Pattern Intelligence ยท NASDAQ

SLN quant read

Silence Therapeutics PLC ยท Healthcare

The nearest historical setups point to a positive historical outcomes, and the completed-week chart evidence supports it.

1-week positive match rate 66.9%

Historically positive ยท avg analogue +3.13%

Moderate historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 76.3%

Historically positive ยท avg analogue +10.11%

Stronger historical lean
Completed-week chart evidence Chart evidence supports the read

3 of the core evidence blocks are supportive.

Evidence agreement Clean alignment

Confirmation is present while price holds above trend and relative strength remains firm.

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
9.86
Trend Line
9.22
Fair value
10.94
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 -1.83%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example +6.36%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile +12.16%

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 +6.95%

Price is comfortably above its medium-term trend.

Price vs Fair Value -9.90%

Price is close to Fair Value.

Market Dynamics -0.00

Market Dynamics are neutral.

Relative Strength +0.11

The stock is showing relative leadership.

Market Activity +0.20

This component is supportive.

Price Cycle -0.10

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
STRO
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6776 higher +3.23%
VIR
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6624 higher +15.68%
ANIK
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6576 higher +5.98%
IQE
LSE
2026-06-12 0.6572 lower -16.22%
CLDX
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6418 higher +25.07%
MCON
LSE
2026-06-12 0.6414 higher +10.00%
PRLD
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.639 higher +7.02%
EDRY
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6388 lower -2.05%
OVID
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6356 higher +9.57%
PRLD
NASDAQ
2026-06-05 0.6348 higher +28.87%
605366
SHH
2026-06-12 0.6347 higher +1.58%
TPX
LSE
2026-06-12 0.6335 higher +9.84%
FLEXQ
STO
2026-06-12 0.6326 higher +24.17%
AIXA
GER
2026-06-12 0.6306 lower -23.46%
ALLO
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6266 higher +5.26%
IOVA
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6249 higher +3.68%
RLAY
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6225 higher +35.08%
ECPG
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6214 higher +13.82%
NSKOG
OSL
2026-06-12 0.621 lower -6.78%
RLYB
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6209 lower -1.19%
SSL
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.6209 lower -28.06%
NAVIGO-STAM
STO
2026-06-05 0.6139 higher +3.33%
ARTV
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6106 higher +12.88%
MGNX
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6105 higher +9.34%
STRO
NASDAQ
2026-06-05 0.6102 higher +16.63%
S92
GER
2026-06-12 0.6099 higher +9.39%
GHH
LSE
2026-06-12 0.6077 lower -14.09%
DAR
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.6072 higher +6.74%
WHWK
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6067 lower -4.57%
SSL
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.6065 lower -19.46%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

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

  • Volume pressure 1.20691
  • Sector structure 0.85619
  • Quality context 0.79807
  • 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 27 companies and 2 entry weeks. 2026-06-05โ€“2026-06-12.

Median return6.36%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes-16.54% to 24.26%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%
1
โˆ’5 to 0%
3
0 to 5%
4
5 to 10%
8
โ‰ฅ 10%
9

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

Does one observation change the story?

Selected-example mean
4.71%
Without the best outcome
3.66%
Without the worst outcome
5.84%
Non-overlapping within each company
5.57% 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
70.3%
4.76%3055%0.63
SectorSame country
83.7%
16.89%3030%0.60
IndustrySame country
83.6%
16.17%3015%0.59

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

Confirmation is present while price holds above trend and relative strength remains firm.

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