Pattern Intelligence ยท LIS

FLEXD quant read

Flexdeal Simfe S.A. ยท Financial Services

The nearest historical setups lean lower, but the completed-week chart evidence is not confirming that read yet.

1-week positive match rate 29.0%

Historically negative ยท avg analogue -1.23%

Moderate historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 39.7%

Historically negative ยท avg analogue -1.47%

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

3 of the core evidence blocks are supportive.

Evidence agreement Historical reads agree

Not confirmed yet; needs price losing trend support before treating the downside 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
5.15
Trend Line
4.93
Fair value
4.77
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 -4.93%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example 0.00%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile +1.83%

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 +4.53%

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

Price vs Fair Value +8.04%

Price is close to Fair Value.

Market Dynamics +0.00

Market Dynamics are neutral.

Relative Strength +0.02

Relative strength is not giving a clear edge.

Market Activity +0.52

This component is supportive.

Price Cycle +0.08

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
VPK
VIE
2026-06-12 0.7494 higher +2.18%
LYBN
MEX
2026-06-12 0.7214 lower -11.61%
VPK
VIE
2026-06-05 0.6764 lower -0.30%
APCD
VIE
2026-06-12 0.6656 higher +7.02%
DOW1
MEX
2026-06-12 0.6649 flat 0.00%
YTCH
MCE
2026-06-12 0.6645 flat 0.00%
EOGR
VIE
2026-06-12 0.6564 lower -2.22%
5PF
SES
2026-06-12 0.6499 flat 0.00%
ENG
VIE
2026-06-05 0.6481 higher +1.19%
COP
MEX
2026-06-12 0.6418 lower -8.88%
ENG
VIE
2026-06-12 0.6405 lower -2.30%
5PF
SES
2026-06-05 0.625 lower -3.33%
PBRAN
MEX
2026-06-12 0.6203 lower -10.48%
EOGR
VIE
2026-06-05 0.6134 lower -5.88%
LIN
VIE
2026-06-12 0.6122 higher +2.92%
CE
MEX
2026-06-12 0.61 lower -10.72%
KMI
MEX
2026-06-12 0.6097 higher +1.57%
APCD
VIE
2026-06-05 0.6072 higher +10.65%
CIGN
MEX
2026-06-12 0.6071 lower -2.49%
TCOAT
SET
2026-06-12 0.6019 higher +1.92%
L1YB34
SAO
2026-06-05 0.6011 lower -18.48%
MLPAC
PAR
2026-06-05 0.5997 flat 0.00%
GIL
VIE
2026-06-12 0.5991 higher +0.64%
PSXC
VIE
2026-06-12 0.5979 higher +5.56%
KMI
VIE
2026-06-05 0.5978 higher +1.52%
UN02
VIE
2026-06-12 0.5971 lower -5.38%
CTVA
VIE
2026-06-12 0.5952 higher +13.65%
SHEL1N
MEX
2026-06-12 0.5939 lower -3.57%
BFSAN
MEX
2026-06-12 0.5905 lower -14.11%
LIN
VIE
2026-06-05 0.5904 higher +7.26%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

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

  • Volume pressure -2.12594
  • Sector structure 0.85633
  • Trend Signal 0.63856
  • Market Activity 0.47747
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 24 companies and 2 entry weeks. 2026-06-05โ€“2026-06-12.

Median return0.00%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes-10.81% to 7.05%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%
5
โˆ’10 to โˆ’5%
3
โˆ’5 to 0%
6
0 to 5%
11
5 to 10%
3
โ‰ฅ 10%
2

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

Does one observation change the story?

Selected-example mean
-1.46%
Without the best outcome
-1.98%
Without the worst outcome
-0.87%
Non-overlapping within each company
-2.14% ยท 24 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
39.7%
-1.47%30100%0.61

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 price losing trend support before treating the downside 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