Outlook: Winmark Corporation Common Stock is assigned short-term Ba1 & long-term Ba1 estimated rating.
Dominant Strategy : Sell
Time series to forecast n: 23 Jan 2023 for (n+16 weeks)
Methodology : Ensemble Learning (ML)

## Abstract

Winmark Corporation Common Stock prediction model is evaluated with Ensemble Learning (ML) and Lasso Regression1,2,3,4 and it is concluded that the WINA stock is predictable in the short/long term. According to price forecasts for (n+16 weeks) period, the dominant strategy among neural network is: Sell

## Key Points

3. Can we predict stock market using machine learning?

## WINA Target Price Prediction Modeling Methodology

We consider Winmark Corporation Common Stock Decision Process with Ensemble Learning (ML) where A is the set of discrete actions of WINA 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(Lasso 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(Ensemble Learning (ML)) X S(n):→ (n+16 weeks) $R=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right)$

n:Time series to forecast

p:Price signals of WINA stock

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?

## WINA Stock Forecast (Buy or Sell) for (n+16 weeks)

Sample Set: Neural Network
Stock/Index: WINA Winmark Corporation Common Stock
Time series to forecast n: 23 Jan 2023 for (n+16 weeks)

According to price forecasts for (n+16 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 Winmark Corporation Common Stock

1. The assessment of whether an economic relationship exists includes an analysis of the possible behaviour of the hedging relationship during its term to ascertain whether it can be expected to meet the risk management objective. The mere existence of a statistical correlation between two variables does not, by itself, support a valid conclusion that an economic relationship exists.
2. An entity may use practical expedients when measuring expected credit losses if they are consistent with the principles in paragraph 5.5.17. An example of a practical expedient is the calculation of the expected credit losses on trade receivables using a provision matrix. The entity would use its historical credit loss experience (adjusted as appropriate in accordance with paragraphs B5.5.51–B5.5.52) for trade receivables to estimate the 12-month expected credit losses or the lifetime expected credit losses on the financial assets as relevant. A provision matrix might, for example, specify fixed provision rates depending on the number of days that a trade receivable is past due (for example, 1 per cent if not past due, 2 per cent if less than 30 days past due, 3 per cent if more than 30 days but less than 90 days past due, 20 per cent if 90–180 days past due etc). Depending on the diversity of its customer base, the entity would use appropriate groupings if its historical credit loss experience shows significantly different loss patterns for different customer segments. Examples of criteria that might be used to group assets include geographical region, product type, customer rating, collateral or trade credit insurance and type of customer (such as wholesale or retail)
3. An entity can rebut this presumption. However, it can do so only when it has reasonable and supportable information available that demonstrates that even if contractual payments become more than 30 days past due, this does not represent a significant increase in the credit risk of a financial instrument. For example when non-payment was an administrative oversight, instead of resulting from financial difficulty of the borrower, or the entity has access to historical evidence that demonstrates that there is no correlation between significant increases in the risk of a default occurring and financial assets on which payments are more than 30 days past due, but that evidence does identify such a correlation when payments are more than 60 days past due.
4. Paragraph 6.3.6 states that in consolidated financial statements the foreign currency risk of a highly probable forecast intragroup transaction may qualify as a hedged item in a cash flow hedge, provided that the transaction is denominated in a currency other than the functional currency of the entity entering into that transaction and that the foreign currency risk will affect consolidated profit or loss. For this purpose an entity can be a parent, subsidiary, associate, joint arrangement or branch. If the foreign currency risk of a forecast intragroup transaction does not affect consolidated profit or loss, the intragroup transaction cannot qualify as a hedged item. This is usually the case for royalty payments, interest payments or management charges between members of the same group, unless there is a related external transaction. However, when the foreign currency risk of a forecast intragroup transaction will affect consolidated profit or loss, the intragroup transaction can qualify as a hedged item. An example is forecast sales or purchases of inventories between members of the same group if there is an onward sale of the inventory to a party external to the group. Similarly, a forecast intragroup sale of plant and equipment from the group entity that manufactured it to a group entity that will use the plant and equipment in its operations may affect consolidated profit or loss. This could occur, for example, because the plant and equipment will be depreciated by the purchasing entity and the amount initially recognised for the plant and equipment may change if the forecast intragroup transaction is denominated in a currency other than the functional currency of the purchasing entity.

*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

Winmark Corporation Common Stock is assigned short-term Ba1 & long-term Ba1 estimated rating. Winmark Corporation Common Stock prediction model is evaluated with Ensemble Learning (ML) and Lasso Regression1,2,3,4 and it is concluded that the WINA stock is predictable in the short/long term. According to price forecasts for (n+16 weeks) period, the dominant strategy among neural network is: Sell

### WINA Winmark Corporation Common Stock Financial Analysis*

Rating Short-Term Long-Term Senior
Outlook*Ba1Ba1
Income StatementB2Baa2
Balance SheetBa3C
Leverage RatiosCC
Cash FlowCaa2C
Rates of Return and ProfitabilityBaa2C

*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: 86 out of 100 with 797 signals.

## References

1. Challen, D. W. A. J. Hagger (1983), Macroeconomic Systems: Construction, Validation and Applications. New York: St. Martin's Press.
2. Babula, R. A. (1988), "Contemporaneous correlation and modeling Canada's imports of U.S. crops," Journal of Agricultural Economics Research, 41, 33–38.
3. Van der Vaart AW. 2000. Asymptotic Statistics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
4. Bera, A. M. L. Higgins (1997), "ARCH and bilinearity as competing models for nonlinear dependence," Journal of Business Economic Statistics, 15, 43–50.
5. A. Shapiro, W. Tekaya, J. da Costa, and M. Soares. Risk neutral and risk averse stochastic dual dynamic programming method. European journal of operational research, 224(2):375–391, 2013
6. M. Colby, T. Duchow-Pressley, J. J. Chung, and K. Tumer. Local approximation of difference evaluation functions. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, Singapore, May 2016
7. Sutton RS, Barto AG. 1998. Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Frequently Asked QuestionsQ: What is the prediction methodology for WINA stock?
A: WINA stock prediction methodology: We evaluate the prediction models Ensemble Learning (ML) and Lasso Regression
Q: Is WINA stock a buy or sell?
A: The dominant strategy among neural network is to Sell WINA Stock.
Q: Is Winmark Corporation Common Stock stock a good investment?
A: The consensus rating for Winmark Corporation Common Stock is Sell and is assigned short-term Ba1 & long-term Ba1 estimated rating.
Q: What is the consensus rating of WINA stock?
A: The consensus rating for WINA is Sell.
Q: What is the prediction period for WINA stock?
A: The prediction period for WINA is (n+16 weeks)