Pattern Intelligence ยท NYSE

OHI quant read

Omega Healthcare Investors Inc ยท Real Estate

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

1-week positive match rate 36.4%

Unclear ยท avg analogue +0.17%

Moderate historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 89.0%

Historically positive ยท avg analogue +5.45%

Stronger historical lean
Completed-week chart evidence Chart evidence challenges the read

3 of the core evidence blocks are acting as headwinds.

Evidence agreement Evidence not decisive

Not confirmed yet; needs price reclaiming trend and relative strength stopping its lag before treating the upside 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
44.41
Trend Line
46.62
Fair value
36.65
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 +1.64%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example +3.79%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile +4.79%

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 -4.74%

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

Price vs Fair Value +21.16%

Price is stretched above the current Fair Value estimate.

Market Dynamics -0.01

Market Dynamics are neutral.

Relative Strength -0.11

The stock is lagging relative strength.

Market Activity -0.06

This component is a drag.

Price Cycle +0.21

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
8934
JPX
2026-06-12 0.74 higher +5.00%
WBC
NZE
2026-06-05 0.7239 higher +3.16%
3277
JPX
2026-06-12 0.7208 higher +4.54%
2206
JPX
2026-06-12 0.7193 lower -3.97%
8850
JPX
2026-06-12 0.7184 higher +4.87%
2009
JPX
2026-06-12 0.7174 higher +0.65%
2573
JPX
2026-06-12 0.715 lower -4.41%
2914
JPX
2026-06-12 0.7061 higher +1.04%
4671
JPX
2026-06-12 0.7002 higher +4.24%
4676
JPX
2026-06-12 0.699 higher +1.68%
Z77
SES
2026-06-12 0.6965 higher +3.76%
1333
JPX
2026-06-12 0.6937 higher +1.35%
Z77
SES
2026-06-05 0.6927 higher +4.21%
SR
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.6914 higher +2.06%
2282
JPX
2026-06-12 0.6879 higher +1.63%
2117
JPX
2026-06-12 0.6878 higher +5.40%
2201
JPX
2026-06-12 0.6874 higher +3.85%
SCL
NZE
2026-06-05 0.6863 higher +11.72%
7481
JPX
2026-06-12 0.684 higher +1.92%
7050
JPX
2026-06-12 0.684 higher +6.72%
WBC
ASX
2026-06-12 0.6839 higher +4.40%
DHT-UN
TOR
2026-06-05 0.6838 higher +6.35%
9401
JPX
2026-06-12 0.6833 higher +10.07%
3288
JPX
2026-06-12 0.6809 higher +0.61%
3950
JPX
2026-06-12 0.6808 higher +2.92%
2784
JPX
2026-06-12 0.6788 lower -0.18%
4577
JPX
2026-06-12 0.675 higher +3.39%
2602
JPX
2026-06-12 0.6749 higher +3.82%
146A
JPX
2026-06-12 0.6742 higher +24.71%
ANZ
NZE
2026-06-05 0.674 higher +3.96%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

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

  • Volume pressure 1.10623
  • Sector structure 0.85619
  • Value context 0.71831
  • Factor stack 0.42827
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 return3.79%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes0.53% to 7.06%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%
0
โˆ’10 to โˆ’5%
0
โˆ’5 to 0%
3
0 to 5%
20
5 to 10%
4
โ‰ฅ 10%
3

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

Does one observation change the story?

Selected-example mean
3.98%
Without the best outcome
3.27%
Without the worst outcome
4.27%
Non-overlapping within each company
3.99% 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
89.9%
3.94%3055%0.69
SectorSame country
86.4%
6.57%3030%0.57
IndustrySame country
91.5%
8.74%2815%0.34

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 reclaiming trend and relative strength stopping its lag before treating the upside 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