For this research, I compared 32 well-known stock chart patterns using published historical performance data. I ranked the top 12 by breakout success, then compared their average post-breakout percentage move.
The strongest chart pattern in this comparison is the Rounding Bottom, with a 96% historical breakout-success rate. The Cup and Handle ranks second at 95% but produces the largest average upward move at 54%.
Chart Pattern Breakout Success & Percent Gain
| Chart Patterns Ranked | Breakout Tested | Failure Rate | Breakout Success* | Average Price Move |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Rounding Bottom | Up | 4% | 96% | +48% |
| 2. Cup & Handle | Up | 5% | 95% | +54% |
| 3. Big W Double Bottom | Up | 9% | 91% | +46% |
| 4. Inverse Head & Shoulders | Up | 11% | 89% | +45% |
| 5. Eve & Eve Double Bottom | Up | 12% | 88% | +50% |
| 6. Triple Bottom | Up | 13% | 87% | +46% |
| 7. Rectangle Top | Up | 15% | 85% | +51% |
| 8. Rectangle Bottom | Up | 15% | 85% | +48% |
| 9. High & Tight Bull Flag | Up | 15% | 85% | +39% |
| 10. Ascending Triangle | Up | 17% | 83% | +43% |
| 11. Head & Shoulders Top | Down | 19% | 81% | −16% |
| 12. Descending Triangle | Up | 22% | 78% | +38% |
Performance Data Courtesy of thepatternsite.com, permission kindly granted by Tom Bulkowski. See research source and clarifications.
*Breakout Success = 100% minus the historical break-even failure rate. It means the pattern moved at least 5% beyond its confirmed breakout before reversing; it does not represent the percentage of profitable trades.
Not all chart patterns perform equally. Some formations have historically broken out successfully far more often than others, while some have produced much larger price moves after confirmation. That distinction matters because reliability and percent gain are not the same thing.
A pattern can break successfully more often but produce a smaller average move. Another may fail slightly more often but generate much larger gains when it works.
For a broader introduction to pattern types, trendlines, reversals, continuations, and pattern identification, start with my 22 Proven Stock Chart Price Patterns guide.
What the Results Tell Us
First, high breakout reliability does not guarantee the biggest price move. The Rounding Bottom ranks first for breakout success at 96%, but the Cup and Handle produces the larger average rise at 54%.
Second, breakout direction matters enormously. The same formation can have very different performance statistics depending on whether price breaks above resistance or below support.
Third, some popular textbook patterns are surprisingly weak. Rising Wedges, Falling Wedges, generic Flags, and Pennants deserve much more caution than their popularity suggests.
How I Ranked the Chart Patterns
I ranked these 12 formations primarily using historical break-even failure rates.
A low failure rate means that, historically, relatively few confirmed patterns failed to move at least 5% beyond their breakout.
| Metric | What It Means |
|---|---|
| Failure Rate | Percentage failing to move at least 5% beyond the breakout |
| Breakout Success | 100% minus the break-even failure rate |
| Average Price Move | Historical average rise or decline following confirmation |
| Breakout Direction | Whether the tested breakout was upward or downward |
Most of the results used here are for bull markets, allowing more meaningful comparisons between patterns.
It is also important to understand Bulkowski’s term “perfect trades.” These figures measure the price movement available between the breakout and the subsequent ultimate high or low. They do not assume that an actual trader bought the exact breakout and sold at the perfect exit.
That is why I call the final column Average Price Move, not “trading profit.”
Automatically Identifying Chart Patterns
Traditionally, identifying chart patterns, drawing trendlines, and plotting target prices required manual effort. However, with the advent of TradingView, most chart patterns can now be automatically detected, streamlining the analysis process for professionals. TradingView is the number one charting service in the world and is loved by Liberated Stock Trader readers.
Software guide: Compare their pattern libraries, detection accuracy, scanning capabilities, and automation in my 5 Best Chart Pattern Recognition Tools test.
