Outlook: ECOGRAF LIMITED is assigned short-term Ba1 & long-term Ba1 estimated rating.
Dominant Strategy : Sell
Time series to forecast n: 23 Feb 2023 for (n+6 month)
Methodology : Reinforcement Machine Learning (ML)

Abstract

ECOGRAF LIMITED prediction model is evaluated with Reinforcement Machine Learning (ML) and Independent T-Test1,2,3,4 and it is concluded that the EGR stock is predictable in the short/long term. According to price forecasts for (n+6 month) period, the dominant strategy among neural network is: Sell

Key Points

1. What are the most successful trading algorithms?
2. Understanding Buy, Sell, and Hold Ratings
3. Investment Risk

EGR Target Price Prediction Modeling Methodology

We consider ECOGRAF LIMITED Decision Process with Reinforcement Machine Learning (ML) where A is the set of discrete actions of EGR 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(Independent T-Test)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(Reinforcement Machine Learning (ML)) X S(n):→ (n+6 month) $\stackrel{\to }{R}=\left({r}_{1},{r}_{2},{r}_{3}\right)$

n:Time series to forecast

p:Price signals of EGR 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?

EGR Stock Forecast (Buy or Sell) for (n+6 month)

Sample Set: Neural Network
Stock/Index: EGR ECOGRAF LIMITED
Time series to forecast n: 23 Feb 2023 for (n+6 month)

According to price forecasts for (n+6 month) 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 ECOGRAF LIMITED

1. For the purposes of applying the requirements in paragraphs 5.7.7 and 5.7.8, an accounting mismatch is not caused solely by the measurement method that an entity uses to determine the effects of changes in a liability's credit risk. An accounting mismatch in profit or loss would arise only when the effects of changes in the liability's credit risk (as defined in IFRS 7) are expected to be offset by changes in the fair value of another financial instrument. A mismatch that arises solely as a result of the measurement method (ie because an entity does not isolate changes in a liability's credit risk from some other changes in its fair value) does not affect the determination required by paragraphs 5.7.7 and 5.7.8. For example, an entity may not isolate changes in a liability's credit risk from changes in liquidity risk. If the entity presents the combined effect of both factors in other comprehensive income, a mismatch may occur because changes in liquidity risk may be included in the fair value measurement of the entity's financial assets and the entire fair value change of those assets is presented in profit or loss. However, such a mismatch is caused by measurement imprecision, not the offsetting relationship described in paragraph B5.7.6 and, therefore, does not affect the determination required by paragraphs 5.7.7 and 5.7.8.
2. An entity need not undertake an exhaustive search for information but shall consider all reasonable and supportable information that is available without undue cost or effort and that is relevant to the estimate of expected credit losses, including the effect of expected prepayments. The information used shall include factors that are specific to the borrower, general economic conditions and an assessment of both the current as well as the forecast direction of conditions at the reporting date. An entity may use various sources of data, that may be both internal (entity-specific) and external. Possible data sources include internal historical credit loss experience, internal ratings, credit loss experience of other entities and external ratings, reports and statistics. Entities that have no, or insufficient, sources of entityspecific data may use peer group experience for the comparable financial instrument (or groups of financial instruments).
3. Conversely, if changes in the extent of offset indicate that the fluctuation is around a hedge ratio that is different from the hedge ratio that is currently used for that hedging relationship, or that there is a trend leading away from that hedge ratio, hedge ineffectiveness can be reduced by adjusting the hedge ratio, whereas retaining the hedge ratio would increasingly produce hedge ineffectiveness. Hence, in such circumstances, an entity must evaluate whether the hedging relationship reflects an imbalance between the weightings of the hedged item and the hedging instrument that would create hedge ineffectiveness (irrespective of whether recognised or not) that could result in an accounting outcome that would be inconsistent with the purpose of hedge accounting. If the hedge ratio is adjusted, it also affects the measurement and recognition of hedge ineffectiveness because, on rebalancing, the hedge ineffectiveness of the hedging relationship must be determined and recognised immediately before adjusting the hedging relationship in accordance with paragraph B6.5.8.
4. Measurement of a financial asset or financial liability and classification of recognised changes in its value are determined by the item's classification and whether the item is part of a designated hedging relationship. Those requirements can create a measurement or recognition inconsistency (sometimes referred to as an 'accounting mismatch') when, for example, in the absence of designation as at fair value through profit or loss, a financial asset would be classified as subsequently measured at fair value through profit or loss and a liability the entity considers related would be subsequently measured at amortised cost (with changes in fair value not recognised). In such circumstances, an entity may conclude that its financial statements would provide more relevant information if both the asset and the liability were measured as at fair value through profit or loss.

*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

ECOGRAF LIMITED is assigned short-term Ba1 & long-term Ba1 estimated rating. ECOGRAF LIMITED prediction model is evaluated with Reinforcement Machine Learning (ML) and Independent T-Test1,2,3,4 and it is concluded that the EGR stock is predictable in the short/long term. According to price forecasts for (n+6 month) period, the dominant strategy among neural network is: Sell

EGR ECOGRAF LIMITED Financial Analysis*

Rating Short-Term Long-Term Senior
Outlook*Ba1Ba1
Income StatementCaa2B2
Balance SheetBa1Baa2
Leverage RatiosCaa2B2
Cash FlowCB3
Rates of Return and ProfitabilityBaa2Baa2

*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: 81 out of 100 with 778 signals.

References

1. Bessler, D. A. T. Covey (1991), "Cointegration: Some results on U.S. cattle prices," Journal of Futures Markets, 11, 461–474.
2. Bertsimas D, King A, Mazumder R. 2016. Best subset selection via a modern optimization lens. Ann. Stat. 44:813–52
3. Dimakopoulou M, Zhou Z, Athey S, Imbens G. 2018. Balanced linear contextual bandits. arXiv:1812.06227 [cs.LG]
4. Nie X, Wager S. 2019. Quasi-oracle estimation of heterogeneous treatment effects. arXiv:1712.04912 [stat.ML]
5. Christou, C., P. A. V. B. Swamy G. S. Tavlas (1996), "Modelling optimal strategies for the allocation of wealth in multicurrency investments," International Journal of Forecasting, 12, 483–493.
6. Efron B, Hastie T, Johnstone I, Tibshirani R. 2004. Least angle regression. Ann. Stat. 32:407–99
7. Bewley, R. M. Yang (1998), "On the size and power of system tests for cointegration," Review of Economics and Statistics, 80, 675–679.
Frequently Asked QuestionsQ: What is the prediction methodology for EGR stock?
A: EGR stock prediction methodology: We evaluate the prediction models Reinforcement Machine Learning (ML) and Independent T-Test
Q: Is EGR stock a buy or sell?
A: The dominant strategy among neural network is to Sell EGR Stock.
Q: Is ECOGRAF LIMITED stock a good investment?
A: The consensus rating for ECOGRAF LIMITED is Sell and is assigned short-term Ba1 & long-term Ba1 estimated rating.
Q: What is the consensus rating of EGR stock?
A: The consensus rating for EGR is Sell.
Q: What is the prediction period for EGR stock?
A: The prediction period for EGR is (n+6 month)