NOTE 5: FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS

The following table presents the fair value measurement hierarchy for the Group's assets and liabilities. Quantitative disclosures of the fair value measurement hierarchy of the Group's assets and liabilities:

The Company entered into several foreign currency forward contracts to protect against changes in the value of forecasted cash flow relating to salaries and related payments, service providers, and office rent expenses denominated in NIS. These contracts are designated as derivative financial instruments measured at fair value through profit or loss, in accordance with IFRS 9.

During the six months periods ended June 30, 2026, and 2025, the Company recognized a gain of $646, and a loss of $1,443, respectively, on the financial investments denominated in New Israeli Shekels (NIS), due to the appreciation of ILS relative to the U.S. Dollar. The gain was recorded in profit or loss, consistent with the instrument’s classification under IFRS 9.

The fair value of the financial instruments is determined using a combination of valuation techniques, including Monte Carlo simulations (applied, among others, to Neurolief), including a Least Squares Monte Carlo framework applied to multi-date contractual exercise rights (applied, among others, to Neurolief), option pricing models based on a binomial framework and on a closed-form model, a market approach based on revenue or EBITDA multiples (the revenue multiple approach being applied, among others, to Neurolief, in deriving the enterprise value used in its Monte Carlo simulation), and, for investments completed shortly before the reporting date, calibration to the price of the recent transaction.

The Monte Carlo simulations incorporate significant unobservable inputs such as a weighted average cost of capital (WACC) with a weighted average rate of 21.61% (primarily attributable to Neurolief, for which a WACC of 20.83% was applied), expected enterprise-value volatility assumptions ranging up to 77.85% (the upper end of the range being attributable to Neurolief, for which volatility of 77.41%-77.85% was applied) with a weighted average of 64.93% (primarily attributable to Neurolief, for which volatility of approximately 77.6% was applied, and to Stella), and a risk-free interest rate with a weighted average of 4.08% (primarily attributable to Neurolief, for which rates of 3.98%–4.15% were applied, and to Stella). The option pricing models rely on significant unobservable inputs including expected enterprise-value volatility of 46.65% and a risk-free interest rate with a weighted average of 4.24%. In addition, the market approach applies revenue multiples as a significant unobservable input, which were determined based on comparable market data and resulted in a weighted average multiple of 2.13 (primarily attributable to Neurolief, for which a multiple of 2.57x was applied, and to Stella), as well as an EV/EBITDA multiple of 6.5 applied to one investment. For that investment, a probability-weighted scenario analysis was applied, using probabilities of 59%, 40% and 1% assigned to the low, base and ideal scenarios, respectively. Changes in these assumptions could result in material changes to the fair value measurements.