Pattern Intelligence ยท NASDAQ

PRQR quant read

ProQR Therapeutics BV ยท Healthcare

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

1-week positive match rate 50.5%

Unclear ยท avg analogue +3.12%

Mixed historical lean
4-week blended positive rate 76.0%

Historically positive ยท avg analogue +8.43%

Stronger 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

Not confirmed yet; needs price reclaiming trend and relative strength stopping its lag before treating the upside 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
1.63
Trend Line
1.73
Fair value
2.03
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 -1.21%

What weaker historical analogues tended to deliver.

Median example +3.78%

The middle outcome from the nearest resolved examples.

Upper quartile +10.13%

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 -5.98%

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

Price vs Fair Value -19.74%

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

Market Dynamics -0.00

Market Dynamics are neutral.

Relative Strength -0.24

The stock is lagging relative strength.

Market Activity -0.14

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
INV
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.6014 lower -10.70%
TLX
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5947 higher +16.53%
AST
LSE
2026-06-12 0.5899 higher +18.57%
TMK
ASX
2026-06-12 0.5815 higher +8.00%
PET
LSE
2026-06-12 0.5719 flat 0.00%
PMTS
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5603 higher +2.57%
SKYH
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5497 higher +7.27%
AURA
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5399 higher +6.71%
PRTS
NASDAQ
2026-06-05 0.5386 higher +3.34%
CDXS
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5376 higher +1.25%
5210
KLS
2026-06-12 0.5368 higher +12.31%
REBN
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5362 higher +4.29%
UJO
LSE
2026-06-12 0.5349 higher +8.21%
TFX
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5346 higher +4.02%
RELY
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5316 higher +24.58%
IBTA
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5301 lower -1.66%
CRDL
TOR
2026-06-12 0.5288 lower -1.37%
OBSRV
OSL
2026-06-05 0.5248 lower -0.89%
SBAC
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5228 lower -7.21%
PTEC
LSE
2026-06-12 0.5214 higher +14.08%
PRTS
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5209 lower -15.54%
ASTH
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5196 higher +21.37%
QTRH
TOR
2026-06-12 0.517 higher +32.97%
OXM
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5164 lower -1.32%
SCYX
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5162 higher +3.55%
TZOO
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.5152 higher +1.77%
STX
ASX
2026-06-12 0.5139 lower -4.76%
DYA
TOR
2026-06-12 0.5132 higher +4.17%
HNST
NASDAQ
2026-06-12 0.513 higher +10.77%
CODI
NYSE
2026-06-12 0.5113 lower -2.14%
Distinctive drivers

What made this setup unusual

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

  • Sector structure 0.85619
  • Factor stack 0.84827
  • Momentum context 0.80791
  • Quality context 0.72807
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 return3.78%4 weeks after entry
Middle 80% of outcomes-5.01% to 18.85%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%
2
โˆ’10 to โˆ’5%
1
โˆ’5 to 0%
6
0 to 5%
9
5 to 10%
4
โ‰ฅ 10%
8

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

Does one observation change the story?

Selected-example mean
5.36%
Without the best outcome
4.41%
Without the worst outcome
6.08%
Non-overlapping within each company
6.08% 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
66.9%
5.38%3055%0.53
SectorSame country
87.1%
10.87%3030%0.48
IndustrySame country
87.4%
14.73%3015%0.43

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 reclaiming trend and relative strength stopping its lag before treating the upside 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