark with market-like sensitivity to QQQ.

Week ending Latest completed weekly edition
Next update 15:40 UK ยท after Stage Analysis
One-year beta 0.91Market-like sensitivity ยท Rising
Movement explained 2%13% weekly correlation
Relative strength-83.87Weakening below benchmark
Downside beta 3.46Upside beta 4.35
One-year excess return-114.1%-88.9% stock ยท 25.2% benchmark
Directional participation

NAMI in rising and falling QQQ weeks

These percentages count what actually happened in completed weeks. They describe historical participation, not certainty about the next move.

Latest 52-week reading More dependable when the benchmark falls

The stock has joined falling benchmark weeks more consistently than rising ones.

45% of directional weeks moved the same way.
When QQQ rose24%

NAMI also rose in 24% of 29 rising benchmark weeks.

When QQQ fell70%

NAMI also fell in 70% of 23 falling benchmark weeks.

Market state now Range-bound market with active movement
-0.5% over 13 weeks21.8% volatility

After 11 earlier matches by market direction, often separates from the benchmark.

Joined rising weeks50%
Joined falling weeks40%
Limited sample ยท 45% same-direction rate ยท 3.87 beta
Benchmark fit

NAMI sensitivity to QQQ

The benchmark relationship is weak and explains 2% of weekly movement over the latest year. Current beta is 0.91 and is rising.

Likely beta range-1.04 to 2.86

A wider range means the beta estimate is less precise.

Beta stability0/100

How consistently rolling beta has held its level and direction.

Annualised alpha-158.7%

The weekly regression intercept annualised; it is historical, not expected return.

Tracking error128.5%

Annualised volatility of returns above or below the benchmark.

Relationship directionRelationship broadly stable

+1.7 point change in movement explained across two distinct 26-week windows.

Beta and benchmark fitBeta is secondary evidence only
Weaker benchmark fitStronger benchmark fitLower sensitivityHigher sensitivity

The benchmark fit is too weak for the headline beta to be treated as a dependable description on its own.

Historical one-week sensitivity
If QQQ rises 1%+4.35%historically associated NAMI move
If QQQ falls 1%-3.46%historically associated NAMI move
Likely beta range -1.04 to 2.86 ยท width 3.90
Can the beta be trusted?Weak relationship
Movement explained2%
Stability0%
Directional agreement45%

Rolling beta

26-week estimates show whether market sensitivity is rising or falling.

Move across the chart to inspect a completed week.
Rolling betaMarket-like beta 1.00

Rolling relationship strength

Correlation shows direction; explained movement shows how useful the relationship has been.

Move across the chart to inspect a completed week.
CorrelationMovement explained
PeriodBetaCorrelationMovement explainedAlphaExcess returnTracking error
6 months1.0316%3%-241.9%-95.9%139.0%
1 year0.9113%2%-158.7%-114.1%128.5%
Relative strength

NAMI relative strength against QQQ

The score compares the stock/benchmark ratio with its trailing 52-week average. Above zero means the ratio is above trend; direction shows whether that advantage is building or fading.

Relative-strength trend

Current score -83.87 ยท 13-week change -14.33

Move across the chart to inspect a completed week.
Relative strengthZero baseline

Stock, benchmark and worthwhile peers

Each path starts at 100. Sector and industry appear only when their Market Structure indexes have enough constituents.

Move across the chart to inspect a completed week.
Sector ยท Communication Services-59.3 points

versus sector over 13 weeks ยท 243 constituents ยท 17% correlation

Industry ยท Internet Content & Information-53.6 points

versus industry over 13 weeks ยท 66 constituents ยท 14% correlation

Sensitivity to Communication Services1.33 beta

3% of weekly movement explained by the sector over one year.

Sensitivity to Internet Content & Information0.72 beta

2% of weekly movement explained by the industry over one year.

Return components

13-week and 52-week returns relative to QQQ

This is a return bridge, not a claim of cause. It starts with the benchmark return, then shows the difference added at sector, industry and ticker level.

