Outlook: AF Acquisition Corp. Warrants is assigned short-term Ba1 & long-term Ba1 estimated rating.
Dominant Strategy : Sell
Time series to forecast n: 13 Jun 2023 for 8 Weeks
Methodology : Transductive Learning (ML)

## Abstract

AF Acquisition Corp. Warrants prediction model is evaluated with Transductive Learning (ML) and Spearman Correlation1,2,3,4 and it is concluded that the AFAQW stock is predictable in the short/long term. Transductive learning is a supervised machine learning (ML) method in which the model is trained on both labeled and unlabeled data. The goal of transductive learning is to predict the labels of the unlabeled data. Transductive learning is a hybrid of inductive and semi-supervised learning. Inductive learning algorithms are trained on labeled data only, while semi-supervised learning algorithms are trained on a combination of labeled and unlabeled data. Transductive learning algorithms can achieve better performance than inductive learning algorithms on tasks where there is a small amount of labeled data. This is because transductive learning algorithms can use the unlabeled data to help them learn the relationships between the features and the labels. According to price forecasts for 8 Weeks period, the dominant strategy among neural network is: Sell ## Key Points

1. Is Target price a good indicator?
2. How do you decide buy or sell a stock?
3. Is now good time to invest?

## AFAQW Target Price Prediction Modeling Methodology

We consider AF Acquisition Corp. Warrants Decision Process with Transductive Learning (ML) where A is the set of discrete actions of AFAQW 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(Spearman Correlation)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(Transductive Learning (ML)) X S(n):→ 8 Weeks $∑ i = 1 n s i$

n:Time series to forecast

p:Price signals of AFAQW stock

j:Nash equilibria (Neural Network)

k:Dominated move

a:Best response for target price

### Transductive Learning (ML)

Transductive learning is a supervised machine learning (ML) method in which the model is trained on both labeled and unlabeled data. The goal of transductive learning is to predict the labels of the unlabeled data. Transductive learning is a hybrid of inductive and semi-supervised learning. Inductive learning algorithms are trained on labeled data only, while semi-supervised learning algorithms are trained on a combination of labeled and unlabeled data. Transductive learning algorithms can achieve better performance than inductive learning algorithms on tasks where there is a small amount of labeled data. This is because transductive learning algorithms can use the unlabeled data to help them learn the relationships between the features and the labels.

### Spearman Correlation

Spearman correlation is a nonparametric measure of the strength and direction of association between two variables. It is a rank-based correlation, which means that it does not assume that the data is normally distributed. Spearman correlation is calculated by first ranking the data for each variable, and then calculating the Pearson correlation between the ranks.

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?

## AFAQW Stock Forecast (Buy or Sell) for 8 Weeks

Sample Set: Neural Network
Stock/Index: AFAQW AF Acquisition Corp. Warrants
Time series to forecast n: 13 Jun 2023 for 8 Weeks

According to price forecasts for 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 AF Acquisition Corp. Warrants

1. Conversely, if the critical terms of the hedging instrument and the hedged item are not closely aligned, there is an increased level of uncertainty about the extent of offset. Consequently, the hedge effectiveness during the term of the hedging relationship is more difficult to predict. In such a situation it might only be possible for an entity to conclude on the basis of a quantitative assessment that an economic relationship exists between the hedged item and the hedging instrument (see paragraphs B6.4.4–B6.4.6). In some situations a quantitative assessment might also be needed to assess whether the hedge ratio used for designating the hedging relationship meets the hedge effectiveness requirements (see paragraphs B6.4.9–B6.4.11). An entity can use the same or different methods for those two different purposes.
2. When designating a hedging relationship and on an ongoing basis, an entity shall analyse the sources of hedge ineffectiveness that are expected to affect the hedging relationship during its term. This analysis (including any updates in accordance with paragraph B6.5.21 arising from rebalancing a hedging relationship) is the basis for the entity's assessment of meeting the hedge effectiveness requirements.
3. The change in the value of the hedged item determined using a hypothetical derivative may also be used for the purpose of assessing whether a hedging relationship meets the hedge effectiveness requirements.
4. IFRS 7 defines credit risk as 'the risk that one party to a financial instrument will cause a financial loss for the other party by failing to discharge an obligation'. The requirement in paragraph 5.7.7(a) relates to the risk that the issuer will fail to perform on that particular liability. It does not necessarily relate to the creditworthiness of the issuer. For example, if an entity issues a collateralised liability and a non-collateralised liability that are otherwise identical, the credit risk of those two liabilities will be different, even though they are issued by the same entity. The credit risk on the collateralised liability will be less than the credit risk of the non-collateralised liability. The credit risk for a collateralised liability may be close to zero.

*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

AF Acquisition Corp. Warrants is assigned short-term Ba1 & long-term Ba1 estimated rating. AF Acquisition Corp. Warrants prediction model is evaluated with Transductive Learning (ML) and Spearman Correlation1,2,3,4 and it is concluded that the AFAQW stock is predictable in the short/long term. According to price forecasts for 8 Weeks period, the dominant strategy among neural network is: Sell

### AFAQW AF Acquisition Corp. Warrants Financial Analysis*

Rating Short-Term Long-Term Senior
Outlook*Ba1Ba1
Income StatementCB3
Balance SheetB2C
Leverage RatiosCaa2Baa2
Cash FlowBa1B2
Rates of Return and ProfitabilityB1Ba2

*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 586 signals.

## References

1. Çetinkaya, A., Zhang, Y.Z., Hao, Y.M. and Ma, X.Y., When to Sell and When to Hold FTNT Stock. AC Investment Research Journal, 101(3).
2. Ashley, R. (1983), "On the usefulness of macroeconomic forecasts as inputs to forecasting models," Journal of Forecasting, 2, 211–223.
3. 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
4. Artis, M. J. W. Zhang (1990), "BVAR forecasts for the G-7," International Journal of Forecasting, 6, 349–362.
5. Dudik M, Langford J, Li L. 2011. Doubly robust policy evaluation and learning. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 1097–104. La Jolla, CA: Int. Mach. Learn. Soc.
6. LeCun Y, Bengio Y, Hinton G. 2015. Deep learning. Nature 521:436–44
7. Allen, P. G. (1994), "Economic forecasting in agriculture," International Journal of Forecasting, 10, 81–135.
Frequently Asked QuestionsQ: What is the prediction methodology for AFAQW stock?
A: AFAQW stock prediction methodology: We evaluate the prediction models Transductive Learning (ML) and Spearman Correlation
Q: Is AFAQW stock a buy or sell?
A: The dominant strategy among neural network is to Sell AFAQW Stock.
Q: Is AF Acquisition Corp. Warrants stock a good investment?
A: The consensus rating for AF Acquisition Corp. Warrants is Sell and is assigned short-term Ba1 & long-term Ba1 estimated rating.
Q: What is the consensus rating of AFAQW stock?
A: The consensus rating for AFAQW is Sell.
Q: What is the prediction period for AFAQW stock?
A: The prediction period for AFAQW is 8 Weeks