Pattern Intelligence ยท NYSE

GFR quant read

Greenfire Resources Ltd. ยท Energy

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

1-week positive match rate 19.9%

Historically negative ยท avg analogue -2.34%

Moderate historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 41.0%

Unclear ยท avg analogue -3.44%

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

The current setup has both supportive and challenging components.

Evidence agreement Evidence not decisive

Evidence improves only if price stabilises and relative strength stops lagging.

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
5.87
Trend Line
6.13
Fair value
5.82
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 -0.46%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example +2.19%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile +3.61%

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 -4.25%

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

Price vs Fair Value +0.86%

Price is close to Fair Value.

Market Dynamics +0.01

Market Dynamics are neutral.

Relative Strength -0.05

The stock is lagging relative strength.

Market Activity +0.09

This component is supportive.

Price Cycle +0.01

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
JMSB
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5699 higher +0.60%
CMPR
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5696 higher +12.21%
HBNC
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5618 lower -0.06%
MATW
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5567 lower -0.60%
MYFW
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5488 higher +7.37%
CHMG
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5194 higher +4.02%
TFSL
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5189 higher +4.43%
PDLB
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5137 higher +2.52%
SNDR
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5119 lower -5.31%
ELF
TOR
2026-06-12 0.5101 higher +0.12%
VABK
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.51 lower -0.78%
CYRX
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5073 higher +10.60%
TFII
TOR
2026-06-12 0.5067 lower -6.61%
OCFC
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5063 higher +2.74%
GSBC
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5058 higher +2.91%
BCML
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5036 higher +3.51%
REI-UN
TOR
2026-06-12 0.5022 lower -2.44%
FRST
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5004 flat 0.00%
MTRN
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.4975 higher +4.21%
CNO
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.4949 higher +3.18%
NWE
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.4906 higher +3.31%
CSR
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.4902 lower -3.54%
WAFD
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.489 higher +2.78%
HTB
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.489 higher +1.86%
GAIN
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.4873 higher +7.67%
TFIN
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.4859 higher +3.65%
GGB
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.4853 lower -5.26%
MAC
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.4843 lower -2.33%
CATY
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.4825 higher +0.90%
WERN
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.4806 higher +0.07%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

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

  • Volume pressure 1.81214
  • Growth context 0.87697
  • Sector structure 0.85612
  • Quality context 0.69804
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 1 entry weeks. 2026-06-12โ€“2026-06-12.

Median return2.19%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes-3.71% to 7.40%10thโ€“90th historical percentiles
Largest company share3%Of selected examples
Weight-equivalent sample29.9Accounts for unequal weights, not dependence

The distribution, including losses

< โˆ’10%
0
โˆ’10 to โˆ’5%
3
โˆ’5 to 0%
6
0 to 5%
17
5 to 10%
2
โ‰ฅ 10%
2

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

Does one observation change the story?

Selected-example mean
1.72%
Without the best outcome
1.36%
Without the worst outcome
2.01%
Non-overlapping within each company
1.72% 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
66.6%
1.78%3055%0.50
SectorSame country
13.1%
-9.43%3030%0.38
IndustrySame country
3.1%
-10.60%3015%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

Evidence improves only if price stabilises and relative strength stops lagging.

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