Pattern Intelligence ยท NYSE

NVT quant read

nVent Electric PLC ยท Industrials

The nearest historical setups point to a positive historical outcomes, and the completed-week chart evidence supports it.

1-week positive match rate 76.6%

Historically positive ยท avg analogue +3.13%

Stronger historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 52.8%

Unclear ยท avg analogue +0.16%

Mixed historical lean
Completed-week chart evidence Chart evidence supports the read

4 of the core evidence blocks are supportive.

Evidence agreement Evidence not decisive

Confirmation is present while price holds above trend and relative strength remains firm.

Current weekly tape

Price, trend line, and fair value

Compare the stored pattern with completed weekly prices. The Fair Value line is the latest reference within this chart, held constant across the display.

Close
164.41
Trend Line
150.70
Fair value
89.32
Hover chart for weekly context.

Signal stack

What changed underneath price?

Each signal is standardized against its own recent history, so the lines show whether the current reading is unusually strong or weak for this stock.

Hover for standardized signal values.

Historical memory

Selected 4-week example returns

Each bar is a stored exampleโ€™s subsequent return, ordered by similarity. This selected set differs from the weighted global, sector and industry blend above.

Hover for analogue return and similarity rank.
Outcome frame

How varied were the historical outcomes?

The lower quartile, median and upper quartile of the selected examples. Actual future outcomes can fall outside this historical range.

Lower quartile -5.67%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example +1.93%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile +7.44%

What stronger historical analogues tended to deliver.

Evidence stack

Why the model sees this setup

These are the current conditions feeding the analogue read. The point is not the number alone; it is whether the evidence agrees with the historical read.

Price vs Trend Line +9.10%

Price is comfortably above its medium-term trend.

Price vs Fair Value +84.07%

Price is stretched above the current Fair Value estimate.

Market Dynamics -0.01

Market Dynamics are neutral.

Relative Strength +0.15

The stock is showing relative leadership.

Market Activity +0.13

This component is supportive.

Price Cycle +0.84

This component is supportive.

Historical rhymes

Closest resolved setups

The table keeps the model honest: these are the actual examples behind the selected-example statistics.

Ticker Week Similarity Outcome 4W return
2108
JPX
2026-06-12 0.8332 higher +3.28%
CSMG3
SAO
2026-06-12 0.8196 higher +18.26%
ATRO
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.8173 lower -5.37%
BKD
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.8168 higher +7.30%
CSMG3
SAO
2026-06-05 0.8166 higher +9.95%
FTAI
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.8164 lower -6.04%
MND
ASX
2026-06-12 0.8158 lower -2.31%
SII
TOR
2026-06-12 0.8126 lower -7.87%
1847
JPX
2026-06-12 0.8112 higher +2.55%
KEN
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.8104 lower -9.27%
WWD
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.8092 higher +5.05%
CW
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.8083 lower -0.39%
GLE
PAR
2026-06-05 0.8075 higher +10.08%
7287
JPX
2026-06-12 0.8071 lower -3.19%
ATI
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.8064 lower -5.76%
VIG
VIE
2026-06-05 0.8058 higher +11.30%
ESLT
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.8055 lower -11.86%
B2I
OSL
2026-06-12 0.8044 higher +11.14%
ENR
GER
2026-06-12 0.8033 lower -0.95%
0005
HKG
2026-06-12 0.8019 higher +7.49%
BAP
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.8015 higher +21.31%
ATI
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.8011 higher +5.99%
MFG
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.8006 higher +4.41%
PLUS
LSE
2026-06-12 0.7995 higher +1.31%
HSBC
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.7994 higher +6.59%
PINE4
SAO
2026-06-05 0.7987 lower -3.92%
DANR
MIL
2026-06-12 0.7984 lower -8.28%
SII
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.798 lower -9.12%
WRT1V
HEL
2026-06-12 0.7962 lower -8.53%
BAP
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.7949 higher +8.46%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

These are the largest deviations from the run baseline, renamed into plain market language.

  • Sector structure 0.85612
  • Value context 0.83828
  • Price vs Fair Value 0.76314
  • Price Cycle 0.74792
This is historical analogue evidence, not advice. It becomes more useful when historical rate, average return, chart evidence, and nearby examples all point in the same direction.
Sample audit ยท Selected examples

How much evidence stands behind the reading?

30 distinct examples across 27 companies and 2 entry weeks. 2026-06-05โ€“2026-06-12.

Median return1.93%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes-8.59% to 11.15%10thโ€“90th historical percentiles
Largest company share7%Of selected examples
Weight-equivalent sample30.0Accounts for unequal weights, not dependence

The distribution, including losses

< โˆ’10%
1
โˆ’10 to โˆ’5%
8
โˆ’5 to 0%
5
0 to 5%
4
5 to 10%
7
โ‰ฅ 10%
5

0 unchanged outcomes. Bins use equal counts, not similarity weights; positive means strictly above zero.

Does one observation change the story?

Selected-example mean
1.72%
Without the best outcome
1.04%
Without the worst outcome
2.19%
Non-overlapping within each company
1.13% ยท 27 cases

The two exclusion checks show how much the extremes affect the mean. Companies can still share the same market shock; these checks do not prove independence.

Peer comparison

Does the result travel across comparison groups?

The headline 4-week rate blends these stored groups. The selected example chart and one-week calculation use a combined shortlist, so they will not necessarily reproduce that blend.

Comparison groupPositive rateMean returnMatchesBlend weightMedian similarity
Global
53.4%
1.73%3055%0.81
SectorSame country
59.8%
0.99%3030%0.77
IndustrySame country
36.7%
-7.25%3015%0.53

Groups can share examples. Their counts must not be added together as independent observations. Similarity measures resemblance, not a likelihood of success.

Research playbook

What would strengthen or weaken this case?

Continuation

Historical lean meets chart support

Confirmation is present while price holds above trend and relative strength remains firm.

Look for the next completed weekly observation to sustain agreement in trend, relative strength and activity.

Conflict

Similar history, different conditions

If current price and direction oppose the historical lean, keep it as an unconfirmed case. Review the weaker peer group and whether the result depends on extreme examples.

Reassessment

The setup changes

A change in trend, fading relative strength or a materially different pattern can make the old matches less relevant. Recheck the pattern date and the next published reading.

Method and limits

Read the evidence in the right order

1. Compare like with like

Weekly price and indicator conditions are matched with resolved historical setups. Each listing appears once, using its most recent stored reading. Check the date and outcome horizon.

2. Separate frequency from payoff

The headline is a similarity-weighted blend of global, same-country sector and industry results where available. A high positive rate can coexist with large losses. Inspect the median, tails and individual examples.

3. Demand current confirmation

These are descriptive historical matches, not calibrated odds or an independently validated trading edge. Examples may overlap in time, share companies and reflect later data corrections. Costs, liquidity and delisted-company coverage need separate evaluation.

Evidence context