Pattern Intelligence ยท LSE

GEMD quant read

Gem Diamonds Limited ยท Basic Materials

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

1-week positive match rate 49.8%

Unclear ยท avg analogue +6.28%

Mixed historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 37.2%

Unclear ยท avg analogue +1.00%

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

4 of the core evidence blocks are supportive.

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
0.11
Trend Line
0.0516
Fair value
0.0823
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 -11.37%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example +1.84%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile +23.54%

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 +113.03%

Price is comfortably above its medium-term trend.

Price vs Fair Value +33.60%

Price is stretched above the current Fair Value estimate.

Market Dynamics +0.02

Market Dynamics are neutral.

Relative Strength +1.48

The stock is showing relative leadership.

Market Activity +0.98

This component is supportive.

Price Cycle +0.34

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
1417
HKG
2026-06-12 0.701 higher +96.26%
6968
HKG
2026-06-12 0.6838 lower -17.51%
7192
KLS
2026-06-12 0.6785 higher +2.06%
FCEL
MEX
2026-06-12 0.6699 higher +24.65%
FCEL
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6686 higher +24.14%
FCE2
VIE
2026-06-12 0.6544 higher +21.55%
FCE2
VIE
2026-06-05 0.6537 higher +56.04%
CYW
SES
2026-06-12 0.6462 lower -20.00%
8120
HKG
2026-06-12 0.6447 higher +41.85%
4392
JPX
2026-06-12 0.6351 lower -19.08%
MCO
ASX
2026-06-12 0.6197 flat 0.00%
SMOL
STO
2026-06-05 0.6155 lower -11.37%
FLUI
STO
2026-06-05 0.6129 lower -27.04%
9256
JPX
2026-06-12 0.6063 higher +34.58%
3321
HKG
2026-06-12 0.6048 lower -13.67%
8395
HKG
2026-06-12 0.6007 higher +6.72%
TRUE
LSE
2026-06-12 0.5964 higher +1.61%
0117
HKG
2026-06-12 0.5961 lower -35.08%
EVC
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.5912 higher +49.62%
1780
HKG
2026-06-12 0.5873 higher +60.43%
SLB
ASX
2026-06-12 0.5841 higher +11.11%
SMOL
STO
2026-06-12 0.5836 lower -11.35%
1631
HKG
2026-06-12 0.5816 lower -4.76%
GCTS
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5798 lower -2.38%
CYW
SES
2026-06-05 0.5744 lower -22.31%
DXYZ
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5729 lower -4.49%
2283
KLS
2026-06-12 0.5686 higher +7.69%
1740
HKG
2026-06-12 0.5672 higher +6.13%
OABI
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5586 higher +0.88%
IFRX
NASDAQ
2026-06-05 0.557 higher +21.74%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

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

  • Relative Strength 1.57838
  • Price vs Trend Line 1.16048
  • Market Activity 0.9346
  • Sector structure 0.85601
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 return1.84%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes-20.23% to 50.26%10thโ€“90th historical percentiles
Largest company share7%Of selected examples
Weight-equivalent sample29.9Accounts for unequal weights, not dependence

The distribution, including losses

< โˆ’10%
9
โˆ’10 to โˆ’5%
0
โˆ’5 to 0%
3
0 to 5%
4
5 to 10%
3
โ‰ฅ 10%
11

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

Does one observation change the story?

Selected-example mean
9.27%
Without the best outcome
6.27%
Without the worst outcome
10.80%
Non-overlapping within each company
10.66% 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
57.0%
9.84%3055%0.60
SectorSame country
15.0%
-10.60%3030%0.26
IndustrySame country
8.6%
-8.26%1915%0.03

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