1. Rounding Bottom: 96% Breakout Success, 48% Gain
| Metric | Result |
|---|---|
| Failure Rate | 4% |
| Breakout Success | 96% |
| Average Gain | 48% |
| Historical Sample | 990 perfect trades |
The Rounding Bottom ranks first for breakout reliability in this comparison.
It develops when a prolonged decline gradually loses momentum, the price begins to flatten, and buying pressure eventually produces a sustained recovery. The resulting price structure resembles a large rounded bowl.
Historically, only 4% of confirmed Rounding Bottoms failed to move more than 5% above their breakout, implying a 96% breakout success rate.
The average post-breakout rise was 48%.
Its main weakness is practical rather than statistical: a true Rounding Bottom can take considerable time to develop and is usually easier to recognize on daily or weekly charts than on short intraday timeframes.
Learn more: See how support, resistance, trendlines, reversals, and other formations are identified in my 22 Proven Stock Chart Price Patterns guide.
2. Cup & Handle: 95% Breakout Success, 54% Gain
| Metric | Result |
|---|---|
| Failure Rate | 5% |
| Breakout Success | 95% |
| Average Gain | 54% |
| Historical Sample | 913 perfect trades |
The Cup and Handle ranks second in historical breakout reliability but yields the largest average gain among the 12 patterns tested here.
The cup forms as price gradually rounds downward and then recovers toward its previous high. A smaller consolidation then creates the handle.
The pattern is confirmed when price breaks above the resistance level formed near the top of the cup.
With a 5% failure rate, 95% of the historical formations in this dataset moved more than 5% beyond the breakout. The average subsequent rise was 54%.
This makes the Cup and Handle particularly interesting because it combines both high reliability and strong post-breakout performance.
Deep dive: Learn how to identify, confirm, and trade this formation with my Cup & Handle Pattern tutorial.
3. Big W Double Bottom: 91% Breakout Success, 46% Gain
| Metric | Result |
|---|---|
| Failure Rate | 9% |
| Breakout Success | 91% |
| Average Gain | 46% |
| Historical Sample | 2,100+ perfect trades |
The Big W is a large double-bottom formation with two pronounced lows and relatively tall sides.
It ranks third in this comparison with a 9% historical failure rate, giving it a 91% implied breakout-success rate. Its average rise after confirmation was 46%.
The formation confirms when price closes above the peak separating the two bottoms.
The Big W is less widely discussed than the conventional Double Bottom, but its historical data are stronger than many much more famous chart patterns.
Learn more: For a complete explanation of double bottoms, reversals, confirmation, and breakout analysis, see my 22 Proven Stock Chart Price Patterns guide.
4. Inverse Head & Shoulders: 89% Breakout Success, 45% Gain
| Metric | Result |
|---|---|
| Failure Rate | 11% |
| Breakout Success | 89% |
| Average Gain | 45% |
| Historical Sample | 3,197 perfect trades |
The Inverse Head and Shoulders is one of the best-known bullish reversal formations.
It contains three major lows. The middle low, or head, falls beneath the left and right shoulders.
The formation is not complete merely because three troughs appear. Confirmation occurs when price breaks above the neckline connecting the intervening highs.
Historically, the pattern produced an 11% break-even failure rate and a 45% average rise after confirmation.
That gives it an implied breakout-success rate of 89%.
Deep dive: Learn exactly how to recognize the neckline, confirm the breakout, set targets, and trade the formation in my Inverse Head & Shoulders tutorial.
5. Eve & Eve Double Bottom: 88% Breakout Success, 50% Gain
| Metric | Result |
|---|---|
| Failure Rate | 12% |
| Breakout Success | 88% |
| Average Gain | 50% |
| Historical Sample | 952 perfect trades |
Not every Double Bottom has identical historical performance.
Bulkowski divides Double Bottoms into four types: Adam & Adam, Adam & Eve, Eve & Adam, and Eve & Eve.
The Eve & Eve variation contains two relatively wide, rounded bottoms rather than sharp V-shaped lows.
It produced a 12% failure rate and a substantial 50% average rise.