Last 13 weeks-63.6 points vs benchmark
Broad market-0.5%
Sector difference-4.3%
Industry difference-5.7%
Ticker difference-53.6%

The largest source of relative weakness was the ticker difference. NAMI returned -64.0%; QQQ returned -0.5%.

Last 52 weeks-114.1 points vs benchmark
Broad market+25.2%
Sector difference-41.3%
Industry difference-11.7%
Ticker difference-61.1%

The largest source of relative weakness was the ticker difference. NAMI returned -88.9%; QQQ returned 25.2%.

Market conditions

NAMI in rising and falling benchmark weeks

Upside beta is higher than downside beta, a historically favourable split.

Upside beta4.35-170% upside capture
Downside beta3.4655% downside capture
Current splitMore responsive in rising markets+0.89 beta gap
ConditionWeeksNAMI averageQQQ averageBetaBeat benchmark
Benchmark up29-3.91%+2.29%4.3524%
Benchmark down23-1.01%-1.84%3.4630%
Strongest benchmark weeks10+2.07%+4.05%5.3430%
Weakest benchmark weeks10-5.53%-3.12%10.9830%
Quieter benchmark weeks26-5.71%+0.23%-1.6323%
Historical extremes

Strongest and weakest 13-week relative periods

Distinct 13-week windows prevent one long move from filling the list with overlapping dates.

Strongest relative periods

2025-02-07 to 2025-05-02+28.9 pts

NAMI 22.7% ยท QQQ -6.3%

The return pattern shows that the ticker moved beyond its peer backdrop.
2026-01-02 to 2026-03-27+13.5 pts

NAMI 3.8% ยท QQQ -9.7%

The return pattern shows that the ticker moved beyond its peer backdrop.
2025-06-06 to 2025-08-29+-3.0 pts

NAMI 7.0% ยท QQQ 10.0%

The return pattern shows that the sector moved the same way.

Weakest relative periods

2026-04-03 to 2026-06-26-106.0 pts

NAMI -80.4% ยท QQQ 25.6%

The return pattern shows that the sector moved the same way, and the ticker moved beyond its peer backdrop.
2025-04-25 to 2025-07-18-96.7 pts

NAMI -70.2% ยท QQQ 26.5%

The return pattern shows that the sector moved the same way, and the ticker moved beyond its peer backdrop.
2025-09-05 to 2025-11-28-53.6 pts

NAMI -44.9% ยท QQQ 8.7%

The return pattern shows that the sector moved the same way, and the ticker moved beyond its peer backdrop.
Pressure and timing

Drawdowns and lead/lag relationship

The strongest link is in the same week. Lead/lag evidence is treated as secondary because timing relationships can change quickly.

Drawdown from each rolling high

Worst available drawdown: NAMI -97.6% ยท QQQ -21.3%

Move across the chart to inspect a completed week.
NAMI drawdownQQQ drawdown
Ticker leads 2w
2%
Ticker leads 1w
-4%
Same week
1%
Benchmark leads 1w
4%
Benchmark leads 2w
-26%
Observable signals

Signals that would confirm or change the reading

These are conditions to monitor, not price targets or forecasts.

Relative strengthBelow the zero baseline

A sustained move above zero would mark a meaningful repair in the stock/benchmark ratio.

Up/down beta+0.89 upside-minus-downside gap

Upside beta is higher than downside beta. The favourable split remains intact while that gap stays positive.

Exposure trendBeta is rising

Rising beta means broad-market moves are carrying more weight; falling beta means ticker-specific forces are carrying more weight.

Peer confirmation-53.6 points versus Internet Content & Information over 13 weeks

Strength shared by the peer group is broader; strength confined to the ticker is more company-specific and usually less stable.

Method and limits

Data and interpretation limits

Data
Completed weekly observations from 2024-12-13 to 2026-08-21 ยท 89 aligned weeks.
Current reading
52 weeks; rolling charts use 26 weeks.
Relative strength
Stock/benchmark ratio compared with its trailing 52-week average.
Peer evidence
At least 10 sector constituents and 5 industry constituents. Thin groups are excluded.
Boundary
Historical relationship analysis, not a forecast or a statement of cause. Historical relationships can break without warning.

Evidence context