Pattern Intelligence ยท LSE

AMGO quant read

Amigo Resources PLC ยท Basic Materials

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

1-week positive match rate 53.3%

Unclear ยท avg analogue +2.44%

Mixed historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 35.1%

Unclear ยท avg analogue +0.66%

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

4 of the core evidence blocks are supportive.

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
0.028
Trend Line
0.0253
Fair value
0.008472
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 -8.45%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example -1.85%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile +17.19%

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 +10.46%

Price is comfortably above its medium-term trend.

Price vs Fair Value +200.00%

Price is stretched above the current Fair Value estimate.

Market Dynamics +0.01

Market Dynamics are neutral.

Relative Strength +0.47

The stock is showing relative leadership.

Market Activity +0.23

This component is supportive.

Price Cycle +2.30

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
9900
HKG
2026-06-12 0.8391 higher +4.95%
DBO
TOR
2026-06-05 0.8292 higher +29.35%
ONDS
NASDAQ
2026-06-05 0.8274 lower -28.95%
FML
ASX
2026-06-12 0.8183 lower -8.89%
EASTSILK
NSI
2026-06-12 0.8179 lower -1.07%
AMMS
JKT
2026-06-12 0.8171 lower -6.71%
1653
HKG
2026-06-12 0.8163 lower -28.57%
FINM
PAR
2026-06-05 0.8119 higher +16.46%
CELC
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.8102 higher +21.49%
BUVA
JKT
2026-06-12 0.81 higher +9.03%
DBO
TOR
2026-06-12 0.8072 lower -2.63%
BLUE
JKT
2026-06-12 0.8029 lower -13.08%
AYA
ASX
2026-06-12 0.8023 higher +28.22%
605255
SHH
2026-06-12 0.8014 lower -8.03%
DRUG
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.8001 higher +27.71%
605255
SHH
2026-06-05 0.7999 lower -5.18%
EASTSILK
NSI
2026-06-05 0.7993 lower -5.97%
VKTR
JKT
2026-06-12 0.7992 lower -16.80%
S3N
SES
2026-06-12 0.7985 lower -4.20%
FINM
PAR
2026-06-12 0.7975 lower -10.11%
MLZAM
PAR
2026-06-12 0.797 higher +12.90%
COGT
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.797 higher +17.43%
ABVX
PAR
2026-06-05 0.7961 higher +53.67%
IRSX
JKT
2026-06-12 0.7961 lower -10.88%
300475
SHZ
2026-06-12 0.7942 higher +44.53%
PRAX
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.7941 higher +21.91%
SOFA
JKT
2026-06-12 0.7938 lower -7.14%
688585
SHH
2026-06-12 0.7909 lower -8.59%
CBRE
JKT
2026-06-12 0.7889 lower -0.72%
MLZAM
PAR
2026-06-05 0.7888 higher +7.14%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

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

  • Price Cycle 2.2121
  • Price vs Fair Value 1.9224
  • Volume pressure 1.61482
  • Sector structure 0.85601
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-1.85%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes-13.46% to 28.33%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%
6
โˆ’10 to โˆ’5%
7
โˆ’5 to 0%
4
0 to 5%
1
5 to 10%
2
โ‰ฅ 10%
10

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

Does one observation change the story?

Selected-example mean
4.24%
Without the best outcome
2.54%
Without the worst outcome
5.39%
Non-overlapping within each company
5.45% 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
43.4%
4.19%3055%0.80
SectorSame country
26.3%
-3.62%3030%0.61
IndustrySame country
22.8%
-3.71%2815%0.44

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