Pattern Intelligence ยท HKG

0148 quant read

Kingboard Holdings Limited ยท Industrials

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

1-week positive match rate 60.0%

Historically positive ยท avg analogue +2.58%

Moderate historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 35.6%

Historically negative ยท avg analogue -3.80%

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

The current setup has both supportive and challenging components.

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
55.70
Trend Line
57.84
Fair value
27.72
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 -15.61%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example -3.61%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile +6.75%

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 -3.70%

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

Price vs Fair Value +100.91%

Price is stretched above the current Fair Value estimate.

Market Dynamics -0.00

Market Dynamics are neutral.

Relative Strength +0.26

The stock is showing relative leadership.

Market Activity -0.04

This component is neutral.

Price Cycle +1.01

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
7409
JPX
2026-06-12 0.7773 higher +2.01%
2025
HKG
2026-06-12 0.7639 higher +12.77%
SLGL
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.7588 higher +0.69%
ZATA
JKT
2026-06-12 0.7567 lower -13.79%
8247
HKG
2026-06-12 0.755 lower -22.38%
1133
HKG
2026-06-12 0.7465 lower -12.89%
AG
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.7451 lower -3.97%
PRAX
NASDAQ
2026-06-05 0.7387 higher +25.40%
002969
SHZ
2026-06-12 0.7377 lower -19.10%
301057
SHZ
2026-06-12 0.7352 lower -19.96%
7777
JPX
2026-06-12 0.7315 lower -2.23%
000510
SHZ
2026-06-12 0.7303 lower -2.43%
002842
SHZ
2026-06-12 0.7282 lower -10.65%
LUCY
JKT
2026-06-12 0.7282 lower -71.01%
2983
JPX
2026-06-12 0.7264 higher +10.88%
6366
JPX
2026-06-12 0.7263 lower -3.25%
301057
SHZ
2026-06-05 0.7256 lower -19.00%
6590
JPX
2026-06-12 0.7254 higher +26.83%
HRTA
JKT
2026-06-12 0.7252 lower -8.46%
603163
SHH
2026-06-12 0.7246 higher +1.52%
688031
SHH
2026-06-12 0.7242 lower -16.21%
002943
SHZ
2026-06-05 0.7234 lower -21.31%
7760
JPX
2026-06-12 0.723 higher +22.69%
BPM
ASX
2026-06-12 0.7229 lower -8.11%
000559
SHZ
2026-06-12 0.7228 lower -10.50%
PRAX
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.7225 higher +21.91%
1723
JPX
2026-06-12 0.7222 higher +2.76%
BLTE
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.7221 higher +8.08%
002969
SHZ
2026-06-05 0.7216 lower -16.26%
POLA
JKT
2026-06-12 0.7213 higher +10.91%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

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

  • Volume pressure 0.99557
  • Price vs Fair Value 0.93153
  • Price Cycle 0.91631
  • Sector structure 0.85619
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-3.61%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes-20.10% to 21.99%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%
12
โˆ’10 to โˆ’5%
2
โˆ’5 to 0%
4
0 to 5%
4
5 to 10%
1
โ‰ฅ 10%
7

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

Does one observation change the story?

Selected-example mean
-4.50%
Without the best outcome
-5.58%
Without the worst outcome
-2.21%
Non-overlapping within each company
-4.37% 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
40.1%
-4.50%3055%0.73
SectorSame country
25.8%
-5.93%3030%0.62
IndustrySame country
38.7%
3.05%3015%-0.04

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