Confirmation occurs only when price closes above the intervening peak between the two bottoms. Without that breakout, the W-shape remains an unconfirmed formation.
Deep dive: Learn how to distinguish valid double bottoms from incomplete W-patterns and trade the confirmation with my Double Bottom Pattern tutorial.
6. Triple Bottom: 87% Breakout Success, 46% Gain
| Metric | Result |
|---|---|
| Failure Rate | 13% |
| Breakout Success | 87% |
| Average Gain | 46% |
| Historical Sample | 2,500+ perfect trades |
A Triple Bottom tests approximately the same support area three times.
This suggests that sellers have repeatedly failed to push price sustainably below the support zone.
The formation does not confirm until price breaks above resistance formed by the peaks between the three bottoms.
Historically, Triple Bottoms had a 13% break-even failure rate, translating to an 87% breakout success rate, with an average rise of 46%.
They are less common than Double Bottoms because three distinct lows rarely align cleanly enough to satisfy the pattern rules.
Deep dive: Learn how to identify the three lows, the confirmation level, the breakout, and the target in my Triple Bottom Pattern tutorial.
7. Rectangle Top: 85% Breakout Success, 51% Gain
| Metric | Result |
|---|---|
| Failure Rate | 15% |
| Breakout Success | 85% |
| Average Gain | 51% |
A Rectangle Top forms when price consolidates between approximately horizontal support and resistance after entering the trading range from below.
The key is not the rectangular shape itself but which direction price eventually breaks.
For upward breakouts in bull markets, Rectangle Tops produced a 15% failure rate and a 51% average rise.
That 51% average move is the second-largest gain among the 12 formations in this article.
Downward Rectangle Top breakouts perform much worse, which is why waiting for confirmation is crucial.
Deep dive: Learn how to identify rectangle support and resistance, distinguish tops from bottoms, and trade breakouts in both directions in my Rectangle Chart Pattern tutorial.
8. Rectangle Bottom: 85% Breakout Success, 48% Gain
| Metric | Result |
|---|---|
| Failure Rate | 15% |
| Breakout Success | 85% |
| Average Gain | 48% |
A Rectangle Bottom also consists of horizontal support and resistance, but price enters the formation from above rather than below.
For upward breakouts, historical testing produced a 15% failure rate and a 48% average rise.
The downward breakout statistics are considerably weaker: the same formation has a 24% failure rate and a 16% average decline when price breaks below support.
This demonstrates why calling a rectangle simply “bullish” or “bearish” before confirmation can be misleading.
Deep dive: Learn how to identify the trading range and trade confirmed rectangle breakouts with my Rectangle Chart Pattern tutorial.
9. High & Tight Bull Flag: 85% Breakout Success, 39% Gain
| Metric | Result |
|---|---|
| Failure Rate | 15% |
| Breakout Success | 85% |
| Average Gain | 39% |
| Historical Sample | 1,028 perfect trades |
The High & Tight Flag is not the same thing as every ordinary Bull Flag.
It follows an unusually strong prior price advance and then enters a relatively short consolidation.
The specific High & Tight Flag formation produced a 15% break-even failure rate and 39% average rise.
That is materially stronger than the performance of generic flag formations, which have much higher failure rates.
So I would be careful whenever someone quotes the High & Tight Flag statistics as evidence that all Bull Flags are highly reliable.
They are not.
Deep dive: Learn the difference between a normal Bull Flag and the high-performance variation, including entry and breakout rules, in my Bull Flag Pattern tutorial.
10. Ascending Triangle: 83% Breakout Success, 43% Gain
| Metric | Upward Breakout |
|---|---|
| Failure Rate | 17% |
| Breakout Success | 83% |
| Average Gain | 43% |
An Ascending Triangle typically contains a horizontal resistance line and an upward-sloping support line formed by progressively higher lows.
It is commonly described as bullish, but the formation itself does not guarantee an upward breakout.
For confirmed upward breakouts in bull markets, the historical failure rate was 17%, yielding an 83% implied breakout success rate and a 43% average rise.
