Pattern Intelligence ยท ASX

VVA quant read

Viva Leisure Limited ยท Consumer Cyclical

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

1-week positive match rate 66.7%

Historically positive ยท avg analogue +1.85%

Moderate historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 61.2%

Historically positive ยท avg analogue +2.22%

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

The current setup has both supportive and challenging components.

Evidence agreement Historical reads agree

Watch for price and relative strength to firm up before treating the upside read as confirmed.

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
1.51
Trend Line
1.53
Fair value
1.47
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 -2.68%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example +0.81%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile +5.27%

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 -1.55%

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

Price vs Fair Value +2.83%

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 -0.04

This component is neutral.

Price Cycle +0.03

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
4292
SAU
2026-06-05 0.615 lower -2.60%
RHL
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5923 higher +0.90%
4292
SAU
2026-06-12 0.5818 lower -7.95%
9611
SAU
2026-06-12 0.581 lower -0.25%
WORTHPERI
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5802 higher +9.77%
SUNTECK
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5792 higher +13.87%
AMBICAAGAR
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5778 higher +1.93%
TBZ
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5769 higher +24.25%
BIKAJI
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5758 lower -4.53%
PATANJALI
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5723 lower -2.76%
KELLTONTEC
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5718 higher +0.72%
BLUEDART
NSI
2026-06-12 0.568 higher +3.36%
GROBTEA
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5679 higher +1.82%
CAMPUS
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5679 lower -3.07%
MINDTECK
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5667 higher +1.20%
MATAS
CPH
2026-06-12 0.5643 lower -1.95%
HDIL
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5627 lower -10.11%
HMVL
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5619 higher +15.14%
MUKKA
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5618 higher +1.18%
3004
SAU
2026-06-12 0.5601 lower -3.62%
METROBRAND
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5592 higher +5.91%
ASALCBR
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5585 higher +0.98%
RITES
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5568 higher +9.98%
0332
KLS
2026-06-12 0.5565 flat 0.00%
ROML
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5553 lower -0.11%
2340
SAU
2026-06-05 0.5551 higher +18.52%
4070
SAU
2026-06-12 0.5539 higher +7.26%
4007
SAU
2026-06-05 0.5538 lower -4.63%
SHRENIK
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5535 lower -2.70%
LANDMARK
NSI
2026-06-12 0.5524 higher +0.25%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

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

  • Volume pressure 1.53383
  • Sector structure 0.85619
  • Momentum context 0.75791
  • Yield context 0.71914
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 29 companies and 2 entry weeks. 2026-06-05โ€“2026-06-12.

Median return0.81%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes-4.54% to 13.99%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%
10
0 to 5%
10
5 to 10%
4
โ‰ฅ 10%
4

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

Does one observation change the story?

Selected-example mean
2.42%
Without the best outcome
1.67%
Without the worst outcome
2.86%
Non-overlapping within each company
2.78% ยท 29 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
56.6%
2.41%3065%0.57
SectorSame country
69.7%
1.87%3035%0.33

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

Watch for price and relative strength to firm up before treating the upside read as confirmed.

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