Pattern Intelligence ยท NASDAQ

ZYME quant read

Zymeworks Inc. Common Stock ยท Healthcare

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

1-week positive match rate 76.9%

Historically positive ยท avg analogue +2.66%

Moderate historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 77.7%

Historically positive ยท avg analogue +10.78%

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

The current setup has both supportive and challenging components.

Evidence agreement Historical reads agree

Not confirmed yet; needs 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
25.79
Trend Line
25.37
Fair value
16.00
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 -0.82%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example +3.90%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile +8.36%

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 +1.65%

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

Price vs Fair Value +61.21%

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 +0.02

This component is neutral.

Price Cycle +0.61

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
NVDA
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6294 higher +2.81%
LGND
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6182 higher +23.75%
GOOG
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6182 lower -0.87%
GOOG
TOR
2026-06-12 0.617 lower -0.86%
GOOGL
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6165 lower -0.70%
NVDA
TOR
2026-06-12 0.6144 higher +2.39%
CXDO
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.614 higher +14.78%
CBK
GER
2026-06-12 0.6078 higher +4.91%
NVD
GER
2026-06-12 0.605 higher +2.22%
AVGO
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6028 higher +4.86%
TSHA
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5997 higher +11.03%
GOOGL
BUE
2026-06-12 0.5994 higher +3.82%
CLS
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5986 lower -8.46%
SAN
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5952 higher +7.77%
MCY
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5948 higher +8.25%
TVTX
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5922 higher +8.74%
CLS
TOR
2026-06-12 0.5908 lower -7.33%
C
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5901 higher +0.69%
ABEC
GER
2026-06-12 0.5898 lower -1.86%
ENVA
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.589 higher +25.75%
ATZ
TOR
2026-06-12 0.5885 lower -5.03%
BTSG
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5872 higher +12.97%
BNC
LSE
2026-06-12 0.5866 higher +8.40%
ING
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5858 higher +7.22%
GS
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5819 lower -0.71%
AAMI
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5818 higher +3.97%
BNY
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5814 higher +5.51%
GNP
ASX
2026-06-12 0.5808 lower -8.48%
ABEA
GER
2026-06-12 0.5804 lower -1.82%
LGND
NASDAQ
2026-06-05 0.5796 higher +34.83%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

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

  • Volume pressure 1.4857
  • Sector structure 0.85619
  • Yield context 0.83914
  • Growth context 0.79701
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 return3.90%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes-5.26% to 15.68%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%
4
โˆ’5 to 0%
6
0 to 5%
8
5 to 10%
6
โ‰ฅ 10%
6

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

Does one observation change the story?

Selected-example mean
5.29%
Without the best outcome
4.27%
Without the worst outcome
5.76%
Non-overlapping within each company
4.65% 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
66.7%
5.28%3055%0.59
SectorSame country
89.9%
16.61%3030%0.53
IndustrySame country
93.5%
19.28%3015%0.51

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 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