Pattern Intelligence ยท JNB

SSW quant read

Sibanye Stillwater Limited ยท Basic Materials

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

1-week positive match rate 36.9%

Historically negative ยท avg analogue -1.34%

Moderate historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 20.1%

Historically negative ยท avg analogue -6.48%

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
4,155.00
Trend Line
3,892.02
Fair value
3,154.11
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 -19.91%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example -5.89%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile -0.75%

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 +6.76%

Price is comfortably above its medium-term trend.

Price vs Fair Value +31.73%

Price is stretched above the current Fair Value estimate.

Market Dynamics +0.01

Market Dynamics are neutral.

Relative Strength -0.07

The stock is lagging relative strength.

Market Activity +0.31

This component is supportive.

Price Cycle +0.32

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
SES
STO
2026-06-12 0.639 lower -30.02%
PROAC
PAR
2026-06-12 0.6307 lower -8.11%
CAND
BRU
2026-06-12 0.6044 flat 0.00%
281A
JPX
2026-06-12 0.5532 lower -3.75%
LNZA
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5504 higher +10.19%
KDR
LSE
2026-06-12 0.5444 lower -20.59%
PMVM
TLV
2026-06-12 0.5378 lower -3.92%
INSP
STO
2026-06-12 0.5333 lower -26.60%
WEBELSOLAR
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5217 lower -3.65%
QDC
SET
2026-06-05 0.5213 lower -46.15%
LGVN
NASDAQ
2026-06-05 0.5112 lower -5.41%
WOOF
NASDAQ
2026-06-05 0.5044 lower -7.42%
SOLAR
SET
2026-06-12 0.4999 lower -17.86%
DCMFINSERV
NSI
2026-06-05 0.4964 lower -6.74%
VIS
JNB
2026-06-12 0.4956 flat 0.00%
FLUO
STO
2026-06-12 0.4886 lower -16.10%
BIOTEC
SET
2026-06-12 0.4878 lower -4.00%
HIMS
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.4846 higher +40.51%
1596
HKG
2026-06-12 0.4829 lower -28.89%
8218
HKG
2026-06-12 0.4725 lower -6.36%
TAOX
NASDAQ
2026-06-05 0.468 lower -3.94%
ARTL
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.4587 lower -20.59%
ALWTR
PAR
2026-06-12 0.4574 higher +0.44%
SVCO
NASDAQ
2026-06-05 0.4544 lower -1.77%
0936
HKG
2026-06-12 0.4479 higher +16.00%
RVRG
LSE
2026-06-12 0.4471 lower -56.31%
LFMD
NASDAQ
2026-06-05 0.4466 lower -0.41%
FCM
LSE
2026-06-12 0.4457 lower -27.63%
UMESLTD
NSI
2026-06-05 0.4452 higher +4.14%
MPT
MIL
2026-06-12 0.4442 lower -8.03%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

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

  • Volume pressure 1.51021
  • Sector structure 0.85609
  • Trend Signal -0.36138
  • Market Activity 0.26364
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 30 companies and 2 entry weeks. 2026-06-05โ€“2026-06-12.

Median return-5.89%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes-29.00% to 4.74%10thโ€“90th historical percentiles
Largest company share3%Of selected examples
Weight-equivalent sample29.7Accounts for unequal weights, not dependence

The distribution, including losses

< โˆ’10%
10
โˆ’10 to โˆ’5%
6
โˆ’5 to 0%
7
0 to 5%
4
5 to 10%
0
โ‰ฅ 10%
3

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

Does one observation change the story?

Selected-example mean
-9.43%
Without the best outcome
-11.15%
Without the worst outcome
-7.82%
Non-overlapping within each company
-9.43% ยท 30 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
15.8%
-9.57%3065%0.49
SectorSame country
28.0%
-0.81%3035%-0.09

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