Organizations: Graduate Institute of Electrical Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan · Institute of Information Science, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan · National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan · University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA · United Link Co., Ltd., Taipei, Taiwan
Predicting stock prices presents challenges in financial forecasting. While traditional approaches such as ARIMA and RNNs are prevalent, recent developments in Large Language Models (LLMs) offer alternative methodologies. This paper introduces an approach that integrates LLMs with daily financial news for stock price prediction. To address the challenge of processing news data and identifying relevant content, we utilize stock name embeddings within attention mechanisms. Specifically, we encode news articles using a pre-trained LLM and implement three attention-based pooling techniques -- self-attentive, cross-attentive, and position-aware self-attentive pooling -- to filter news based on stock relevance. The filtered news embeddings, combined with historical stock prices, serve as inputs to the prediction model. Unlike prior studies that focus on individual stocks, our method trains a single generalized model applicable across multiple stocks. Experimental results demonstrate a 7.11% reduction in Mean Absolute Error (MAE) compared to the baseline, indicating the utility of stock name embeddings for news filtering and price forecasting within a generalized framework.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: Overview of the proposed stock price prediction framework. We employ Attentive Pooling to derive pooled representations of all news articles from each day. Subsequently, we integrate daily historical stock price data with corresponding news information via News-Price Fusion. Finally, these historical representations are input into an LLM to predict future stock prices. The dotted line represents a process that is optional.
Fig. 2: Three proposed daily news pooling methods that integrate the stock name. (a) We use the sequence of news embeddings as Keys and Values and the stock name embedding as Query for cross-attention to obtain a pooled representation. (b) We append the stock name embedding in front of the sequence of news embeddings, and apply self-attention to obtain a pooled representation. (c) We add the stock name embedding and positional embeddings to the sequence of news embeddings via matrix addition ⊕ , and apply self-attention to obtain a pooled representation.
Fig. 3: The News-Price Fusion Module. Initially, we feed the 20-day price embeddings and pooled news embeddings into distinct dense layers. Subsequently, we apply bidirectional cross-attention, alternating between prices and news as Query/Key and Value. Additionally, a two-layer GCN architecture is employed to model the interaction between prices and news. Finally, we integrate the three fused representations with the original outputs from the dense layers (both price and news embeddings) using a weighted average, yielding the final fused result.
Max # Chars
Avg # Chars
Max # News
Avg # News
7538
509.96
654
219.50
Table 1: Maximum and average number of characters in news articles and maximum and average number of news articles per day. For excessively long articles, methods such as sliding window or truncation are applied.
Company
Metric
Methods
LSTM
FPT
TimeLLM
+News
+CAP
+SAP
+PA-SAP
TSMC
MAE
0.2677
0.1477
0.1496
0.1530
0.1398
0.1433
0.1419
MSE
0.2000
0.0457
0.0456
0.0446
0.0399
0.0429
0.0432
MediaTek
MAE
0.2931
0.1403
0.1365
0.1347
0.1276
0.1294
0.1200
MSE
0.2270
0.0356
0.0340
0.0346
0.0292
0.0301
0.0261
Foxconn
MAE
1.0633
0.5378
0.5016
0.5035
0.4763
0.4953
0.5125
Table 2: Performance of individual stocks in future-1 day prediction. TimeLLM represents the Time-LLM baseline without news, +News represents including news but excluding the stock name, +CAP, +SAP, and +PA-SAP are the proposed news pooling methods integrating the stock name: cross-attentive pooling, self-attentive pooling, and position-aware self-attentive pooling, respectively. Bold text indicates that it surpasses both TimeLLM and +News, and underline indicates the best in each column.
TSMC
MediaTeK
Foxconn
Realtek
Novatek
Delta
MAE Mean (Std)
TimeLLM
0.1502 (0.0099)
0.1335 (0.0104)
0.5092 (0.0474)
0.0909 (0.0047)
0.0931 (0.0011)
0.1876 (0.0080)
+News
0.1444 (0.0077)
0.1295 (0.0121)
0.5153 (0.0409)
0.0924 (0.0061)
0.0923 (0.0023)
0.1815 (0.0044)
+SAP
0.1414 (0.0043)
0.1227 (0.0078)
0.4927 (0.0138)
0.0853 (0.0023)
0.0894 (0.0024)
0.1744 (0.0099)
+CAP
0.1390 (0.0007)
0.1252 (0.0090)
0.5019 (0.0408)
0.0897 (0.0040)
0.0933 (0.0014)
0.1807 (0.0074)
+PA-SAP
0.1489 (0.0145)
0.1333 (0.0116)
0.5510 (0.0345)
0.0967 (0.0068)
0.0936 (0.0049)
0.1889 (0.0139)
Table 3: Mean performance over three independent random seeds with sample standard deviation in parentheses. The upper block reports MAE and the lower block reports MSE. Lower is better.
Method
LLaMA Backbone
GPT-2 Backbone
MAE
MSE
MAE
MSE
without SNP
TimeLLM
0.1913
0.1497
0.1889
0.1380
+News
0.1874
0.1432
0.1849
0.1391
+CAP
0.1830
0.1252
0.1775
0.1200
+SAP
0.1777
0.1311
0.1756
0.1191
Table 4: Performance on TW21 for future-1 day prediction. TimeLLM represents the baseline without news, while +News includes news but excludes the stock name. +CAP, +SAP, and +PA-SAP are proposed news pooling methods integrating the stock name. Bold text denotes surpassing both TimeLLM and +News, and underline highlights the best in each column.