The downside statistics are much weaker: downward breakouts show a 38% failure rate and an average decline of just 13%.
The lesson is straightforward: wait for the breakout rather than predicting it from the pattern’s name.
Deep dive: Learn how to draw the two trendlines, confirm the breakout, and trade both bullish and bearish outcomes in my Ascending Triangle Pattern tutorial.
11. Head & Shoulders Top: 81% Breakout Success, 16% Decline
| Metric | Result |
|---|---|
| Failure Rate | 19% |
| Breakout Success | 81% |
| Average Price Move | −16% |
| Historical Sample | 2,800+ perfect trades |
The Head and Shoulders Top is the major bearish pattern in this ranking.
It contains three peaks, with the central head extending above the left and right shoulders.
Confirmation occurs when price breaks beneath the neckline.
Historical testing shows a 19% break-even failure rate and an average decline of 16%, corresponding to an 81% implied breakout-success rate.
Notice how much smaller that average downside move is than many of the upside moves earlier in this study.
That reflects an important feature of stock markets: long-term equity markets have historically had an upward bias, making bearish formations particularly important to evaluate carefully.
Deep dive: Learn how to identify the shoulders, neckline, breakdown, target, and invalidation level in my Head & Shoulders Pattern tutorial.
12. Descending Triangle: 78% Breakout Success, 38% Gain
| Metric | Upward Breakout |
|---|---|
| Failure Rate | 22% |
| Breakout Success | 78% |
| Average Gain | 38% |
The Descending Triangle has a downward-sloping resistance line above price and horizontal support underneath it.
Despite its bearish appearance, the strongest historical result used in this ranking is actually its upward breakout.
Upward breakouts recorded a 22% break-even failure rate and an average rise of 38%, yielding an implied breakout success rate of 78%.
Downward breakouts produced a similar 23% failure rate but only a 15% average decline.
This is another example of why pattern direction should be determined by the actual breakout, not simply by the formation’s traditional name.
Deep dive: Learn how to identify, confirm, and trade both upside and downside breakouts with my Descending Triangle Pattern tutorial.
Popular Chart Patterns With Weaker Results
Several extremely popular formations did not make the top 12.
That does not mean they never work. It means their historical failure rates or average moves are lower than those of the leading formations above.
| Pattern | Breakout | Failure Rate | Breakout Success | Avg. Price Move |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rising Wedge | Up | 19% | 81% | +38% |
| Rising Wedge | Down | 51% | 49% | −9% |
| Falling Wedge | Up | 26% | 74% | +38% |
| Pennant | Up | 54% | 46% | +7% |
| Pennant | Down | 54% | 46% | −6% |
Published data show particularly weak results for bearish Rising Wedge breakouts and Pennants. Pennant results are also measured over the shorter-term price swing rather than the ultimate high/low methodology used for most larger formations.
Rising Wedge: The Bearish Reputation Is Questionable
The Rising Wedge is conventionally presented as bearish.
Historical data suggest being much more cautious with that assumption.
Upward breakouts produced a 19% failure rate and 38% average rise, while downward breakouts failed to move more than 5% about 51% of the time and averaged only a 9% decline.
That makes the commonly expected bearish Rising Wedge breakout one of the weaker classical setups in the research.
Deep dive: See the full evidence, setup rules, and breakout examples in my Rising Wedge Pattern tutorial.
Falling Wedge: Useful, but Not Among the Best
A Falling Wedge is commonly considered bullish, but its historical performance does not rank it among the strongest formations.
Upward breakouts have a 26% failure rate, corresponding to a 74% breakout success rate, with an average rise of 38%.
That is respectable, but materially weaker than the leading Rounding Bottom, Cup and Handle, Double Bottom, and Triple Bottom formations.
Deep dive: Learn how to identify converging trendlines and trade confirmed upside breakouts in my Falling Wedge Pattern tutorial.
Pennants: Avoid Treating Them as High-Probability Signals
Pennants are popular with short-term traders, but the historical evidence is unimpressive.
