econ.GNMay 18, 2025

Hardening Soft Information: Evidence on Analyst Integration Costs

Authors: Kerry Xiao, Amy Zang

Organizations: Hong Kong University of Science and Technology

Abstract

We examine how the cost of transforming qualitative information into precise numerical estimates--a form of integration cost--creates a structural friction in expectations formation. To isolate this integration cost from the costs of information awareness and acquisition, we exploit sell-side analyst reports, in which the same forecaster simultaneously produces textual narratives and numerical forecasts. Because the information underlying the text has already been acquired, any systematic gap between the two outputs can be attributed to integration costs. We document systematic quantification inefficiency: an analyst's textual tone negatively predicts her contemporaneous forecast errors and positively predicts her subsequent numerical revisions, revealing that analysts leave part of their qualitative insights unquantified until further evidence arrives. Consistent with this integration-friction explanation, this inefficiency intensifies when reports are linguistically vaguer, environmental uncertainty is higher, or analysts' processing capacity is more constrained, and it persists where strategic and behavioral explanations are weaker. Our findings provide direct, large-sample evidence that integration costs constitute a distinct economic friction, explaining why soft information carries value-relevant content beyond contemporaneous hard numbers.

Explore similar work

Dec 12, 2025q-fin.ST

Generative AI for Analysts

We study how generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) reshapes financial analysts' information production. Using the 2023 integration of GenAI into FACTSET as a plausibly exogenous change in AI access, we find that FACTSET-associated reports become markedly richer--featuring 26% more distinct information sources, 24% broader topical coverage, and 21% more analytical methods--while also improving timeliness. However, these gains do not uniformly improve decision quality: relative forecast accuracy declines when analysts face greater information-processing demands. Yet, a machine-learning benchmark processing the same observable inputs shows no analogous deterioration, pointing to a human processing constraint rather than poorer underlying information. Placebo tests using other data vendors make a common platform-wide technology trend unlikely. Overall, GenAI relaxes information-acquisition constraints while making human attention a more important bottleneck.
Sep 1, 2026cs.AI

AnalysisBank: An Expert Analysis Pattern Library for Financial Report Generation

We argue that financial report generation should operate at the analytical rather than structural level, composing content from data-derived insights rather than high-level topics or sections. To this end, we propose AnalysisBank, which distills expert reports into a reusable library of Analyses, each pairing a data signal, an analytical move, and the expert span it was derived from. At inference time, AnalysisBank matches input signals to library entries and applies the retrieved moves to compose the report. A study of Analyses distilled from 550 expert reports reveals a heavy-tailed distribution of 47-52 signal types spanning 13 move types. On two financial benchmarks across four LLM backbones, AnalysisBank increases the proportion of novel, data-grounded insights by 1.7-3.7x over structural-level baselines. Transfer to scientific writing suggests that the distinction generalizes beyond finance. Code and the distilled Analysis library are available at https://github.com/yajingyang/AnalysisBank.
Jun 29, 2026cs.CL

Fast Numbers, Slow Language: Bridging Quantitative and Qualitative Earnings Signals

Earnings announcements release two types of information sequentially: quantitative surprise (numeric earnings-per-share (EPS)/revenue versus analyst estimate) arrives first in press releases and financial news, processed by algorithmic traders within minutes; qualitative language (management tone, guidance, question-and-answer (Q&A) credibility) arrives 30-90 min later in the earnings conference call transcript (ECT), requiring human interpretation overnight. Financial economists have studied quantitative surprise for 50 years; natural language processing (NLP) researchers have studied qualitative ECT signals for a decade. Despite studying the same event, the two communities used incompatible frameworks: different targets (return vs. volatility), trading setups (long top-decile and short bottom-decile vs. trade-all), and metrics (return spread between top and bottom 20% (Q5-Q1) vs. mean squared error (MSE)), making direct comparison and connection challenging. We bridge these communities with EarningsInOne, the first corpus aligning earnings news, ECTs, and intraday and next-day prices across SP 1500 (broad U.S. equity universe, 2022-2025). Applying unified trading and evaluation tools to both signal types, we confirm a clean speed separation, fast numbers, slow language: quantitative surprise peaks at announcement and is largely eliminated by the next market open; qualitative ECT sentiment peaks on the next trading day, real and tradeable, but hidden under prior transcript-based evaluation that optimised sign-agnostic volatility with pointwise MSE.