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.

Primary-source evidence is constructive but the setup remains a cautious monitor rather than a high-conviction bull call. The company’s Q1 release showed strong wholesale growth and kept FY26 guidance unchanged, while BofA and Jefferies both lifted targets after the print. Shares traded around $9.92 (+3.98%) on May 26 and were still $9.92 on May 27 UTC, suggesting a positive but not clearly decisive reaction. Coverage is still thin and forward visibility depends on wholesale order conversion, capex discipline, and balance-sheet execution.

The first read is mildly positive but not decisive: the company beat consensus and the stock reportedly rose 2.4% after hours, yet the release also showed y/y revenue and profit declines plus a cautious Q2 outlook. Coverage did not surface a clear fresh analyst target/revision wave, so this is best treated as a monitoring setup rather than a thesis reset.

Post-earnings news tone is constructive around the record revenue and higher Q2 outlook, but this remains an early T+1 follow-up. The peer set is now anchored to more relevant high-speed analog/connectivity and wireless IoT comparators, while analyst-revision evidence in the packet is still incomplete; treat the memo as positive but monitoring-oriented rather than a fully confirmed rerating call.

Headline tone is strongly positive and the stock has extended sharply from the May 22 anchor price (295.88 versus 260.52, about +13.6%), but analyst revision / target-change data were not available in the packet, so this is best treated as a monitoring-style rerating rather than a fully confirmed sell-side upgrade cycle.

Primary-source evidence remains anchored to the March 18 FY2025 earnings 8-K and the March 27 10-K; I did not find a verified May 26, 2026 earnings release in primary company sources, so this stays a cautious monitoring view. Shares are about 4.9% above the May 22 anchor, which is consistent with a modestly positive news tone, but the move is not yet clearly tied to a verified earnings reaction. Coverage on post-print analyst revisions is thin, so conviction stays modest; Berkshire-related headlines are a secondary positive, not thesis-changing, input.

Primary-source results were constructive and the stock reportedly rose about 3% after hours on better-than-consensus EPS and revenue, but the follow-through remains to be tested. No fresh analyst revision set is visible yet, so this is a positive-but-cautious earnings follow-up rather than a high-conviction rerating call.