Pattern Intelligence ยท LSE

SIHL quant read

Symphony International Holdings Limited ยท Financial Services

The pattern is not clean enough for a strong directional call. The chart needs confirmation.

1-week positive match rate 32.9%

Unclear ยท avg analogue +0.88%

Moderate historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 47.0%

Unclear ยท avg analogue +2.92%

Mixed historical lean
Completed-week chart evidence Chart evidence is mixed

The current setup has both supportive and challenging components.

Evidence agreement Evidence not decisive

A decisive weekly close that pulls the 1-week and 4-week evidence into agreement.

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
0.385
Trend Line
0.3838
Fair value
0.378
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 -0.47%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example +0.57%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile +7.62%

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 +0.32%

Price is close to trend, so direction still needs confirmation.

Price vs Fair Value +1.85%

Price is close to Fair Value.

Market Dynamics +0.00

Market Dynamics are neutral.

Relative Strength -0.04

Relative strength is not giving a clear edge.

Market Activity -0.29

This component is a drag.

Price Cycle +0.02

This component is neutral.

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
COUR
PAR
2026-06-12 0.5773 lower -11.21%
MINSAB
MEX
2026-06-12 0.5769 higher +1.96%
DYCQ
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5754 flat 0.00%
CVII
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5742 flat 0.00%
003680
KSC
2026-06-12 0.5715 higher +84.31%
R1OP34
SAO
2026-06-05 0.5704 higher +11.84%
1593
HKG
2026-06-12 0.57 lower -14.75%
3639
JPX
2026-06-12 0.5695 higher +7.41%
XYL
MEX
2026-06-12 0.5646 higher +1.05%
A
SET
2026-06-05 0.5624 flat 0.00%
LEVI
MEX
2026-06-12 0.56 higher +4.68%
BPAC
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5599 higher +0.10%
AVO
MEX
2026-06-12 0.5544 flat 0.00%
5QY
SES
2026-06-05 0.5524 lower -13.33%
NTES
VIE
2026-06-12 0.5518 higher +3.64%
CVAC
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5432 flat 0.00%
2520
HKG
2026-06-12 0.5423 higher +11.61%
SOMA21
MEX
2026-06-12 0.5374 flat 0.00%
4424
JPX
2026-06-12 0.5371 higher +90.38%
2153
HKG
2026-06-12 0.5368 lower -4.55%
UMB
MCE
2026-06-12 0.5357 lower -0.62%
5DS
SES
2026-06-05 0.5355 higher +12.64%
5QY
SES
2026-06-12 0.5352 lower -7.14%
5131
JPX
2026-06-12 0.5336 higher +1.59%
GLJ
VIE
2026-06-12 0.533 lower -4.98%
AWK
MEX
2026-06-12 0.5288 higher +9.15%
7226
KLS
2026-06-12 0.5275 higher +2.70%
NTES
VIE
2026-06-05 0.5274 higher +7.69%
6633
HKG
2026-06-12 0.5274 higher +14.80%
A
SET
2026-06-12 0.5267 lower -6.21%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

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

  • Volume pressure 2.71363
  • Sector structure 0.85601
  • Next-week expectancy -0.38154
  • Trend Signal -0.3614
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 return0.57%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes-7.55% to 12.86%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%
3
โˆ’10 to โˆ’5%
2
โˆ’5 to 0%
3
0 to 5%
13
5 to 10%
3
โ‰ฅ 10%
6

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

Does one observation change the story?

Selected-example mean
6.76%
Without the best outcome
3.88%
Without the worst outcome
7.50%
Non-overlapping within each company
7.87% 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
53.2%
6.75%3055%0.55
SectorSame country
34.5%
-2.61%3030%0.32
IndustrySame country
49.1%
-0.04%3015%0.28

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

A decisive weekly close that pulls the 1-week and 4-week evidence into agreement.

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