Pattern Intelligence ยท NSI

SOBHA quant read

Sobha Limited ยท Real Estate

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

1-week positive match rate 33.8%

Historically negative ยท avg analogue -0.81%

Moderate historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 54.5%

Unclear ยท avg analogue +2.31%

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

4 of the core evidence blocks are acting as headwinds.

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
1,161.70
Trend Line
1,330.18
Fair value
1,452.60
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 -1.63%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example 0.00%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile +1.55%

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 -12.67%

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

Price vs Fair Value -20.03%

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

Market Dynamics -0.01

Market Dynamics are neutral.

Relative Strength -0.10

The stock is lagging relative strength.

Market Activity -0.11

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
SZ50
GER
2026-06-12 0.5225 higher +1.54%
VNET
LSE
2026-06-12 0.5106 higher +1.55%
FRPH
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5013 higher +0.80%
MKTX
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.4924 lower -5.82%
INSURE
SET
2026-06-12 0.4911 lower -7.62%
DXCM
MEX
2026-06-12 0.491 higher +0.26%
RGO
GER
2026-06-12 0.4896 higher +9.63%
BHFAL
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.4854 lower -0.06%
PYR
GER
2026-06-12 0.484 lower -1.60%
GBLI
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.4837 higher +2.64%
ACI
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.4806 lower -4.22%
AIQ
ASX
2026-06-12 0.4795 higher +1.08%
DUKE
LSE
2026-06-12 0.4792 higher +3.64%
SLRN
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.4759 flat 0.00%
GWRS
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.475 higher +0.09%
S2UI34
SAO
2026-06-12 0.4738 lower -4.92%
HPHA
GER
2026-06-12 0.4719 higher +3.10%
BIRKN
MEX
2026-06-12 0.4716 flat 0.00%
7003
KLS
2026-06-12 0.4712 higher +7.14%
RADX
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.4707 higher +2.34%
CMCSA
MEX
2026-06-12 0.47 lower -1.64%
ESTCN
MEX
2026-06-12 0.4693 flat 0.00%
0154
KLS
2026-06-12 0.4686 flat 0.00%
RAND
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.4656 higher +0.49%
9300
SAU
2026-06-05 0.4648 higher +3.05%
ALMKS
PAR
2026-06-05 0.4631 lower -8.50%
VECT
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.4624 flat 0.00%
NEXCOM
CPH
2026-06-12 0.4622 lower -6.06%
INSURE
SET
2026-06-05 0.4612 lower -9.57%
FSNB
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.4601 flat 0.00%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

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

  • Volume pressure 2.34295
  • Sector structure 0.85626
  • Factor stack 0.75827
  • Momentum context 0.62792
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 29 companies and 2 entry weeks. 2026-06-05โ€“2026-06-12.

Median return0.00%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes-6.22% to 3.15%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%
5
โˆ’5 to 0%
5
0 to 5%
18
5 to 10%
2
โ‰ฅ 10%
0

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

Does one observation change the story?

Selected-example mean
-0.42%
Without the best outcome
-0.77%
Without the worst outcome
-0.11%
Non-overlapping within each company
-0.17% ยท 29 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
47.2%
-0.40%3055%0.47
SectorSame country
61.9%
5.48%3030%0.25
IndustrySame country
66.5%
5.92%3015%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

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