RIDGE: An Autonomous Framework for Validation and Method Discovery in LLM-Generated Option Pricing

Quantitative backtesting is essential for evaluating trading strategies but remains hampered by high technical barriers and limited scalability. While Large Language Models (LLMs) offer a transformative path to automate this complex, interdisciplinary workflow through advanced code generation, tool usage, and agentic planning, the practical realization is significantly challenged by the current lack of a large-scale benchmark dedicated to automated quantitative backtesting, which hinders progress in this field. To bridge this critical gap, we introduce BacktestBench, the first large-scale benchmark for automated quantitative backtesting. Built from over 6 million real market records, it comprises 18,246 meticulously annotated question-answering pairs across four task categories: metrics calculation, ticker selection, strategy selection, and parameter confirmation. We also propose AutoBacktest, a robust multi-agent baseline that translates natural language strategies into reproducible backtests by coordinating a Summarizer for semantic factor extraction, a Retriever for validated SQL generation, and a Coder for Python backtesting implementation. Our evaluation on 23 mainstream LLMs, complemented by targeted ablations, identifies key factors that influence end-to-end performance and highlights the importance of grounded verification and standardized indicator representations.

Generating realistic synthetic option prices requires implied volatility as an input, yet implied volatility is itself derived from observed option prices, creating a circular dependency that limits synthetic data for machine-learning and risk-analysis applications. We break this circularity with a pipeline in which implied volatility emerges as an output of a structural model of equity returns. A Jump Hidden Markov Model produces multi-asset price paths with realistic stylized facts and cross-asset tail dependence; a modified Heston variance process, whose mean-reversion target depends on regime state, days to expiration, moneyness, and a market-mood indicator, converts those paths into implied-volatility paths; and a recombining binomial lattice prices American options from the resulting surface. Initializing variance at its mean-reversion target for each strike-expiration pair lets smile, skew, and term structure emerge without external calibration. We calibrate the shape function through a hierarchy spanning a parametric baseline, a globally shared neural surrogate, and a sector-specific neural surrogate fit to a multi-ticker, multi-sector option ladder. A temporal holdout on a multi-day capture isolated scheduled corporate events as the dominant source of test-time generalization error, and calendar-derived earnings-distance and same-sector peer-coupling features recovered the anticipatory portion of that signal. We then apply the framework as a synthetic-data generator on real near-the-money put and call contracts, forward-simulating price paths, and recovering path-conditional implied volatility, finite-difference American Greeks, and terminal short-premium profit and loss from one coherent simulation, and confirm cross-ticker robustness by re-running on a second underlying from a different sector and volatility regime. The framework is released as an open-source Julia package.

Large language models have demonstrated strong performance on general-purpose programming tasks, yet their ability to generate executable algorithmic trading strategies remains underexplored. Unlike standard code benchmarks, trading-strategy generation requires simultaneous mastery of domain-specific financial logic, knowledge of a specialized API, and the ability to produce code that is not only syntactically correct but also leads to actual trades on historical data. In this work, we present QuantCode-Bench, a benchmark for the systematic evaluation of modern LLMs in generating strategies for the Backtrader framework from textual descriptions in English. The benchmark contains 400 tasks of varying difficulty collected from Reddit, TradingView, StackExchange, GitHub, and synthetic sources. Evaluation is conducted through a multi-stage pipeline that checks syntactic correctness, successful backtest execution, the presence of trades, and semantic alignment with the task description using an LLM judge. We compare state-of-the-art models in two settings: single-turn, where the strategy must be generated correctly on the first attempt, and agentic multi-turn, where the model receives iterative feedback and may repair its errors. We analyze the failure modes across different stages of the pipeline and show that the main limitations of current models are not related to syntax, but rather to the correct operationalization of trading logic, proper API usage, and adherence to task semantics. These findings suggest that trading strategy generation constitutes a distinct class of domain-specific code generation tasks in which success requires not only technical correctness, but also alignment between natural-language descriptions, financial logic, and the observable behavior of the strategy on data.