cs.CLAug 31, 2026

Can LLMs Take the Pulse of the Economy? A Real-Time Evaluation of LLM Nowcasts on Macroeconomic Indicators

Authors: Xinyue Zhao, Ruiyi Zhang, Liqin Ye, Rui Cao, Pengtao Xie, Sudheer Chava

Organizations: Georgia Institute of Technology · University of California San Diego

Abstract

Nowcasting headline macroeconomic indicators, i.e., estimating an indicator's value for the current reference period before its official release, is critical for monetary policy and financial markets, and central banks devote dedicated teams of expert economists to producing such estimates. Large language model (LLM) agents are a promising candidate for this task, combining broad world knowledge with real-time web search and supporting queries at higher frequency than institutional nowcasts. Evaluating their nowcasting capability is, however, challenging: headline indicators such as GDP and CPI are widely reported and likely memorized during pretraining, so any evaluation on historical releases is vulnerable to data contamination. To address this, we introduce LiveMacroEval, a live, contamination-resistant benchmark in which LLM agents produce hourly nowcasts for sixteen major U.S. macroeconomic indicators over a pre-release window closing at each official release. Nowcast quality is assessed through a LiveMacro Score against announcement-window equity returns and a LiveBetting Score from simulated Polymarket-style trading, with Federal Reserve regional-bank nowcasts, the Bloomberg ECOS professional consensus, and an auto-ARIMA baseline as comparators. Over six months with four state-of-the-art LLM agents configured with web search, aggregate nowcast accuracy is broadly comparable to the institutional and professional benchmarks, with performance varying widely across individual indicators. This highlights LLM agents' potential as real-time estimators of macroeconomic conditions.

Explore similar work

CardsList
Jun 21, 2026q-fin.ST

Leakage-Aware Benchmarking of LLM Forecasting: Real-Time Nowcasts as the Decision-Time Input for Macro Factor Ranking

Forecasting benchmarks for retrieval-augmented LLMs routinely confound model capability with information leakage: features labeled with a target's timestamp are often not observable at the system's decision time. We study leakage-controlled equity factor ranking with a retrieval-augmented 7B open-source LLM forecaster. At each month-end from 2023-04 to 2026-03, the forecaster observes only decision-time information: lag-shifted FRED macro variables, recent macro-event summaries, and the Cleveland Fed's archived daily CPI nowcast for unreleased current-month inflation. A macro-analog retrieval module selects historical states, a critic LLM compresses them into one tactical rule, and an actor LLM maps the current state and recent rules into scores for seven U.S. equity style factors. The full pipeline obtains a median monthly Spearman rank IC of +0.154, with positive means across three non-overlapping contiguous 12-month subwindows; the mean IC remains statistically underpowered, with a bootstrap 95% confidence interval that includes zero. Non-LLM baselines under the same decision-time constraint demonstrate that a kNN macro-analog model recovers a comparable median IC, indicating that real-time inflation information and macro-similar retrieval explain much of the median signal. The LLM pipeline retains higher mean IC and a stronger long-short allocation sanity check, suggesting that any marginal benefit is concentrated in the extreme rankings that drive long-short portfolio formation. A descriptive audit of the 36 critic rules and per-month case studies appears in the appendix.
Mao Guan, Qian Chen
LeakageDecisionsRetrieval-Augmented Generation
AskPDF
Apr 23, 2026cs.AI

Ideological Bias in LLMs' Economic Causal Reasoning

Do large language models (LLMs) exhibit systematic ideological bias when reasoning about economic causal effects? As LLMs are increasingly used in policy analysis and economic reporting, where directionally correct causal judgments are essential, this question has direct practical stakes. We present a systematic evaluation by extending the EconCausal benchmark with ideology-contested cases - instances where intervention-oriented (pro-government) and market-oriented (pro-market) perspectives predict divergent causal signs. From 10,490 causal triplets (treatment-outcome pairs with empirically verified effect directions) derived from top-tier economics and finance journals, we identify 1,056 ideology-contested instances and evaluate 20 state-of-the-art LLMs on their ability to predict empirically supported causal directions. We find that ideology-contested items are consistently harder than non-contested ones, and that across 18 of 20 models, accuracy is systematically higher when the empirically verified causal sign aligns with intervention-oriented expectations than with market-oriented ones. Moreover, when models err, their incorrect predictions disproportionately lean intervention-oriented, and this directional skew is not eliminated by one-shot in-context prompting. These results highlight that LLMs are not only less accurate on ideologically contested economic questions, but systematically less reliable in one ideological direction than the other, underscoring the need for direction-aware evaluation in high-stakes economic and policy settings.
Donggyu Lee, Hyeok Yun, Jungwon Kim +4
Ideology
AskPDF
Jul 15, 2026cs.CL

Hindcast: Replaying Prediction Markets to Evaluate LLM Forecasters

Forecasters are evaluated by backtesting, which replays resolved questions and grades the probability the system would have assigned before the outcome was known. For LLMs, two channels leak the answer into this test. A model that retrieves can surface reports written after the event, turning forecasting into a lookup, and each new model is trained on data closer to the event, so a question that lay in the future for last year's models sits inside this year's training data. Either way, the test grades recall while claiming to grade foresight. We introduce Hindcast, which closes both leaks by grading a model as if it stood at a chosen past date t0t_0, before the outcome existed in either channel. Hindcast replays resolved Polymarket prediction markets against a frozen snapshot of public Reddit, lets the model read only posts written before t0t_0, and scores each forecast against both what happened and the market's own price at t0t_0, itself a human forecast made from the same past information. Because the cutoff is set per market and the snapshot never changes, the evaluation re-runs on new markets as models improve, without going stale. Once the leak is closed, retrieval still helps most models, but only where Reddit discussed the event beforehand. Where the archive carried only speculation, retrieval hurts.
Xiao Ye, Jacob Dineen, Evan Zhu +3
Prediction MarketsForesight
AskPDF