Method
with SNP
without SNP
MAE
MSE
MAE
MSE
+SAP
0.1870
0.1472
0.1777
0.1311
- GCN
0.1835
0.1420
0.1940
0.1583
- P2N
0.1882
0.1538
0.1934
0.1611
- N2P
0.2166
0.2125
0.2112
0.1889
- P2N - N2P
0.2149
0.2191
0.2145
0.2147
Table 5: Ablation study results for the +SAP method. The “-” symbol indicates the removal of specific components from the News-Price Fusion module in Figure 1 . Underlined values represent the best performance in each column.
Fig. 4: (a) and (b) compare the MAE of future 5-day price prediction methods with different backbones: LLaMA (a) and GPT-2 (b). Darker bars indicate results without SNP, while lighter bars show results with SNP. TimeLLM serves as the baseline, +News includes news without stock name embeddings, and +CAP, +SAP, and +PA-SAP are three attentive pooling methods.
Methods
LLaMA Backbone
GPT-2 Backbone
MAE
MSE
MAE
MSE
TimeLLM
0.1030
0.0221
0.1037
0.0222
+News
0.0975
0.0199
0.1034
0.0223
+CAP
0.2653
0.1291
0.2443
0.1102
+SAP
0.0974
0.0198
0.1024
0.0218
+PA-SAP
0.1019
0.0215
0.1097
0.0245
Table 6: Performance on BigData23 for future-1 day prediction (without SNP). TimeLLM is the baseline without news, while +News includes news but excludes the stock name. +SAP, +CAP, and +PA-SAP are news pooling methods integrating the stock name. Bold surpasses both TimeLLM and +News, and underline highlights the best in each column.
Stock market analysts and investors face a daily challenge: too much financial news, too little time. Manually reading and synthesizing hundreds of company-specific articles is impractical, yet missing key information can directly affect investment decisions. This project, conducted at George Washington University in Fall 2023, explores whether Large Language Models can automate this process reliably. We built a pipeline that pulls news articles from the News API, company background from Wikipedia, and stock price data from Yahoo Finance for ten major companies (AAPL, MSFT, GOOGL, AMZN, META, TSLA, JPM, NVDA, WMT, DIS). Because LLMs cannot directly process numerical tables, we developed a simple but effective template that converts stock data into natural language narratives. We then tested two summarization approaches (Summarize Chains and Retrieval-Augmented Generation with FAISS) across three open-source models (Falcon-7B-Instruct, DistilBART-CNN-12-6, BART-Large-XSum) for news, and GPT (text-davinci-003) for stock summaries. Falcon-7B with Summarize Chains gave the best results, covering all news events accurately and coherently. RAG, while promising in theory, caused severe repetition in Falcon and hallucinated facts in BART-Large when k was large. Both LLM-based approaches outperformed a simple Lead-3 baseline on ROUGE-1. We also built a Streamlit dashboard for interactive stock visualization. The work was done in Fall 2023, before RAG-based financial tools became widespread, and the failure modes we document, particularly hallucination under RAG in smaller models, remain relevant today.
Pranav Chandaliya
Department of Data Science George Washington University Washington, D.C., USA
Financial forecasting has traditionally relied on numerical time-series (TS) signals, while textual information such as news remains largely underutilized. We introduce XForecast, a benchmark and competition for news-grounded financial forecasting, where the task is to predict stock price movements four weeks ahead using both historical price data and paired news signals. XForecast combines stock price data with curated financial text generated using FinTexTS, a multimodal dataset generation method. It covers 100 large-cap stocks from 2019--2023, with training on 2019--2022 and evaluation on 2023. To better evaluate models that leverage textual signals, we adopt a weighted hit rate metric that places greater emphasis on instances where news information is expected to have stronger influence. The XForecast Challenge, hosted on Kaggle as part of KDD 2026 Finance Day, aims to benchmark methods for integrating financial TS and textual information.
Jaehoon Lee, Jun Seo, Seunghan Lee +10
LG AI Research, Seoul, South Korea · Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology (UNIST), Ulsan, South Korea
Can financial news reliably predict short-term stock movements? Despite advances in large language models, this question remains unresolved. We revisit this problem using a zero-shot natural language processing framework, investigating whether models can extract actionable signals from financial news without domain-specific training. We design a structured pipeline that combines zero-shot natural language inference with temporal aggregation, explicitly modelling recency and event-dependent impact horizons when integrating information across articles. To address the need for transparency in high-stakes settings, we introduce a multi-layered explainability framework that links predictions to token-level, article-level, and aggregate evidence, and produces grounded natural language rationales. Across multiple models and prediction horizons, we find that zero-shot approaches consistently fail to outperform simple baselines, with particularly weak performance on negative movements, suggesting deeper structural limitations in mapping news sentiment to short-term price dynamics. However, explainability signals reliably distinguish between trustworthy and unreliable predictions, offering practical value even when accuracy is limited. These findings highlight the limits of zero-shot financial NLP and motivate a shift toward decision-support systems that prioritise transparency and uncertainty awareness. Code: https://github.com/alimert05/zero-shot-stock-xai
Ali M Karaoglu, Shreyank N Gowda
School of Computer Science, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom