Calendar

Carnival showed improving operations and had a decent tape into June 23: the last reported quarter beat on both EPS and revenue, the 5-day move was positive, and volume improved on at least one session. But the available evidence still fell short of this screen’s stricter standard because the upside-revision signal was modest, the most recent volume snapshots were below the 1.5x threshold, and the risk/sector checks were not completed tightly enough pre-event.

Fervo had an operational growth story and a confirmed June 22 premarket report, but the available pre-event public estimate trail was too thin for this schema’s required EPS-and-revenue consensus discipline. Without credible street estimate sources and with limited tape verification, it remained a thin-data reject.

Sunbelt had a good-looking operating backdrop from its prior quarter and an official June 23 event, but the public pre-event estimate trail was thin in the sources I could verify quickly. Without credible consensus EPS plus revenue sources and a fuller tape stack, it stayed a thin-data reject despite a decent underlying business tone.

Korn Ferry had a confirmed event date, but the quick pre-event public estimate trail I could verify was too sparse to satisfy the schema’s EPS-plus-revenue consensus requirement. That made it a thin-data reject rather than a true setup call.

FedEx had decent fundamentals into the quarter, with a strong prior report and a respectable Q4 consensus, but the tape was not favorable enough for this screen. Five-day performance was negative, the most direct June 18 volume read was below average, and the required sector/risk checks were not completed with enough confidence to call for a pre-earnings upside surprise.

Cerebras had a compelling AI narrative and a visible June 23 release, but the pre-event setup was too noisy and too thin for this screen. Consensus revenue and EPS were available, yet the business carried meaningful concentration and profitability risk, and I did not verify the required recent accumulation-volume and price-stack details cleanly enough to frame it as a skeptical upside-surprise candidate.

General Mills was also mismatched in the supplied universe. Official company investor-relations materials posted fiscal Q4 and full-year 2026 earnings for July 1, 2026, not June 23, 2026, and recent guidance and revenue trends were weak anyway. That pushed GIS out of the requested window and out of consideration.

KB Home had an officially confirmed June 23 print, a close-location pass, and at least one 1.5x volume session. The issue was that the underlying operating backdrop was weak: the prior quarter had steep year-over-year revenue pressure, preview estimates still called for a large year-over-year EPS drop, and homebuilder fundamentals did not show the kind of positive inflection this screen needs.

Paychex had real positives into June 24: official conference-call timing, an above-average prior quarter, and a strong June 20 volume/close snapshot. But the 5-day tape was weak, prior marketwatch sessions showed only ordinary volume, and I did not confirm a clean positive revision/sector-risk stack, so the stock stayed below the qualifying threshold.

McCormick had one of the clearest recent volume spikes in the universe, and its June 25 timing was officially posted. But the tape trend was poor, the stock had been in a multi-day slide, and the available setup looked more like event-driven churn than constructive accumulation ahead of an upside surprise.

NOVAGOLD is not suitable for this screen because checked public materials did not provide a credible current-quarter revenue consensus and the company remains a project-development story rather than a normal operating earnings setup. That makes surprise probability hard to measure using the rules required here.

Micron had the best fundamental pre-print setup in the window: consensus Q3 EPS and revenue were high and the prior quarter plus company guidance pointed to another AI-memory-led beat, while the stock had strong 5-day and 1-month momentum. The setup still failed this screen because the available pre-event tape checks did not confirm the required 1.5x accumulation-volume signal and I did not find a clean sector-tape/risk source strong enough to upgrade it from a near miss to a qualifying pre-earnings surprise candidate.

Nike was in the supplied universe for June 24, but official Nike investor-relations materials posted the fiscal Q4 2026 earnings release for Tuesday, June 30, 2026 after the close. Because that date sits outside the requested June 22 to June 26 window and conflicts with the supplied calendar, the name is disqualified from this screen run.

Jefferies had okay tape into June 24 and the official release date was clear, but the last reported quarter missed EPS and only met revenue, making the setup less favorable than the better cyclical candidates. The stock’s volume pickup and 1-month performance were positive, yet I lacked a strong revision/whisper edge and did not complete a direct risk/sector check, leaving it as a watch-only reject.

H.B. Fuller had published preview estimates, but the checked earnings-date source explicitly treated June 24 as estimated rather than confirmed. Under this screen’s hard rules, the name must be disqualified because the earnings date could not be independently confirmed pre-event.

Darden had a credible restaurant setup with an official/credible June 25 date, positive revenue and EPS history, and at least one recent above-average volume session. Still, the pre-event tape was only mildly strong and the close-location evidence was mixed, while revision and risk/sector confirmation were not strong enough to meet this screen’s stricter upside-surprise standard.

TD SYNNEX had a solid technical setup into June 25, including official earnings timing, strong recent volume, and prior revenue growth tied to the technology distribution ecosystem. What kept it out was the lack of a clear positive EPS revision/whisper signal and the absence of a completed sector/risk confirmation pass before the event.

Acuity had a respectable industrial-tech setup: official June 25 timing, positive 5-day and 1-month price action, near-high close location, and a clear volume pickup. The problem was that the estimate evidence looked more like steady expectations than a sharp positive revision signal, and I did not complete a clean pre-event sector/risk check, so it remained a decent near miss rather than a qualified upside-surprise pick.

Commercial Metals had enough estimate coverage and a solid volume spike, but the setup was fighting weak near-term price action. With 5-day performance negative and the prior quarter missing EPS, the name looked more like a choppy materials trade than a clean underappreciated upside-surprise candidate.

The post-earnings reaction was constructive: the stock traded at $34.29, up 14.7% from the prior close as of 2026-05-27 23:32 UTC. Even so, analyst coverage remains thin and the available target summary is below spot, so this looks like a positive but still cautious monitoring setup rather than a clean thesis reset.

Primary-source support is solid for the earnings release and the forward H1 FY27 guidance checkpoint, but this remains a low-coverage T1 follow-up. The market read was negative after the print and tied to the revenue/BPD execution concerns despite strong adjusted operating income. Confirmed post-print analyst target changes were not available in the packet, so revision evidence remains unavailable and this should be treated as a lower-conviction monitoring update rather than a thesis reset.

Early market coverage on May 27 was positive, with headlines framing the quarter as an earnings beat and shares up roughly 1-2% premarket, but analyst revision data were thin in the packet. Because the FY27 guide is management-led and the turnaround is still early, conviction should stay moderate rather than euphoric.

This is a thin-coverage, low-confidence follow-up. The stock was up 3.7% premarket at $14.49 on 2026-05-28 versus the previous close, but I did not find a fresh SEC earnings filing or post-print analyst revisions in the packet or SEC submissions; the strongest primary evidence remains the March 19 FY25 results/guidance and the May 20 CFO appointment, so treat this as monitoring rather than a fresh re-underwrite.

This is a high-coverage post-earnings follow-up with a strong primary-source beat-and-raise, but the evidence is still T+1 and analyst reaction is thin. The market tone is mixed: Burlington's own release was very strong, yet premarket trading was roughly 11% below the prior close, and trusted headline coverage framed the story as a lift in outlook alongside quarterly sales gains. That combination supports a cautious monitoring stance rather than a fresh bullish upgrade.

Official company messaging and market coverage were clearly positive: the release beat expectations, reiterated FY27 guidance, and news flow said shares were almost 10% higher in premarket trading. By the live quote capture, BBY was still up roughly 2.1% on the day, so some of the initial rerating held, but analyst revision evidence was still thin at this T+1 checkpoint.