Both upward and downward Pennant breakouts have a 54% break-even failure rate.
That yields only a 46% implied breakout success rate using the methodology in this article.
The average price moves are also relatively small at approximately +7% for upward breakouts and −6% for downward moves.
This does not mean a Pennant can never work. It means it should not be treated as a highly reliable standalone signal.
- Bullish deep dive: Read why the numbers warrant caution in my Bull Pennant tutorial.
- Bearish deep dive: For downside setups, see my Bear Pennant tutorial.
Bullish vs. Bearish Chart Patterns
The data also make clear why separating bullish and bearish performance matters.
A chart formation is not necessarily bullish or bearish simply because of its name or visual shape. Many formations can break in either direction.
For traders specifically looking for upside setups, I rank patterns separately based on their historical bullish performance in my 10 Accurate Bullish Chart Patterns study.
For downside signals, breakdowns, and short-selling formations, see my research on 8 Accurate Bearish Chart Patterns.
Those pages focus on directional behavior. This page focuses on comparing overall breakout reliability and percent price movement.
How to Use Chart Pattern Success Rates
The most useful way to apply these statistics is as a filter, not as a complete trading strategy.
A 95% historical breakout success rate does not mean you should automatically buy whenever something vaguely resembles a Cup and Handle.
Before trading any chart pattern, verify that:
- The formation actually meets the identification criteria.
- Price has confirmed the breakout.
- You know whether you are trading an upward or downward breakout.
- Your stop-loss or invalidation level is defined before entry.
- The expected reward justifies the risk.
- You have tested the setup under the market conditions and timeframe you intend to use for trading.
A pattern can have excellent historical statistics and still fail on its next occurrence.
What historical testing gives you is a better starting point: evidence that some formations deserve more attention than others.
Chart Patterns vs. Candlestick Patterns
Chart patterns and candlestick patterns are related forms of technical analysis, but they are not the same thing.
Chart patterns normally develop across multiple price swings and are defined by support, resistance, trendlines, peaks, troughs, and breakout levels.
Examples include:
Cup and Handle, Head and Shoulders, Double Bottom, Rectangles, Triangles, and Wedges.
Candlestick patterns usually consist of one or a small number of individual candles and rely on the relationship among their open, high, low, and close. See The 10 Best Candle Patterns Proven With 56,680 Trades
Examples include:
Hammer, Doji, Engulfing, Harami, and Morning Star patterns.
Keeping these categories separate helps avoid comparing statistics produced by very different types of formations.
Chart Pattern Reliability FAQ
What chart pattern has the highest breakout success rate?
Of the 12 patterns compared here, the Rounding Bottom ranks first with a 96% historical breakout-success rate, calculated from a 4% break-even failure rate. Its average post-breakout gain was 48%.
Which chart pattern has the highest average percent gain?
The Cup and Handle produced the largest average upward move in this comparison, at 54%, and recorded a 95% breakout success rate.
What does an 89% breakout-success rate mean?
It does not mean 89% of traders make money. It means that under the historical methodology used here, 11% of confirmed patterns failed to move more than 5% in the breakout direction before reversing. Therefore, 89% cleared that 5% threshold.
Are chart-pattern gains the same as trading profits?
No. The percentage gains in this article represent historical post-breakout price movement. They do not account for your actual entry price, exit timing, commissions, slippage, stop-loss placement, taxes, or position sizing.
Do I need to wait for the breakout?
For the statistics used in this comparison, yes. The historical figures generally begin after pattern confirmation.
Entering before confirmation means you are making a different trade from the one represented by these statistics.
Are bullish chart patterns more reliable than bearish patterns?
Not automatically. The result depends on the specific formation and breakout direction.
However, many of the strongest results in this comparison are upward breakouts, while several popular bearish formations produce relatively small average declines or high failure rates.
See my studies, “10 Accurate Bullish Chart Patterns” and “8 Accurate Bearish Chart Patterns,” for the directional breakdown.
What is the weakest popular chart pattern?
Pennants are among the weakest well-known formations in this research.
