pattern research

Do chart patterns actually work? We tested 11 of them

Chart patterns are taught as if they were established facts. They are testable claims, so we tested them: 758,032 daily sessions across 153 S&P 500 names, 2005-01-01 to 2025-01-01.

5 of 11 moved the odds at all. 2 of those moved them the opposite way to the textbook.

PatternTextbook saysInstancesHigher in 5 daysvs base rateVerdict
RSI overboughtbearish reversal55,84252.4%-2.3 ptsworks as advertised
60-day high breakoutbullish continuation79,94952.6%-2.1 ptsworks, backwards
Hammerbullish reversal5,95353.8%-0.9 ptsno measurable effect
Bearish engulfingbearish reversal14,93054.8%+0.0 ptsno measurable effect
Golden crossbullish trend change2,19054.8%+0.0 ptsno measurable effect
Dojiindecision, possible reversal79,77855.1%+0.3 ptsno measurable effect
Death crossbearish trend change2,12855.5%+0.7 ptsno measurable effect
Shooting starbearish reversal6,67255.9%+1.1 ptsno measurable effect
Bullish engulfingbullish reversal8,42656.0%+1.3 ptsworks as advertised
RSI oversoldbullish reversal21,04057.8%+3.1 ptsworks as advertised
60-day low breakdownbearish continuation32,18958.0%+3.3 ptsworks, backwards

Sorted weakest to strongest. "vs base rate" is the gap against the 54.7% of all bars in this sample that closed higher five sessions later. Generated 2026-08-11.

What the table says

The candlestick patterns are the weakest group. The hammer, the doji, the shooting star and the bearish engulfing bar are among the most searched terms in technical analysis, and none of them separates from the base rate. The golden cross, which reliably makes headlines, is exactly flat across 2,190 occurrences.

The two conditions that work best both run backwards. A close at a 60-day high is taught as strength that continues, and is followed by below-average returns. A close at a 60-day low is taught as weakness that continues, and is the most bullish condition in the backtest. Over one week on large-cap US stocks, the extremes mean revert rather than continue.

What people do about it

Knowing which signals work is only half the question. The other half is what readers actually do when they see one, and that needs a crowd calling the same blind chart. On Read the Tape, across 52 settled charts, the textbook lean was right on 46.2% of them. The crowd followed it on 71.2%.

Those are chart counts, not call counts. Every player sees the same five charts a day, so 4,847 calls do not make 52 charts into 4,847 independent trials. At this sample the textbook is not yet distinguishable from a coin flip, which is itself worth stating given what it claims. Updated 2026-08-11.

How this was measured

Every pattern is scored the same way. Take 153 S&P 500 names, 2005-01-01 to 2025-01-01, which is 758,032 daily sessions. Mark every bar where the pattern completes, using only information available at that bar. Measure the close 5 trading sessions later, the same horizon the game itself uses. Compare against the base rate across all bars in the same sample, which is 54.7% higher after five sessions.

The comparison is a two-sided test of proportions and the threshold is the conventional 5%. "No measurable effect" means the pattern failed that bar, not that the effect is exactly zero. The code is one file and the definitions are written out in full on each page, so you can disagree with a threshold and see what it changes.

What this does not show

These are unconditional five-day results on large-cap US stocks over one twenty-year window. They say nothing about intraday trading, about other markets, or about a pattern used in combination with something else. A trader who uses the hammer as one input among several is not tested here. Neither is any pattern at a horizon other than five sessions, and a signal can be useless over a week and useful over a quarter.

Call five blind charts yourself →