Modelling A.I. in Economics

ARW Arrow Electronics Inc. Common Stock (Forecast)

Outlook: Arrow Electronics Inc. Common Stock is assigned short-term Ba1 & long-term Ba1 estimated rating.
Dominant Strategy : Wait until speculative trend diminishes
Time series to forecast n: 24 May 2023 for (n+4 weeks)
Methodology : Inductive Learning (ML)

Abstract

Arrow Electronics Inc. Common Stock prediction model is evaluated with Inductive Learning (ML) and Beta1,2,3,4 and it is concluded that the ARW stock is predictable in the short/long term. According to price forecasts for (n+4 weeks) period, the dominant strategy among neural network is: Wait until speculative trend diminishes

Key Points

  1. How accurate is machine learning in stock market?
  2. Game Theory
  3. Is it better to buy and sell or hold?

ARW Target Price Prediction Modeling Methodology

We consider Arrow Electronics Inc. Common Stock Decision Process with Inductive Learning (ML) where A is the set of discrete actions of ARW 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(Beta)5,6,7= p a 1 p a 2 p 1 n p j 1 p j 2 p j n p k 1 p k 2 p k n p n 1 p n 2 p n n X R(Inductive Learning (ML)) X S(n):→ (n+4 weeks) i = 1 n s i

n:Time series to forecast

p:Price signals of ARW 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?

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

Sample Set: Neural Network
Stock/Index: ARW Arrow Electronics Inc. Common Stock
Time series to forecast n: 24 May 2023 for (n+4 weeks)

According to price forecasts for (n+4 weeks) period, the dominant strategy among neural network is: Wait until speculative trend diminishes

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 Arrow Electronics Inc. Common Stock

  1. If a financial asset contains a contractual term that could change the timing or amount of contractual cash flows (for example, if the asset can be prepaid before maturity or its term can be extended), the entity must determine whether the contractual cash flows that could arise over the life of the instrument due to that contractual term are solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding. To make this determination, the entity must assess the contractual cash flows that could arise both before, and after, the change in contractual cash flows. The entity may also need to assess the nature of any contingent event (ie the trigger) that would change the timing or amount of the contractual cash flows. While the nature of the contingent event in itself is not a determinative factor in assessing whether the contractual cash flows are solely payments of principal and interest, it may be an indicator. For example, compare a financial instrument with an interest rate that is reset to a higher rate if the debtor misses a particular number of payments to a financial instrument with an interest rate that is reset to a higher rate if a specified equity index reaches a particular level. It is more likely in the former case that the contractual cash flows over the life of the instrument will be solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding because of the relationship between missed payments and an increase in credit risk. (See also paragraph B4.1.18.)
  2. 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.
  3. If the contractual cash flows on a financial asset have been renegotiated or otherwise modified, but the financial asset is not derecognised, that financial asset is not automatically considered to have lower credit risk. An entity shall assess whether there has been a significant increase in credit risk since initial recognition on the basis of all reasonable and supportable information that is available without undue cost or effort. This includes historical and forwardlooking information and an assessment of the credit risk over the expected life of the financial asset, which includes information about the circumstances that led to the modification. Evidence that the criteria for the recognition of lifetime expected credit losses are no longer met may include a history of up-to-date and timely payment performance against the modified contractual terms. Typically a customer would need to demonstrate consistently good payment behaviour over a period of time before the credit risk is considered to have decreased.
  4. IFRS 15, issued in May 2014, amended paragraphs 3.1.1, 4.2.1, 5.1.1, 5.2.1, 5.7.6, B3.2.13, B5.7.1, C5 and C42 and deleted paragraph C16 and its related heading. Paragraphs 5.1.3 and 5.7.1A, and a definition to Appendix A, were added. An entity shall apply those amendments when it applies IFRS 15.

*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

Arrow Electronics Inc. Common Stock is assigned short-term Ba1 & long-term Ba1 estimated rating. Arrow Electronics Inc. Common Stock prediction model is evaluated with Inductive Learning (ML) and Beta1,2,3,4 and it is concluded that the ARW stock is predictable in the short/long term. According to price forecasts for (n+4 weeks) period, the dominant strategy among neural network is: Wait until speculative trend diminishes

ARW Arrow Electronics Inc. Common Stock Financial Analysis*

Rating Short-Term Long-Term Senior
Outlook*Ba1Ba1
Income StatementCaa2C
Balance SheetCBaa2
Leverage RatiosCaa2Baa2
Cash FlowB1B2
Rates of Return and ProfitabilityB1C

*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: 80 out of 100 with 499 signals.

References

  1. Chernozhukov V, Chetverikov D, Demirer M, Duflo E, Hansen C, et al. 2016a. Double machine learning for treatment and causal parameters. Tech. Rep., Cent. Microdata Methods Pract., Inst. Fiscal Stud., London
  2. Abadie A, Imbens GW. 2011. Bias-corrected matching estimators for average treatment effects. J. Bus. Econ. Stat. 29:1–11
  3. J. Ott. A Markov decision model for a surveillance application and risk-sensitive Markov decision processes. PhD thesis, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, 2010.
  4. Zeileis A, Hothorn T, Hornik K. 2008. Model-based recursive partitioning. J. Comput. Graph. Stat. 17:492–514 Zhou Z, Athey S, Wager S. 2018. Offline multi-action policy learning: generalization and optimization. arXiv:1810.04778 [stat.ML]
  5. Miller A. 2002. Subset Selection in Regression. New York: CRC Press
  6. S. Proper and K. Tumer. Modeling difference rewards for multiagent learning (extended abstract). In Proceedings of the Eleventh International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, Valencia, Spain, June 2012
  7. 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
Frequently Asked QuestionsQ: What is the prediction methodology for ARW stock?
A: ARW stock prediction methodology: We evaluate the prediction models Inductive Learning (ML) and Beta
Q: Is ARW stock a buy or sell?
A: The dominant strategy among neural network is to Wait until speculative trend diminishes ARW Stock.
Q: Is Arrow Electronics Inc. Common Stock stock a good investment?
A: The consensus rating for Arrow Electronics Inc. Common Stock is Wait until speculative trend diminishes and is assigned short-term Ba1 & long-term Ba1 estimated rating.
Q: What is the consensus rating of ARW stock?
A: The consensus rating for ARW is Wait until speculative trend diminishes.
Q: What is the prediction period for ARW stock?
A: The prediction period for ARW 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
This project is licensed under the license; additional terms may apply.