TRMK Trustmark Corporation Common Stock

Outlook: Trustmark Corporation Common Stock is assigned short-term Ba1 & long-term Ba1 estimated rating.
Dominant Strategy : Sell
Time series to forecast n: 12 Mar 2023 for (n+4 weeks)
Methodology : Modular Neural Network (CNN Layer)

Abstract

Trustmark Corporation Common Stock prediction model is evaluated with Modular Neural Network (CNN Layer) and Factor^1,2,3,4 and it is concluded that the TRMK stock is predictable in the short/long term. According to price forecasts for (n+4 weeks) period, the dominant strategy among neural network is: Sell

Key Points

1. Dominated Move
2. What is prediction model?
3. Decision Making

TRMK Target Price Prediction Modeling Methodology

We consider Trustmark Corporation Common Stock Decision Process with Modular Neural Network (CNN Layer) where A is the set of discrete actions of TRMK 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(Factor)^5,6,7= $\begin{array}{cccc}{p}_{\mathrm{a}1}& p_{\mathrm{a}2}& \dots & p_{1n}\\ & ⋮\\ p_{j1}& p_{j2}& \dots & p_{jn}\\ & ⋮\\ p_{k1}& p_{k2}& \dots & p_{kn}\\ & ⋮\\ p_{n1}& p_{n2}& \dots & p_{nn}\end{array}$ X R(Modular Neural Network (CNN Layer)) X S(n):→ (n+4 weeks) $\overrightarrow{R}=\left(r_1,r_2,r_3\right)$

n:Time series to forecast

p:Price signals of TRMK 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?

TRMK Stock Forecast (Buy or Sell) for (n+4 weeks)

Sample Set: Neural Network
Stock/Index: TRMK Trustmark Corporation Common Stock
Time series to forecast n: 12 Mar 2023 for (n+4 weeks)

According to price forecasts for (n+4 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 Trustmark Corporation Common Stock

1. When designating a group of items as the hedged item, or a combination of financial instruments as the hedging instrument, an entity shall prospectively cease applying paragraphs 6.8.4–6.8.6 to an individual item or financial instrument in accordance with paragraphs 6.8.9, 6.8.10, or 6.8.11, as relevant, when the uncertainty arising from interest rate benchmark reform is no longer present with respect to the hedged risk and/or the timing and the amount of the interest rate benchmark-based cash flows of that item or financial instrument.
2. When an entity separates the foreign currency basis spread from a financial instrument and excludes it from the designation of that financial instrument as the hedging instrument (see paragraph 6.2.4(b)), the application guidance in paragraphs B6.5.34–B6.5.38 applies to the foreign currency basis spread in the same manner as it is applied to the forward element of a forward contract.
3. 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.
4. When assessing a modified time value of money element, an entity must consider factors that could affect future contractual cash flows. For example, if an entity is assessing a bond with a five-year term and the variable interest rate is reset every six months to a five-year rate, the entity cannot conclude that the contractual cash flows are solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding simply because the interest rate curve at the time of the assessment is such that the difference between a five-year interest rate and a six-month interest rate is not significant. Instead, the entity must also consider whether the relationship between the five-year interest rate and the six-month interest rate could change over the life of the instrument such that the contractual (undiscounted) cash flows over the life of the instrument could be significantly different from the (undiscounted) benchmark cash flows. However, an entity must consider only reasonably possible scenarios instead of every possible scenario. If an entity concludes that the contractual (undiscounted) cash flows could be significantly different from the (undiscounted) benchmark cash flows, the financial asset does not meet the condition in paragraphs 4.1.2(b) and 4.1.2A(b) and therefore cannot be measured at amortised cost or fair value through other comprehensive income.

*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

Trustmark Corporation Common Stock is assigned short-term Ba1 & long-term Ba1 estimated rating. Trustmark Corporation Common Stock prediction model is evaluated with Modular Neural Network (CNN Layer) and Factor^1,2,3,4 and it is concluded that the TRMK stock is predictable in the short/long term. According to price forecasts for (n+4 weeks) period, the dominant strategy among neural network is: Sell

TRMK Trustmark Corporation Common Stock Financial Analysis*

Rating	Short-Term	Long-Term Senior
Outlook*	Ba1	Ba1
Income Statement	B3	Caa2
Balance Sheet	Baa2	B2
Leverage Ratios	Baa2	Baa2
Cash Flow	C	Caa2
Rates of Return and Profitability	C	C

*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: 84 out of 100 with 623 signals.

References

1. A. Y. Ng, D. Harada, and S. J. Russell. Policy invariance under reward transformations: Theory and application to reward shaping. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML 1999), Bled, Slovenia, June 27 - 30, 1999, pages 278–287, 1999.
2. D. Bertsekas. Min common/max crossing duality: A geometric view of conjugacy in convex optimization. Lab. for Information and Decision Systems, MIT, Tech. Rep. Report LIDS-P-2796, 2009
3. T. Morimura, M. Sugiyama, M. Kashima, H. Hachiya, and T. Tanaka. Nonparametric return distribution ap- proximation for reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 799–806, 2010
4. uyer, S. Whiteson, B. Bakker, and N. A. Vlassis. Multiagent reinforcement learning for urban traffic control using coordination graphs. In Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases, European Conference, ECML/PKDD 2008, Antwerp, Belgium, September 15-19, 2008, Proceedings, Part I, pages 656–671, 2008.
5. Çetinkaya, A., Zhang, Y.Z., Hao, Y.M. and Ma, X.Y., Can stock prices be predicted?(SMI Index Stock Forecast). AC Investment Research Journal, 101(3).
6. Bewley, R. M. Yang (1998), "On the size and power of system tests for cointegration," Review of Economics and Statistics, 80, 675–679.
7. Barkan O. 2016. Bayesian neural word embedding. arXiv:1603.06571 [math.ST]

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: What is the prediction methodology for TRMK stock?
A: TRMK stock prediction methodology: We evaluate the prediction models Modular Neural Network (CNN Layer) and Factor
Q: Is TRMK stock a buy or sell?
A: The dominant strategy among neural network is to Sell TRMK Stock.
Q: Is Trustmark Corporation Common Stock stock a good investment?
A: The consensus rating for Trustmark Corporation Common Stock is Sell and is assigned short-term Ba1 & long-term Ba1 estimated rating.
Q: What is the consensus rating of TRMK stock?
A: The consensus rating for TRMK is Sell.
Q: What is the prediction period for TRMK stock?
A: The prediction period for TRMK is (n+4 weeks)

Premium

• Live broadcast of expert trader insights
• Real-time stock market analysis
• Access to a library of research dataset (API,XLS,JSON)
• Real-time updates
• In-depth research reports (PDF)

Login