feat(sec): add fiscal period filter for SEC company concepts

[dijonkitchen]

Pull Request the OpenBB Platform

Description

Resolves part of #6654 (comment)

Allows for SEC company concepts to be filtered by fiscal period.

• Summary of the change/ bug fix.
• Link # issue, if applicable.
• Screenshot of the feature or the bug before/after fix, if applicable.
• Relevant motivation and context.
• List any dependencies that are required for this change.

How has this been tested?

• Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes.

• Please provide instructions so we can reproduce.

• Please also list any relevant details for your test configuration.

• Ensure all unit and integration tests pass.

• If you modified/added command(s):

  • Ensure the command(s) execute with the expected output.
    • API.
    • Python Interface.
  • If applicable, please add new tests for the command (see CONTRIBUTING.md to leverage semi-automated testing).

- If a new provider was introduced or a new fetcher was added to an existing provider: - [ ] Ensure the existing tests pass. - [ ] Ensure the new provider and/or fetcher is stable and usable. - [ ] If applicable, please add new tests for the provider and/or fetcher (see [CONTRIBUTING.md](/openbb_platform/CONTRIBUTING.md) to leverage semi-automated testing). - If a new provider or extension was added: - [ ] Update the list of [Extensions](/openbb_platform/EXTENSIONS.md). - [ ] Update the list of [Providers](/openbb_platform/PROVIDERS.md). - [ ] If it's a community extension or provider, update the [integration tests GitHub Action workflow](/.github/workflows/platform-api-integration-test.yml).

Checklist

• I have performed a self-review of my own code.
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas.
• I have adhered to the GitFlow naming convention and my branch name is in the format of feature/feature-name or hotfix/hotfix-name.
• I ensure that I am following the CONTRIBUTING guidelines.
  • (If applicable) I have updated tests following these guidelines.

[CLAassistant]

All committers have signed the CLA.

[deeleeramone]

I know you have this marked as a draft, so forgive me for jumping in early.

The main issue, and why I excluded filtering by a fiscal quarter, is that Q4 is not a reliable piece of data. A large portion of Facts do not report Q4, and relying on CY/frame field is also not really reliable for this purpose. I had initially made an attempt to cover this, but needed to withdraw that functionality in the face of inconsistent quality of results.

If you were able to devise a parsing method that accounted for Q4 across all Facts, and filtered out the duplicate entries so that there was only one valid entry with values representing the change Q/Q for items that are not point-in-time, we'd start to have a fighting chance at making quarterly statements that are comparable over time.