Outlook: Lithia Motors Inc. Common Stock is assigned short-term Ba1 & long-term Ba1 estimated rating.
Dominant Strategy : Sell
Time series to forecast n: 14 Jan 2023 for (n+8 weeks)
Methodology : Modular Neural Network (Market News Sentiment Analysis)

## Abstract

Lithia Motors Inc. Common Stock prediction model is evaluated with Modular Neural Network (Market News Sentiment Analysis) and Polynomial Regression1,2,3,4 and it is concluded that the LAD stock is predictable in the short/long term. According to price forecasts for (n+8 weeks) period, the dominant strategy among neural network is: Sell

## Key Points

1. What are buy sell or hold recommendations?
3. Trust metric by Neural Network

## LAD Target Price Prediction Modeling Methodology

We consider Lithia Motors Inc. Common Stock Decision Process with Modular Neural Network (Market News Sentiment Analysis) where A is the set of discrete actions of LAD stock holders, F is the set of discrete states, P : S × F × S → R is the transition probability distribution, R : S × F → R is the reaction function, and γ ∈ [0, 1] is a move factor for expectation.1,2,3,4

F(Polynomial Regression)5,6,7= $\begin{array}{cccc}{p}_{a1}& {p}_{a2}& \dots & {p}_{1n}\\ & ⋮\\ {p}_{j1}& {p}_{j2}& \dots & {p}_{jn}\\ & ⋮\\ {p}_{k1}& {p}_{k2}& \dots & {p}_{kn}\\ & ⋮\\ {p}_{n1}& {p}_{n2}& \dots & {p}_{nn}\end{array}$ X R(Modular Neural Network (Market News Sentiment Analysis)) X S(n):→ (n+8 weeks) $\stackrel{\to }{S}=\left({s}_{1},{s}_{2},{s}_{3}\right)$

n:Time series to forecast

j:Nash equilibria (Neural Network)

k:Dominated move

a:Best response for target price

For further technical information as per how our model work we invite you to visit the article below:

How do AC Investment Research machine learning (predictive) algorithms actually work?

Sample Set: Neural Network
Stock/Index: LAD Lithia Motors Inc. Common Stock
Time series to forecast n: 14 Jan 2023 for (n+8 weeks)

According to price forecasts for (n+8 weeks) period, the dominant strategy among neural network is: Sell

X axis: *Likelihood% (The higher the percentage value, the more likely the event will occur.)

Y axis: *Potential Impact% (The higher the percentage value, the more likely the price will deviate.)

Z axis (Grey to Black): *Technical Analysis%

## IFRS Reconciliation Adjustments for Lithia Motors Inc. Common Stock

1. For the purposes of applying the requirement in paragraph 5.7.7(a), credit risk is different from asset-specific performance risk. Asset-specific performance risk is not related to the risk that an entity will fail to discharge a particular obligation but instead it is related to the risk that a single asset or a group of assets will perform poorly (or not at all).
2. For floating-rate financial assets and floating-rate financial liabilities, periodic re-estimation of cash flows to reflect the movements in the market rates of interest alters the effective interest rate. If a floating-rate financial asset or a floating-rate financial liability is recognised initially at an amount equal to the principal receivable or payable on maturity, re-estimating the future interest payments normally has no significant effect on the carrying amount of the asset or the liability.
3. The following are examples of when the objective of the entity's business model may be achieved by both collecting contractual cash flows and selling financial assets. This list of examples is not exhaustive. Furthermore, the examples are not intended to describe all the factors that may be relevant to the assessment of the entity's business model nor specify the relative importance of the factors.
4. For example, Entity A, whose functional currency is its local currency, has a firm commitment to pay FC150,000 for advertising expenses in nine months' time and a firm commitment to sell finished goods for FC150,000 in 15 months' time. Entity A enters into a foreign currency derivative that settles in nine months' time under which it receives FC100 and pays CU70. Entity A has no other exposures to FC. Entity A does not manage foreign currency risk on a net basis. Hence, Entity A cannot apply hedge accounting for a hedging relationship between the foreign currency derivative and a net position of FC100 (consisting of FC150,000 of the firm purchase commitment—ie advertising services—and FC149,900 (of the FC150,000) of the firm sale commitment) for a nine-month period.

*International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) adjustment process involves reviewing the company's financial statements and identifying any differences between the company's current accounting practices and the requirements of the IFRS. If there are any such differences, neural network makes adjustments to financial statements to bring them into compliance with the IFRS.

## Conclusions

Lithia Motors Inc. Common Stock is assigned short-term Ba1 & long-term Ba1 estimated rating. Lithia Motors Inc. Common Stock prediction model is evaluated with Modular Neural Network (Market News Sentiment Analysis) and Polynomial Regression1,2,3,4 and it is concluded that the LAD stock is predictable in the short/long term. According to price forecasts for (n+8 weeks) period, the dominant strategy among neural network is: Sell

### LAD Lithia Motors Inc. Common Stock Financial Analysis*

Rating Short-Term Long-Term Senior
Outlook*Ba1Ba1
Income StatementCC
Balance SheetB3Ba2
Leverage RatiosCC
Cash FlowBa2Baa2
Rates of Return and ProfitabilityCaa2Baa2

*Financial analysis is the process of evaluating a company's financial performance and position by neural network. It involves reviewing the company's financial statements, including the balance sheet, income statement, and cash flow statement, as well as other financial reports and documents.
How does neural network examine financial reports and understand financial state of the company?

### Prediction Confidence Score

Trust metric by Neural Network: 90 out of 100 with 630 signals.

## References

1. Bennett J, Lanning S. 2007. The Netflix prize. In Proceedings of KDD Cup and Workshop 2007, p. 35. New York: ACM
2. Nie X, Wager S. 2019. Quasi-oracle estimation of heterogeneous treatment effects. arXiv:1712.04912 [stat.ML]
3. Holland PW. 1986. Statistics and causal inference. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 81:945–60
4. Athey S, Wager S. 2017. Efficient policy learning. arXiv:1702.02896 [math.ST]
5. Akgiray, V. (1989), "Conditional heteroscedasticity in time series of stock returns: Evidence and forecasts," Journal of Business, 62, 55–80.
6. Bessler, D. A. S. W. Fuller (1993), "Cointegration between U.S. wheat markets," Journal of Regional Science, 33, 481–501.
7. Hartigan JA, Wong MA. 1979. Algorithm as 136: a k-means clustering algorithm. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. C 28:100–8