Should You Buy Now or Wait? LCFYW Stock Forecast

Jorgenson, Dale W.; Weitzman, Martin L.; ZXhang, Yoshua X; Haxo, Yann M; Mat , Ying X

Outlook: Locafy Limited Warrant is assigned short-term B2 & long-term Ba3 estimated rating.
AUC Score : What is AUC Score?
Short-Term Revised¹ :
Dominant Strategy : Buy
Time series to forecast n: for Weeks²
Methodology : Transfer Learning (ML)
Hypothesis Testing : Ridge Regression
Surveillance : Major exchange and OTC

¹The accuracy of the model is being monitored on a regular basis.(15-minute period)

²Time series is updated based on short-term trends.

Locafy Limited Warrant prediction model is evaluated with Transfer Learning (ML) and Ridge Regression^1,2,3,4 and it is concluded that the LCFYW stock is predictable in the short/long term. Transfer learning is a machine learning (ML) method where a model developed for one task is reused as the starting point for a model on a second task. This can be useful when the second task is similar to the first task, or when there is limited data available for the second task.⁵ According to price forecasts for 1 Year period, the dominant strategy among neural network is: Buy

Key Points

How do you pick a stock?
Dominated Move
Can machine learning predict?

LCFYW Stock Price Forecast

We consider Locafy Limited Warrant Decision Process with Transfer Learning (ML) where A is the set of discrete actions of LCFYW 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

Sample Set: Neural Network
Stock/Index: LCFYW Locafy Limited Warrant
Time series to forecast: 1 Year

According to price forecasts, the dominant strategy among neural network is: Buy

F(Ridge Regression)^6,7=

\begin{matrix} p_{a 1} & p_{a 2} & \dots & p_{1 n} \\ ⋮ \\ p_{j 1} & p_{j 2} & \dots & p_{j n} \\ ⋮ \\ p_{k 1} & p_{k 2} & \dots & p_{k n} \\ ⋮ \\ p_{n 1} & p_{n 2} & \dots & p_{n n} \end{matrix}

X R(Transfer Learning (ML)) X S(n):→ 1 Year

\vec{S} = (s_{1}, s_{2}, s_{3})

n:Time series to forecast

p:Price signals of LCFYW stock

j:Nash equilibria (Neural Network)

k:Dominated move of LCFYW stock holders

a:Best response for LCFYW target price

Transfer learning is a machine learning (ML) method where a model developed for one task is reused as the starting point for a model on a second task. This can be useful when the second task is similar to the first task, or when there is limited data available for the second task.⁵ Ridge regression is a type of regression analysis that adds a penalty to the least squares objective function in order to reduce the variance of the estimates. This is done by adding a term to the objective function that is proportional to the sum of the squares of the coefficients. The penalty term is called the "ridge" penalty, and it is controlled by a parameter called the "ridge constant". Ridge regression can be used to address the problem of multicollinearity in linear regression. Multicollinearity occurs when two or more independent variables are highly correlated. This can cause the standard errors of the coefficients to be large, and it can also cause the coefficients to be unstable. Ridge regression can help to reduce the standard errors of the coefficients and to make the coefficients more stable.^6,7

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?

LCFYW Stock Forecast (Buy or Sell) Strategic Interaction Table

Strategic Interaction Table Legend:

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%

Financial Data Adjustments for Transfer Learning (ML) based LCFYW Stock Prediction Model

If a put option written by an entity prevents a transferred asset from being derecognised and the entity measures the transferred asset at fair value, the associated liability is measured at the option exercise price plus the time value of the option. The measurement of the asset at fair value is limited to the lower of the fair value and the option exercise price because the entity has no right to increases in the fair value of the transferred asset above the exercise price of the option. This ensures that the net carrying amount of the asset and the associated liability is the fair value of the put option obligation. For example, if the fair value of the underlying asset is CU120, the option exercise price is CU100 and the time value of the option is CU5, the carrying amount of the associated liability is CU105 (CU100 + CU5) and the carrying amount of the asset is CU100 (in this case the option exercise price).
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.
If a financial instrument that was previously recognised as a financial asset is measured at fair value through profit or loss and its fair value decreases below zero, it is a financial liability measured in accordance with paragraph 4.2.1. However, hybrid contracts with hosts that are assets within the scope of this Standard are always measured in accordance with paragraph 4.3.2.
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.

LCFYW Locafy Limited Warrant Financial Analysis*

Rating	Short-Term	Long-Term Senior
Outlook*	B2	Ba3
Income Statement	C	Ba1
Balance Sheet	C	Baa2
Leverage Ratios	Baa2	B3
Cash Flow	B3	Caa2
Rates of Return and Profitability	Baa2	B3

*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?

References

V. Borkar. A sensitivity formula for the risk-sensitive cost and the actor-critic algorithm. Systems & Control Letters, 44:339–346, 2001
J. Ott. A Markov decision model for a surveillance application and risk-sensitive Markov decision processes. PhD thesis, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, 2010.
Chen X. 2007. Large sample sieve estimation of semi-nonparametric models. In Handbook of Econometrics, Vol. 6B, ed. JJ Heckman, EE Learner, pp. 5549–632. Amsterdam: Elsevier
Belsley, D. A. (1988), "Modelling and forecast reliability," International Journal of Forecasting, 4, 427–447.
T. Shardlow and A. Stuart. A perturbation theory for ergodic Markov chains and application to numerical approximations. SIAM journal on numerical analysis, 37(4):1120–1137, 2000
Efron B, Hastie T. 2016. Computer Age Statistical Inference, Vol. 5. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
Akgiray, V. (1989), "Conditional heteroscedasticity in time series of stock returns: Evidence and forecasts," Journal of Business, 62, 55–80.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: What is the prediction methodology for LCFYW stock?
A: LCFYW stock prediction methodology: We evaluate the prediction models Transfer Learning (ML) and Ridge Regression
Q: Is LCFYW stock a buy or sell?
A: The dominant strategy among neural network is to Buy LCFYW Stock.
Q: Is Locafy Limited Warrant stock a good investment?
A: The consensus rating for Locafy Limited Warrant is Buy and is assigned short-term B2 & long-term Ba3 estimated rating.
Q: What is the consensus rating of LCFYW stock?
A: The consensus rating for LCFYW is Buy.
Q: What is the prediction period for LCFYW stock?
A: The prediction period for LCFYW is 1 Year

What did you think about the prediction? (Insufficient-Outstanding)

Tell us how we can improve PredictiveAI