fev-bench: A Realistic Benchmark for Time Series Forecasting

As time-series foundation models have emerged, the need for benchmarks that can evaluate their forecasting ability in meaningful ways has become increasingly important. Existing time-series forecasting benchmarks provide useful standardized comparisons, but they often evaluate heterogeneous series with uniform error-based metrics. Strong performance under such metrics does not necessarily imply that a model's forecasts will support the best real-world decisions across domains. For example, in stock forecasting, correctly predicting whether a price will rise or fall can be more directly relevant to realized returns than minimizing point-wise forecast error alone. To this end, we introduce FinVerse, a finance-domain time-series forecasting benchmark that takes a first step toward more realistic evaluation. The released FinVerse data artifact contains 116,897 financial time series with 171.1M observations, of which 60,232 series with 17.4M observations are selected as evaluated targets based on their economic relevance to financial decisions. Unlike generic forecasting benchmarks that primarily emphasize uniform point-forecast or probabilistic accuracy, FinVerse defines 11 metric families comprising 78 evaluation metrics and assigns the most appropriate evaluation metrics to each individual time series based on its underlying economic meaning. Our analysis of 43 public time-series forecasting foundation models shows that strong performance under generic forecasting criteria does not necessarily translate into useful financial forecasts. This finding highlights the need for domain-aware benchmarks that evaluate models under objectives closer to real-world decision making.

High-quality time series forecasting is pivotal for real-world decision-making. However, traditional point-wise metrics often fail to reveal complex temporal patterns and align poorly with human intuitive preferences. While the ''LLM-as-a-Judge'' paradigm has revolutionized text evaluation by providing flexible, human-aligned judgment, its application to time series remains largely unexplored. In this paper, we leverage Vision-Language Models (VLMs) as judges for time series forecasting, harnessing their ability to comprehend time series plots grounded in textual information. Specifically, we propose a novel framework integrating micro- and macro-level judgments informed by contextual information to evaluate time series forecasting. To this end, we introduce TimeVista, a comprehensive VLM-as-a-Judge benchmark comprising 5563 time series samples paired with detailed evaluation rubrics. Extensive meta-evaluations demonstrate that VLMs are highly reliable judges, achieving significantly higher consistency with human preferences than conventional metrics. Building upon our benchmark, we comprehensively assess recent Time Series Foundation Models (TSFMs) under the VLM-as-a-Judge paradigm. Our results demonstrate that VLMs serve as robust and interpretable judges, providing a comprehensive, human-aligned standard for evaluating time series models.

Most time series forecasting benchmarks remain numerical-centric and provide limited support for evaluating contextual information that shapes real-world temporal dynamics. Existing multimodal benchmarks also suffer from limited data and context coverage, fragmented evaluation settings, and overreliance on aggregate evaluation. In this paper, we propose \textbf{MUSE-Bench}, a unified benchmark for multimodal time series forecasting with heterogeneous context. It comprises fourteen datasets across eight domains and six types of context: metadata, events, holidays, news, images, and numerical covariates. We evaluate diverse forecasting paradigms, including statistical, data-specific, foundation, multimodal, and general-purpose LLM forecasting methods under shared non-overlapping forecast windows, common target observations, and consistent point and probabilistic metrics. Extensive experiments yield three main findings. First, numerical time series foundation models dominate the overall ranking, while Aurora, the evaluated multimodal foundation model, trails the leading numerical TSFMs but outperforms all evaluated data-specific models. Second, ablations show that external context improves the four evaluated context-aware models, whereas incorrect or temporally misaligned context degrades performance. Third, general-purpose LLMs perform poorly as direct forecasters, and LLM-guided refinement does not yield consistent improvements. MUSE-Bench enables systematic evaluation of how forecasting models utilize context and provides a foundation for future multimodal forecasting research.