Both upward and downward Pennant breakouts have a 54% break-even failure rate, meaning fewer than half moved at least 5% in the breakout direction under the methodology used here.
Can software automatically detect these patterns?
Yes. Several platforms now automatically identify chart formations, and some can scan entire markets for them.
See my comparison of the 5 Best Chart Pattern Recognition Tools for the tools I tested.
Summary: The Best Chart Patterns by Breakout Success & Percent Gain
Historical chart-pattern research shows large differences in reliability and post-breakout performance.
The Rounding Bottom ranks first for breakout reliability with a 96% success rate and 48% average rise.
The Cup and Handle ranks second for reliability at 95% but produces the largest average gain at 54%.
The Big W, Inverse Head and Shoulders, Eve & Eve Double Bottom, Triple Bottom, Rectangle Top, Rectangle Bottom, and High & Tight Flag have also historically produced strong breakout results.
At the opposite end, popular formations such as Pennants and bearish Rising Wedges performed much less reliably than their reputation might suggest.
The central lesson from the data is not that chart patterns predict the future.
It is that some formations have historically produced much better breakout statistics than others.
Use those statistics to prioritize setups, wait for confirmation, define your risk, and then test the pattern under the market conditions you actually trade.
For the next step, use the 22 Proven Stock Chart Price Patterns guide to learn the broader pattern framework, or go directly to the individual deep-dive tutorials linked throughout this research.
Learn the Success Rates of 65 Chart Patterns
The Encyclopedia of Chart Patterns by Tom Bulkowski details the reliability and success rates of 65 chart patterns and shows you how to trade them.
It is an indispensable resource for traders and investors seeking to enhance their profitability by leveraging stock chart patterns. This comprehensive reference book provides in-depth explanations and detailed illustrations of over 65 different patterns, including Head and Shoulders, Double Tops, Wedges, Flags, Gaps, and more.
Support Tom’s great work by purchasing his book and visiting his website, ThePatternSite.com
Research sources and clarifications
The historical data in this article are based on the chart-pattern research of Thomas Bulkowski, author of Encyclopedia of Chart Patterns. His published rankings compare break-even failure rates and post-breakout price movement across thousands of chart formations. Bulkowski’s Chart Pattern Failure Research
Bulkowski defines a break-even failure as a pattern that fails to move more than 5% beyond its breakout before reversing. I therefore calculate:
Breakout Success Rate = 100% − Break-Even Failure Rate
This is not a trader win rate.
Likewise, the average percentage gain measures historical price movement from the breakout toward the subsequent high or low. It does not mean a trader would have captured the entire move. Bulkowski explicitly separates pattern performance from actual trading returns. The Pattern Site
Thanks Michael for your kind comments and feedback. When I update this articles, I will look at expectancy.
thanks Barry
I am enjoying reviewing your written articles and also a big fan of Thomas Bulkowski and his many books on Western & Eastern price patterns, especially under varying market conditions! As to your topic on ‘Western’ patterns, ranking them by ‘Success Rate’ is one approach, but drawing upon my MBA days, there is a more accurate approach called “Expected Value Theory” (EVT) that also includes the results of both Wins and Losses to more accurately reflect the expected ‘overall’ results by continuously following a strategy. The EVT formula combines the following, (Success Rate of Wins [%] * Average Price Change of Wins [%]) – (Unsuccess Rate of Losses [%] * Average Price Change of Losses [%]). The preceding formula looks at the results of both Wins and Losses to provide a better (realistic) statistic in measuring a strategy, especially if the Losses tend to be biggiers versus the Wins! Applying this EVT formula would likely change the rankings of several of the above patterns. This is also one of my personal measures in assessing experts in the investing-trading field as many haven’t heard of it and tend to flaunt their winners without including the losses.
Hi Charlie, the steps forward in technical analysis and automated pattern recognition mean new insights are coming thick and fast. Thanks for the comment.
I found this article incredibly informative, I had no idea that deep research has been done on chart patterns. Impressive that they actually work according to data. Thanks