Pattern Intelligence ยท TOR

AMZN quant read

Amazon.com, Inc. ยท Consumer Cyclical

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

1-week positive match rate 46.9%

Unclear ยท avg analogue +0.11%

Mixed historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 62.0%

Historically positive ยท avg analogue +2.16%

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

The current setup has both supportive and challenging components.

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
28.48
Trend Line
28.36
Fair value
24.27
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 0.00%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example +1.47%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile +4.43%

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 +0.43%

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

Price vs Fair Value +17.33%

Price is stretched above the current Fair Value estimate.

Market Dynamics +0.00

Market Dynamics are neutral.

Relative Strength -0.04

Relative strength is not giving a clear edge.

Market Activity +0.05

This component is neutral.

Price Cycle +0.17

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
NECB
NASDAQ
2026-06-05 0.5602 higher +10.44%
DBRG
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5483 higher +0.45%
NECB
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5459 higher +2.10%
DBRG
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.5392 higher +0.83%
SSBI
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5368 lower -0.11%
RS
TOR
2026-06-12 0.5347 higher +5.74%
CFR
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5337 higher +5.99%
YU
LSE
2026-06-12 0.5296 lower -7.37%
FDSB
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5278 higher +10.67%
NWE
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.526 higher +3.31%
GGC
MCE
2026-06-12 0.5255 flat 0.00%
3045
JPX
2026-06-12 0.5208 higher +1.78%
0002
HKG
2026-06-12 0.5207 higher +4.36%
BYFC
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5205 lower -0.30%
MLCFD
PAR
2026-06-12 0.52 lower -1.82%
BSD
PAR
2026-06-05 0.5189 lower -2.64%
DIMAND
ATH
2026-06-12 0.5182 flat 0.00%
OBK
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5181 higher +2.19%
TGT
BUE
2026-06-12 0.5176 higher +4.46%
HFBL
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5175 higher +13.40%
ATMC
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5165 flat 0.00%
NBN
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5158 higher +1.52%
MRT-UN
TOR
2026-06-12 0.5152 higher +3.53%
ARR
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5146 higher +1.11%
TRIN
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5142 higher +10.28%
BSRR
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5139 higher +0.98%
BAYA
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5128 higher +1.42%
7442
JPX
2026-06-12 0.5127 lower -1.04%
FACT
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5112 lower -0.19%
1038
HKG
2026-06-12 0.511 higher +5.12%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

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

  • Volume pressure 1.94773
  • Sector structure 0.85612
  • Trend Signal 0.63864
  • Value context 0.35828
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 28 companies and 2 entry weeks. 2026-06-05โ€“2026-06-12.

Median return1.47%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes-1.11% to 10.29%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%
1
โˆ’5 to 0%
6
0 to 5%
16
5 to 10%
3
โ‰ฅ 10%
4

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

Does one observation change the story?

Selected-example mean
2.54%
Without the best outcome
2.17%
Without the worst outcome
2.88%
Non-overlapping within each company
2.63% ยท 28 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%
2.55%3065%0.52
SectorSame country
53.2%
1.45%3035%0.40

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