Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as AI analysts to process financial disclosures and support AI-assisted investment decisions. Yet such systems are usually evaluated by what they can retrieve, not whether retrieved information affects their judgments. We identify a retrieval-integration gap in long-context financial analysis. Holding focal-firm information fixed and varying only unrelated context from 2,000 to 128,000 tokens, we find that a risk disclosure's influence on investment judgments falls to the experimental noise floor even as direct retrieval remains accurate. The pattern replicates across model families and judgment tasks and in experiments removing real disclosures from actual 10-K filings. More capable models postpone but do not eliminate the gap. Causal memory interventions show that compressed summaries and source-text lookup jointly transmit disclosures into judgments. Workflow architecture determines whether this transmission succeeds: chunk-and-summarize pipelines evict relevant information, whereas a targeted, structured restatement adjacent to the decision restores its influence. AI analyst performance is therefore jointly determined by model capability and workflow architecture. Retrieval-based evaluations can certify systems whose investment judgments ignore information they demonstrably retrieved.
Explore similar work
Sep 2, 2026cs.CL
Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly use user context such as memory, profiles, and role prompts to personalize their responses. This personalization can affect evidence-based judgment: the same evidence may lead to different conclusions under different user contexts. Finance provides a high-stakes setting to study this problem because decisions often depend on interpreting long and complex documents. We test this using 3,575 SEC filings across twelve LLMs. We compare persona-conditioned retrieval, neutral retrieval, and memory-framed context to separate the effect of evidence selection from the effect of interpretation. We find that most user-context spillover comes from how models interpret the same evidence under different roles, rather than from retrieving different evidence. We then test two simple mitigation strategies: expressing the same investor mindset as a user profile instead of an assistant role, and separating evidence-based and personalized outputs. Both reduce spillover, but neither removes it completely, and their effectiveness varies substantially across models.
Ahmed Asaad, Amr Mohamed, Yang Zhang +1
Durham University Business School · MBZUAI & Ecole Polytechnique · Ecole Polytechnique +1
Jun 28, 2026cs.AI
Financial decision-makers face more information than they can directly inspect, making context compression necessary. Yet when large language models (LLMs) compress financial source material, they can alter the investment judgment supported by the original source. We frame this problem as information fidelity: compression loses fidelity when it changes the decision induced by the source. In agentic systems, such losses may recur across intermediate steps and amplify throughout the decision process. Across financial filings and earnings-call transcripts, we find that LLM-based compression can produce fluent and factually plausible compressed contexts that nevertheless alter downstream decisions. We analyze two diagnostic patterns associated with fidelity loss: decontextualization, where salient evidence is retained but separated from the caveats and contextual qualifiers needed for correct interpretation, and model dependency, where different compressors expose different views of the same source. We then propose Agentic Context Compression, which generates multiple candidate compressions and audits their disagreements against the original source. Our results suggest that financial compression should be evaluated not only by efficiency or factuality, but also by its ability to preserve decision-relevant context.
Hoyoung Lee, Suhwan Park, Seunghan Lee +15
UNIST · LinqAlpha · LG AI Research +9
May 9, 2026cs.CL
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in financial contexts, raising critical concerns about reliability, alignment, and susceptibility to adversarial manipulation. While prior finance-related benchmarks assess LLMs' capabilities in stock trading, they are often restricted to small sample and fail to demonstrate LLM susceptibility to context with potential human bias. We introduce Fin-Bias (financial herding under long and uncertain financial context), a benchmark for evaluating LLM investment decision-making when faced with uncertainty and possible human-biased opinions. Fin-Bias includes 8868 long firm-specific analyst reports, including firm aspects summarized and analyzed by sophisticated analysts with investment ratings (Bullish/Neutral/Bearish) spanning from various industries. We present large language models with firm analyst reports with/without analyst investment ratings and even with 'fake' rating, to get investment ratings generated by LLMs. Our results reveal that LLMs tend to herd the explicit bias in context. We also develop a method to detect potential human opinions, which can encourage LLMs to think independently, some models even exceed human performance in predicting future stock return.
Xiaoyu Hu, Jinman Zhao
Rutgers University · Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto