Pattern Intelligence ยท JPX

7827 quant read

Orvis Corporation 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 73.7%

Historically positive ยท avg analogue +0.94%

Moderate historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 85.6%

Historically positive ยท avg analogue +4.30%

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

3 of the core evidence blocks are supportive.

Evidence agreement Clean alignment

Not confirmed yet; needs relative strength stopping its lag before treating the upside read as live.

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
1,800.00
Trend Line
1,685.50
Fair value
1,459.62
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 +1.19%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example +6.14%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile +8.08%

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 +6.79%

Price is comfortably above its medium-term trend.

Price vs Fair Value +23.32%

Price is stretched above the current Fair Value estimate.

Market Dynamics +0.01

Market Dynamics are neutral.

Relative Strength -0.06

The stock is lagging relative strength.

Market Activity +0.36

This component is supportive.

Price Cycle +0.23

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
NBXG
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.6421 higher +1.61%
AFG
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.6381 higher +8.06%
MET
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.6193 higher +6.59%
EFC
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.615 higher +0.36%
UNM
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.6139 higher +6.33%
NVDC34
SAO
2026-06-05 0.6134 lower -3.91%
7523
JPX
2026-06-12 0.604 higher +8.07%
ESNT
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.5965 higher +12.90%
CFT
EBS
2026-06-12 0.593 higher +4.84%
JPM
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.5927 higher +7.07%
JPM
VIE
2026-06-05 0.5919 higher +8.03%
AXP
VIE
2026-06-05 0.5909 higher +15.43%
002823
SHZ
2026-06-05 0.5898 lower -22.95%
AGN
AMS
2026-06-12 0.5891 higher +5.95%
9872
JPX
2026-06-12 0.5852 higher +4.89%
A1EG34
SAO
2026-06-12 0.5847 lower -8.91%
GNW
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.5824 higher +10.97%
NBXG
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5824 higher +0.41%
MTG
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.5811 higher +10.66%
4769
JPX
2026-06-12 0.5792 higher +6.80%
NDAQ
VIE
2026-06-05 0.5779 lower -1.98%
BIT
NZE
2026-06-05 0.5771 higher +3.53%
NDAQ
VIE
2026-06-12 0.5718 higher +1.05%
PRU
VIE
2026-06-05 0.5696 higher +8.89%
AEG
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.5642 higher +8.08%
AXP
VIE
2026-06-12 0.563 higher +9.28%
BRKB
BUE
2026-06-12 0.5607 higher +5.72%
SAB
VIE
2026-06-05 0.5582 higher +10.61%
AAPL
VIE
2026-06-05 0.5553 lower -1.43%
STC
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.5549 higher +4.06%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

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

  • Volume pressure 1.73143
  • Sector structure 0.85612
  • Trend Signal 0.63864
  • Next-week expectancy 0.61418
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 return6.14%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes-2.17% to 10.69%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%
1
โˆ’5 to 0%
3
0 to 5%
8
5 to 10%
12
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
4.37%
Without the best outcome
3.99%
Without the worst outcome
5.31%
Non-overlapping within each company
4.45% 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
83.4%
4.35%3055%0.59
SectorSame country
87.0%
4.08%3030%0.42
IndustrySame country
90.4%
4.56%3015%0.25

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

Not confirmed yet; needs relative strength stopping its lag before treating the upside read as live.

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