Pattern Intelligence ยท NYSE

MKC quant read

McCormick & Company Incorporated ยท Consumer Defensive

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

1-week positive match rate 50.3%

Unclear ยท avg analogue -0.14%

Mixed historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 72.4%

Historically positive ยท avg analogue +5.43%

Stronger 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

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
44.81
Trend Line
50.35
Fair value
65.75
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 -2.24%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example +2.23%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile +9.75%

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 -11.00%

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

Price vs Fair Value -31.85%

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

Market Dynamics -0.00

Market Dynamics are neutral.

Relative Strength -0.29

The stock is lagging relative strength.

Market Activity -0.36

This component is a drag.

Price Cycle -0.32

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
ARDT
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.747 higher +7.81%
BCG
LSE
2026-06-12 0.7363 lower -2.25%
TRN
LSE
2026-06-12 0.7327 higher +3.13%
DV
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.7255 higher +14.41%
BMBL
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.725 higher +11.40%
PYPL
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.7176 higher +11.53%
WHIRLPOOL
NSI
2026-06-12 0.7172 higher +3.27%
CCR
LSE
2026-06-12 0.7171 lower -5.97%
PSFE
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.716 higher +13.66%
AUTO
LSE
2026-06-12 0.7123 higher +7.61%
HFG
LSE
2026-06-12 0.7091 lower -1.79%
VTEX
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.7087 higher +12.15%
KMY
GER
2026-06-12 0.7032 higher +11.66%
USNA
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.703 higher +10.40%
LFT
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.703 higher +0.26%
LW
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.7005 higher +2.36%
6090
SAU
2026-06-05 0.6996 higher +4.04%
6090
SAU
2026-06-12 0.6991 higher +2.11%
4009
SAU
2026-06-12 0.6977 higher +0.97%
BOSS
GER
2026-06-12 0.6971 lower -3.87%
PAKKA
NSI
2026-06-12 0.6963 lower -6.42%
CCOI
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6948 lower -20.49%
9530
SAU
2026-06-12 0.6941 higher +0.29%
COUR
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.6933 higher +6.93%
HFFG
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6931 lower -13.68%
RMV
LSE
2026-06-12 0.6931 higher +1.90%
KCPSUGIND
NSI
2026-06-12 0.6925 lower -2.31%
ENIL
NSI
2026-06-12 0.6924 lower -3.69%
NESF
LSE
2026-06-12 0.6916 lower -2.21%
ENOV
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.6915 higher +18.12%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

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

  • Volume pressure 1.07986
  • Sector structure 0.85619
  • Growth context 0.84701
  • Momentum context 0.71791
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 return2.23%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes-6.02% to 12.31%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%
2
โˆ’10 to โˆ’5%
2
โˆ’5 to 0%
6
0 to 5%
9
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
2.71%
Without the best outcome
2.18%
Without the worst outcome
3.51%
Non-overlapping within each company
2.73% 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
66.9%
2.77%3055%0.70
SectorSame country
83.2%
9.77%3030%0.65
IndustrySame country
71.2%
6.51%3015%0.62

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