Long-Horizon Forecasting of Complete Financial Statements with Forma

Financial decision-making is contextual: forecasting prices, valuing companies, and assessing event exposure weigh price history, accounting fundamentals, macroeconomic regime, and contemporaneous text. A benchmark over these four signals is hard to build because finance violates four assumptions of time-series evaluation: text must be gated by its publication date to prevent look-ahead, quarterly fundamentals are reported with a one- to ninety-day lag, filing text is partly redundant with the numerical statement fields it accompanies, and macroeconomic regimes leak across calendar splits. No public benchmark addresses all four signals jointly. MacroLens covers 4,416 U.S. small- and micro-cap equities over 2021-2026. Seven tasks share one point-in-time panel of prices, 46.8M XBRL accounting facts, 53 macroeconomic series, 295,860 SEC filings, and 215,882 news articles, plus a scenario layer of 1,130 macroeconomic events across 49 types automatically detected and rendered as natural language. Tasks span contextual forecasting, public and private valuation, statement generation from fundamentals and descriptions, scenario-conditioned returns, and real-estate valuation. We evaluate 19 methods across six families spanning naive heuristics through time-series foundation models, fine-tuned LLM-based time-series models, and zero-shot large language models (LLMs), plus a five-step feature-context ablation on two frontier LLMs and a gradient-boosted baseline. MacroLens is released at https://huggingface.co/datasets/DeepAuto-AI/MacroLens.

Small businesses often have only 12-24 months of accounting history, yet planning and risk workflows require coordinated forecasts across financial statements. We study joint 12-month forecasting of 13 income-statement, balance-sheet, cash-flow, and working-capital key performance indicators (KPIs) from 71 monthly ledger series. We introduce the Accounting Graph Transformer (AGT), which represents each ledger series as a masked token, exchanges information through typed attention on a fixed accounting-relation graph, pools target-specific context, and fuses it with a gated three-month recency path. Across 11,993 forecast origins from 1,060 unseen companies, AGT achieves sample-weighted KPI-macro mean absolute error (MAE) $0.6990 \pm 0.0013$ over three independent seeds, compared with $0.7378 \pm 0.0014$ for the strongest baseline, LightGBM. At the pre-specified seed 42, a paired company-clustered bootstrap gives a LightGBM-minus-AGT difference of 0.0395 with 95% confidence interval (CI) $[0.0350,0.0439]$. AGT is best on all 13 KPIs against LightGBM, TimeMixer, and SOFTS in the matched seed-42 comparison, while final-architecture ablations show that relational attention, accounting topology, and the recency path each improve validation and test accuracy. On 7,094 additional unseen companies with origins sampled from January-May 2025, AGT obtains 0.7548 MAE versus 0.7694 for SOFTS. A single 5.3M-parameter model produces 156 aligned forecasts without company-specific fitting, providing one forecasting layer for integrated planning, liquidity, and working-capital analysis.

We introduce FinVerBench, a benchmark and validity study for financial statement verification: determining whether a set of corporate financial statements is numerically consistent from the information shown to the model. FinVerBench is built from SEC 10-K XBRL filings for 43 S&P 500 companies and defines a four-category error taxonomy covering arithmetic, cross-statement linkage, year-over-year, and magnitude perturbations. We attempt fifteen contemporary LLM evaluations and report fourteen complete runs; a Gemini 2.5 Pro run is excluded from the main comparison because 40/108 gateway calls failed. All binary metrics exclude underdetermined positive instances whose perturbed line item is not rendered, leaving a 105-instance observable diagnostic subset (43 clean, 62 error-injected). Under the original guided-checklist prompt on the unrounded diagnostic subset, nine of fourteen complete LLM runs produce 95-100% false positives on clean statements, while one run achieves 0% observed false positives. Benchmark rendering choices materially affect measured recall: on a realistic rounded variant of the same observable subset, the calibrated model's recall is 79.0% with 0% observed FPR, compared with 100.0% recall on the unrounded diagnostic variant. These results support a construct-validity conclusion rather than a final leaderboard: financial statement verification is not merely arithmetic detection, but calibrated judgment under incomplete observability, prompt-induced assumptions, and realistic numerical rendering. FinVerBench and all code are publicly available.