Pattern Intelligence ยท TAI

1235 quant read

Shin Tai Industry Co., Ltd. ยท Consumer Defensive

The pattern is not clean enough for a strong directional call. The chart needs confirmation.

1-week positive match rate 40.0%

Unclear ยท avg analogue -0.22%

Moderate historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 43.0%

Unclear ยท avg analogue +1.47%

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

4 of the core evidence blocks are acting as headwinds.

Evidence agreement Evidence not decisive

A decisive weekly close that pulls the 1-week and 4-week evidence into agreement.

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
31.45
Trend Line
36.37
Fair value
60.09
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 -5.91%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example -1.32%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile +11.48%

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 -13.52%

Price is below trend, which keeps pressure on the setup.

Price vs Fair Value -47.66%

Price is trading below Fair Value, which can create recovery potential if pressure improves.

Market Dynamics +0.01

Market Dynamics are neutral.

Relative Strength -0.43

The stock is lagging relative strength.

Market Activity -0.13

This component is a drag.

Price Cycle -0.48

This component is a drag.

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
ALCAT
PAR
2026-06-12 0.7964 lower -5.57%
SEDANA
STO
2026-06-05 0.7797 lower -3.87%
ALCAT
PAR
2026-06-05 0.7698 lower -8.55%
HUSQ-A
STO
2026-06-12 0.7555 lower -12.45%
ILLM
TOR
2026-06-05 0.7528 lower -16.67%
8060
SAU
2026-06-05 0.7527 higher +5.29%
BICO
STO
2026-06-05 0.7521 lower -5.08%
BC
MIL
2026-06-12 0.752 lower -5.97%
SECARE
STO
2026-06-05 0.7498 lower -6.52%
8050
SAU
2026-06-05 0.7462 higher +26.86%
ALGEN
PAR
2026-06-05 0.7458 lower -1.63%
MIPS
STO
2026-06-12 0.7455 higher +13.65%
GENO
STO
2026-06-05 0.7449 higher +3.81%
SAFE
SET
2026-06-05 0.7446 lower -0.86%
8190
SAU
2026-06-05 0.7445 higher +12.79%
6060
SAU
2026-06-05 0.7439 higher +28.01%
HUSQ-B
STO
2026-06-12 0.7433 lower -13.75%
PROXI
OSL
2026-06-12 0.7431 lower -4.57%
W1PP34
SAO
2026-06-12 0.7418 lower -1.00%
MLHK
PAR
2026-06-05 0.7416 lower -25.37%
W1PP34
SAO
2026-06-05 0.7402 lower -5.73%
IRLAB-A
STO
2026-06-05 0.7396 higher +3.97%
JJSF
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.7391 lower -2.86%
8260
SAU
2026-06-05 0.7386 higher +8.24%
IRLAB-A
STO
2026-06-12 0.7369 higher +12.56%
4436
JPX
2026-06-12 0.736 higher +12.86%
CORE-A
STO
2026-06-05 0.7358 higher +6.37%
GARO
STO
2026-06-12 0.7357 lower -10.41%
NOMD
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.7357 higher +15.24%
9577
SAU
2026-06-05 0.7356 higher +27.27%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

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

  • Sector structure 0.85633
  • Price Cycle -0.5694
  • Price vs Fair Value -0.55418
  • Next-week expectancy -0.39575
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 27 companies and 2 entry weeks. 2026-06-05โ€“2026-06-12.

Median return-1.32%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes-12.58% to 16.40%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%
5
โˆ’10 to โˆ’5%
6
โˆ’5 to 0%
6
0 to 5%
2
5 to 10%
3
โ‰ฅ 10%
8

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

Does one observation change the story?

Selected-example mean
1.54%
Without the best outcome
0.62%
Without the worst outcome
2.46%
Non-overlapping within each company
1.48% ยท 27 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
43.0%
1.47%30100%0.74

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

A decisive weekly close that pulls the 1-week and 4-week evidence into agreement.

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