Pattern Intelligence ยท CPH

GERHSP quant read

German High Street Properties A/S ยท Real Estate

The nearest historical setups point to downside risk, and the completed-week chart evidence supports that caution.

1-week positive match rate 23.3%

Historically negative ยท avg analogue -1.01%

Moderate historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 38.0%

Historically negative ยท avg analogue -1.16%

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

4 of the core evidence blocks are acting as headwinds.

Evidence agreement Clean alignment

Downside risk is confirmed while price remains below trend and relative strength keeps lagging.

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
65.00
Trend Line
70.50
Fair value
81.17
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 -6.04%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example 0.00%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile +5.27%

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 -7.80%

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

Price vs Fair Value -19.92%

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

Market Dynamics -0.00

Market Dynamics are neutral.

Relative Strength -0.08

The stock is lagging relative strength.

Market Activity -0.31

This component is a drag.

Price Cycle -0.20

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
BEH
SES
2026-06-12 0.6349 lower -22.86%
VIPSN
MEX
2026-06-12 0.605 flat 0.00%
0483
HKG
2026-06-12 0.6046 lower -17.50%
RTO
NZE
2026-06-05 0.6003 higher +6.98%
SOLV
MEX
2026-06-12 0.586 higher +2.37%
BHD
ASX
2026-06-12 0.5794 higher +13.51%
FOAF
PAR
2026-06-12 0.5765 flat 0.00%
PRIN
SET
2026-06-12 0.5738 higher +0.74%
2520
HKG
2026-06-12 0.5616 higher +11.61%
A
SET
2026-06-12 0.5603 lower -6.21%
PRIN
SET
2026-06-05 0.5595 lower -2.90%
6190
JPX
2026-06-12 0.5592 lower -11.29%
A
SET
2026-06-05 0.5582 flat 0.00%
MTD
MEX
2026-06-12 0.5543 flat 0.00%
VIBE
SET
2026-06-05 0.5532 lower -5.56%
BEH
SES
2026-06-05 0.5477 lower -20.00%
T1LK34
SAO
2026-06-05 0.5465 lower -4.33%
MDTN
MEX
2026-06-12 0.5445 higher +5.47%
SVR
NZE
2026-06-12 0.544 higher +6.45%
IQV
MEX
2026-06-12 0.5412 higher +13.88%
BMIN3
SAO
2026-06-05 0.5408 flat 0.00%
090370
KSC
2026-06-12 0.5368 higher +0.46%
GMAB
VIE
2026-06-05 0.5362 higher +15.74%
FOAF
PAR
2026-06-05 0.5358 flat 0.00%
1253
HKG
2026-06-12 0.5304 lower -19.83%
NORB-B
STO
2026-06-05 0.529 lower -6.78%
COO
MEX
2026-06-12 0.5277 higher +8.72%
LEVI
MEX
2026-06-12 0.5275 higher +4.68%
ANF
MEX
2026-06-12 0.5273 lower -1.50%
L1VS34
SAO
2026-06-12 0.5244 lower -11.23%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

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

  • Volume pressure -0.93948
  • Sector structure 0.85609
  • Trend Signal -0.36138
  • Market Activity -0.35655
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 26 companies and 2 entry weeks. 2026-06-05โ€“2026-06-12.

Median return0.00%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes-17.73% to 11.80%10thโ€“90th historical percentiles
Largest company share7%Of selected examples
Weight-equivalent sample29.9Accounts for unequal weights, not dependence

The distribution, including losses

< โˆ’10%
6
โˆ’10 to โˆ’5%
3
โˆ’5 to 0%
3
0 to 5%
10
5 to 10%
4
โ‰ฅ 10%
4

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

Does one observation change the story?

Selected-example mean
-1.31%
Without the best outcome
-1.90%
Without the worst outcome
-0.57%
Non-overlapping within each company
-0.42% ยท 26 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
39.9%
-1.41%3079%0.55
IndustrySame country
31.2%
-0.26%1021%0.10

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

Downside risk is confirmed while price remains below trend and relative strength keeps lagging.

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