FinDialogLens: Event Extraction over Multi-Party Dialogue for Missed-Trade Identification in Financial Chatrooms

Deploying LLMs for financial information retrieval demands accuracy, cost efficiency, and reproducibility, yet most approaches require expensive fine-tuning. PRISM is a training-free framework that composes three deployable modules (prompt engineering, in-context learning, and a candidate refinement module) with a boundary-condition study of multi-agent coordination for financial document retrieval. On FiQA-2018, stacked reranking and $k$-reciprocal encoding raise Recall@100 from 0.7783 to 0.8326. On FinAgentBench, a Cohere-refined top-50 pool yields a higher observed end-to-end NDCG@5, below this evaluation's minimum detectable effect, while cutting per-query cost by about 35%. Added complexity does not always pay off: $k$-reciprocal encoding stops helping once the upstream stage is already high-recall, and multi-agent coordination is not a default for fine-grained chunk ranking. Matched pairs that hold prompt, model, and exemplars fixed lose 0.0702 and 0.0681 combined NDCG@5 to their single-path controls, and the whole gap sits at the chunk stage. We release an expert-annotated FinAgentBench evaluation set, together with a label-robustness sweep over 16 alternative ground-truth constructions, restoring a reproducible evaluation path after the original evaluator went offline. Without fine-tuning, PRISM placed third on the official FinAgentBench private leaderboard (leaderboard basis, NDCG@5 0.71181), reaches NDCG@10 0.6197 on FiQA-2018, and 98% accuracy on FinanceBench. We report per-query latency, token, and dollar accounting across roughly 40 configurations, present the quality-cost-latency Pareto frontier, and introduce FACET, a transparent SLA-specific scalarization for choosing among non-dominated configurations. Code and dataset are released at https://bit.ly/prism-ailens.

Financial analysis requires reasoning over heterogeneous signals, including company fundamentals from regulatory filings and trading signals derived from market prices. However, existing financial benchmarks focus almost exclusively on regulatory filings, neglecting market dynamics and cross-signal interactions. We introduce FinTradeBench, a benchmark of 1,400 questions covering NASDAQ-100 stocks over a ten-year window. To holistically evaluate financial reasoning, FinTradeBench includes questions in three reasoning categories: fundamentals-focused, trading-signal-focused, and hybrid questions that require cross-signal reasoning. Our benchmark starts with 150 expert-authored seed questions, which are then scaled to 1400. To ensure reliable evaluation, we create a Core400 subset in which every item is expert-reviewed. In zero-shot (No-RAG) response generation, we observe that all models perform substantially worse on trading-focused questions compared to fundamental-focused questions. To identify failure causes, we evaluate LLMs under controlled settings including retrieval-based baselines, tool-assisted computation, oracle conditions, and time-series-specialized pipelines. LLMs' capabilities to do computation and evidence selection contribute most to reasoning failures. Additionally, retrieval significantly improves trading-signal reasoning but does not improve fundamental reasoning, where identifying relevant signals remains the dominant failure mode. Finally, rather than relying on a small, fine-tuned model for time-series reasoning, it is better to summarize the time-series data and leverage LLMs' reasoning capabilities.

Recent deployments of large language models (LLMs) as autonomous trading agents raise questions about whether financial decision-making competence generalizes beyond specific market patterns and how it should be trained and evaluated in noisy markets lacking ground truth. We propose a structured framework for training and evaluating such models. Central to our approach is a curated, multiple-choice question (MCQ) dataset derived from classic textbooks and historical markets, verified by an AI committee, enriched with structured reasoning traces, and augmented to reduce shortcut learning. To evaluate whether performance on isolated MCQs generalizes to real-world trading, we introduce a two-stage protocol combining test-set evaluation with an MCQ-based chronological trading simulation. Extensive evaluations across market regimes provide statistically robust evidence that open models trained with our framework exhibit competitive, risk-aware behavior over time, outperform open-source baselines, and approach frontier-model performance at smaller scale. We release the dataset and evaluation framework to support further research.