Pattern Intelligence ยท BUE

MSI quant read

Motorola Solutions, Inc. ยท Technology

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

1-week positive match rate 32.5%

Historically negative ยท avg analogue -1.72%

Moderate historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 43.5%

Unclear ยท avg analogue +0.16%

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

4 of the core evidence blocks are supportive.

Evidence agreement Evidence not decisive

Not confirmed yet; needs price losing trend support and relative strength breaking down before treating the downside 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
35,780.00
Trend Line
33,473.09
Fair value
27,045.76
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 -5.22%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example -2.50%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile +1.30%

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 +6.89%

Price is comfortably above its medium-term trend.

Price vs Fair Value +32.29%

Price is stretched above the current Fair Value estimate.

Market Dynamics +0.01

Market Dynamics are neutral.

Relative Strength +0.14

The stock is showing relative leadership.

Market Activity +0.09

This component is supportive.

Price Cycle +0.32

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
SBR
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.6852 lower -1.97%
SBR
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.6574 lower -5.32%
ALA
TOR
2026-06-12 0.6468 lower -2.20%
ALA
TOR
2026-06-05 0.6425 lower -4.93%
7177
JPX
2026-06-12 0.6246 higher +7.77%
SHEL
BUE
2026-06-12 0.6177 lower -0.12%
HBAN
EBS
2026-06-12 0.604 higher +4.80%
GAS
VIE
2026-06-12 0.6006 lower -4.63%
BP
BUE
2026-06-12 0.6005 lower -3.85%
SLHN
EBS
2026-06-12 0.5881 higher +8.91%
E
BUE
2026-06-12 0.5855 lower -5.66%
HPE
VIE
2026-06-05 0.5854 lower -16.38%
SOBO
TOR
2026-06-05 0.5824 lower -2.65%
YPFD
BUE
2026-06-12 0.58 lower -10.79%
CPX
TOR
2026-06-05 0.5747 higher +6.82%
SOBO
TOR
2026-06-12 0.5746 lower -2.77%
ENB
TOR
2026-06-12 0.5745 lower -2.08%
ENB
TOR
2026-06-05 0.5738 lower -2.34%
HWKN
NASDAQ
2026-06-05 0.5709 lower -10.69%
HPE
VIE
2026-06-12 0.5704 higher +1.53%
REP
MCE
2026-06-12 0.5661 higher +4.34%
UGP
BUE
2026-06-12 0.5641 higher +28.90%
EXM
BRU
2026-06-12 0.5602 lower -3.04%
SOBO
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.5586 lower -5.43%
KEY
TOR
2026-06-05 0.5574 lower -0.36%
BWLP
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.5567 lower -4.81%
WMB
VIE
2026-06-12 0.555 higher +3.44%
WCP
TOR
2026-06-12 0.5536 lower -6.60%
PPL
TOR
2026-06-12 0.5531 higher +0.62%
PBT
NYSE
2026-06-05 0.5529 lower -12.80%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

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

  • Sector structure 0.85633
  • Trend Signal 0.63856
  • Next-week expectancy 0.61215
  • Volume pressure -0.45428
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 25 companies and 2 entry weeks. 2026-06-05โ€“2026-06-12.

Median return-2.50%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes-10.70% to 6.91%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%
4
โˆ’10 to โˆ’5%
4
โˆ’5 to 0%
13
0 to 5%
5
5 to 10%
3
โ‰ฅ 10%
1

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

Does one observation change the story?

Selected-example mean
-1.41%
Without the best outcome
-2.46%
Without the worst outcome
-0.89%
Non-overlapping within each company
-1.39% ยท 25 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
29.5%
-1.42%3065%0.57
SectorSame country
69.1%
3.06%3035%0.24

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 losing trend support and relative strength breaking down before treating the downside 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