Q60, Q75 and Q90 are percentiles of a quantum forecast's outcome distribution — where the model thinks price could land, read as probabilities. Q90 is the price it estimates only a ~10% chance of exceeding, not a target to sell at.
Q60 is the level the model estimates a 60% chance the price finishes at or below (40% above); Q75 and Q90 are the same idea at higher, less likely levels. Read them as a fan of outcomes, not a list of targets: the median (Q50) is the model's best single guess, the upper percentiles sketch the good-case tail, and the width between a low and a high percentile is your uncertainty — which is what should drive position size, not any single percentile.
The most common beginner mistake is reading a high percentile like Q90 as a "sell here" target. It isn't one — it is an optimistic edge with only about a one-in-ten chance of being beaten. The R-multiple take-profit ladder (TP1/TP2/TP3), shown separately, is the actual exit plan.
Forecast percentiles and the confidence interval are the same distribution described two ways: the 90% band is literally the span between the Q05 and Q95 percentiles, and the 50% band the span between Q25 and Q75. So asking whether Q95 is honest is the same as asking whether the 90% band actually contains about 90% of outcomes — which is what CI90 coverage measures.
Live example: AAPL last traded around $333.74, and the model's current 3-month Q95 forecast percentile is $392.52 — the price the model estimates there is only about a 5% chance of finishing above at this horizon (a 95% chance of finishing at or below it). The Q90 the ticker page displays is read exactly the same way, just a little less extreme. It is a statement about where price could land — not a target to sell at and not a promise. See the full AAPL forecast for the current percentile band this attaches to.
On the committed TOP-20 backtest the 90% band (Q05-to-Q95) covered 90.63% of realized prices at 3 months, 90.91% at 6 months and 90.20% at 1 year, and the 50% band (Q25-to-Q75) covered about 52% at 3 months — close to the labels, so the cut-points are on average honestly placed. But the aggregate hides wide dispersion: AAPL's 3-month band covered 85.7% while AVGO's 1-year band, in a structural break, covered only 36.5%. Check the per-ticker forecast-reliability label before leaning on any single percentile.
No. Q90 is the price the model estimates only about a 10% chance of exceeding — an optimistic edge, not where it expects price to go. The R-multiple take-profit ladder (TP1/TP2/TP3), shown separately, is the actual exit plan.
Q60 is the level the model estimates a 60% chance the price finishes at or below (40% above) — a cut-point on the forecast's full distribution of possible outcomes, not a prediction it will reach exactly there.
They are the same distribution: the 90% band is the span between Q05 and Q95, the 50% band between Q25 and Q75. On the committed TOP-20 backtest the 90% band covered 90.63% of realized 3-month prices, so the cut-points are on average honestly placed, though per-ticker calibration varies widely.
AAPL analysis shows this metric in context, or browse all S&P 500 tickers.
Educational research only — not investment advice.