Pattern Intelligence ยท NYSE

NPB quant read

Northpointe Bancshares, Inc. ยท Financial Services

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

1-week positive match rate 23.2%

Historically negative ยท avg analogue -1.69%

Moderate historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 62.3%

Historically positive ยท avg analogue +2.35%

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

3 of the core evidence blocks are acting as headwinds.

Evidence agreement Timeframe conflict

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
15.84
Trend Line
17.44
Fair value
16.31
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 -8.56%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example -4.05%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile +5.03%

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 -9.16%

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

Price vs Fair Value -2.91%

Price is close to Fair Value.

Market Dynamics -0.01

Market Dynamics are neutral.

Relative Strength -0.17

The stock is lagging relative strength.

Market Activity -0.14

This component is a drag.

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
600235
SHH
2026-06-05 0.525 lower -9.76%
BIPC
TOR
2026-06-05 0.5214 lower -3.15%
GE
VIE
2026-06-05 0.5118 higher +14.99%
600168
SHH
2026-06-05 0.508 lower -8.10%
600308
SHH
2026-06-05 0.508 lower -8.72%
002942
SHZ
2026-06-05 0.5016 lower -9.04%
2763
JPX
2026-06-12 0.5008 higher +4.46%
AXS
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5002 higher +11.91%
003008
SHZ
2026-06-05 0.5001 lower -6.67%
002116
SHZ
2026-06-05 0.4985 lower -3.93%
603385
SHH
2026-06-05 0.4979 lower -10.10%
002778
SHZ
2026-06-05 0.4943 lower -13.73%
BIPC
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.4928 lower -5.59%
603856
SHH
2026-06-05 0.4854 higher +16.38%
ORI
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.4843 higher +7.42%
0144
HKG
2026-06-12 0.4831 lower -6.06%
0003
HKG
2026-06-12 0.4831 lower -2.79%
1379
JPX
2026-06-12 0.483 higher +0.90%
300405
SHZ
2026-06-05 0.4814 lower -15.10%
HCA
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.4797 higher +5.22%
SAF
PAR
2026-06-05 0.4762 higher +19.50%
603326
SHH
2026-06-05 0.4723 lower -10.96%
600128
SHH
2026-06-05 0.4721 lower -10.25%
ITB
GER
2026-06-12 0.471 lower -2.05%
IMB
LSE
2026-06-12 0.4703 lower -3.00%
002492
SHZ
2026-06-05 0.4685 lower -6.47%
NAB
ASX
2026-06-12 0.4684 higher +8.52%
601686
SHH
2026-06-05 0.4678 lower -4.18%
6246
JPX
2026-06-12 0.4673 higher +9.87%
BEPC
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.4652 lower -5.76%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

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

  • Volume pressure 0.9739
  • Sector structure 0.85619
  • Momentum context 0.59791
  • Next-week expectancy -0.36512
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 2 entry weeks. 2026-06-05โ€“2026-06-12.

Median return-4.05%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes-10.32% to 12.22%10thโ€“90th historical percentiles
Largest company share3%Of selected examples
Weight-equivalent sample30.0Accounts for unequal weights, not dependence

The distribution, including losses

< โˆ’10%
5
โˆ’10 to โˆ’5%
9
โˆ’5 to 0%
6
0 to 5%
2
5 to 10%
4
โ‰ฅ 10%
4

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
-2.27%
Without the worst outcome
-1.07%
Non-overlapping within each company
-1.54% 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
33.2%
-1.58%3055%0.48
SectorSame country
100.0%
8.01%3030%0.38
IndustrySame country
93.5%
5.41%3015%0.31

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