Forecast reliability rates how much to trust a forecast's confidence band — Calibrated, Wider range, Uncertain or Pending — from that ticker's own backtested band calibration.
Calibrated — the 90% band has historically covered close to 90% of realized prices for this ticker, so you can read it at face value. Wider range — the band is softer than our best-calibrated forecasts; lean toward the wide ends of the range, not the point estimate, and size smaller.
Uncertain — a real, backtested reason to distrust the band (historically over-confident, or unusually wide); treat the call as WAIT until it clears. Pending — the stock is too newly listed to backtest the band yet, so it is "not enough evidence," not a red flag.
Reliability is derived only from numbers the model already computes: the horizon's backtested CI90 coverage (does the 90% band historically contain about 90% of outcomes?), how wide the band is relative to price, and whether a calibration haircut had to widen the raw band. It is a statement about this ticker's own historical band calibration — the per-ticker companion to the platform-wide CI90 coverage figure — never a promise about any single future trade.
Reliability is per-ticker because aggregate calibration hides wide dispersion. On the committed TOP-20 backtest the 90% bands covered 90.63% of realized prices at 3 months on average — but AAPL's 3-month band covered 85.7%, near the low edge of well-calibrated, while AVGO's 1-year band, going through a structural break, covered only 36.5% (badly over-confident — exactly what the label flags). A quiet, familiar name is no guarantee: MA and V covered just 55.6% and 57.1% at 3 months. Check the label on the name you trade, not the platform average.
Live example: AAPL's own 3-month backtest CI90 coverage is 94.4% — the share of past 90% bands the model drew for this ticker that the realized price actually fell inside. That per-ticker coverage is the main input the reliability read looks at. See the full AAPL forecast for the current band this reliability label attaches to.
A well-calibrated band means the width of the uncertainty is honest — not that the forecast pointed the right way. How often the model calls up-vs-down is a separate axis (directional hit rate), and how strong its current view is (model confidence) is a third, distinct number. Reliability is only about whether the band is honest about its own uncertainty.
No. Reliability only rates how much to trust the band's width — it is separate from the forecast's direction and its entry timing. A calibrated band can still point the wrong way.
Treat the call as WAIT until it clears — Uncertain means there is a real, backtested reason to distrust the band, so acting on the point estimate is a bet you can't size honestly.
Because calibration varies a lot per ticker. On the committed TOP-20 backtest, AAPL's 3-month band covered 85.7% of realized prices while AVGO's 1-year band covered only 36.5%. A structural break is one cause, but not the only one — some large, stable names are poorly covered too, which is why the label is computed per ticker rather than assumed from the company.
AAPL analysis shows this metric in context, or browse all S&P 500 tickers.
Educational research only — not investment advice.