Finance

Deploying machine learning in regulated financial environments -- credit risk, fraud detection, and anti-money laundering -- exposes critical vulnerabilities in algorithmic reproducibility. While early financial ML addressed statistical challenges such as backtest overfitting, deep neural networks and Generative AI have introduced mechanical nondeterminism rooted in hardware and architecture. This survey provides a systems perspective on reproducibility failures across three modalities now dominant in financial AI: tabular models (post-hoc explanation variance), graph networks (stochastic sampling and temporal asynchrony), and LLM-based agentic workflows (batch-dependent divergence and trajectory drift). We supplement the literature analysis with first-party experiments on public financial datasets -- quantifying explanation rank instability in credit scoring, prediction flip rates in GNN-based fraud detection, and tensor-parallel-induced output divergence in LLM entity extraction. We propose a layered evaluation framework linking modality-specific metrics (RBO, D_cos, TDI, PSD) to audit readiness, and empirically validate the complementarity of logit-level and semantic-level determinism measures.

Corporate bankruptcy prediction is a high-stakes financial task characterized by severe class imbalance and multi-horizon forecasting demands. Public datasets supporting it remain scarce and small: widely used free benchmarks contain between 6,000 and 80,000 company-year observations, while larger resources are behind subscription paywalls. To address this gap, we introduce V4FinBench, a benchmark of over one million company-year records from the Visegràd Group (V4) economies (2006-2021), with 131 financial and non-financial features, six prediction horizons, and a composite distress criterion jointly capturing solvency, profitability, and liquidity deterioration. V4FinBench is designed to support the evaluation of tabular and foundation-model methods under realistic class imbalance, with positive rates between 0.19% and 0.36%. We provide reference evaluations of standard tabular baselines, finetuned TabPFN, and QLoRA-finetuned Llama-3-8B. With imbalance-aware finetuning, TabPFN matches or exceeds gradient boosting at longer time horizons on both $F_1$-score and ROC-AUC. In contrast, Llama-3-8B trails gradient boosting on ROC-AUC at every horizon and is generally weaker on $F_1$-score, with the gap widening sharply beyond the immediate horizon. In an external evaluation on the American Bankruptcy Dataset, the V4FinBench-finetuned TabPFN checkpoint improves over vanilla TabPFN, suggesting that adaptation captures transferable financial-distress structure rather than only V4-specific patterns. V4FinBench is publicly released to support further evaluation and development of prediction methods on realistic financial data.

Emojis are widely used in online financial communication, but it is unclear whether they provide transferable sentiment signals across languages, platforms, and asset communities. This study examines the extent to which emoji usage, semantics, and sentiment polarity remain stable across financial communities, and how these layers influence zero-shot sentiment transfer. Using large corpora of Twitter and StockTwits posts in four languages, we measure cross-community divergence and evaluate sentiment models trained under emoji-only, text-only, and text+emoji inputs. We find that emoji frequencies differ across communities, especially across languages, but their semantics and sentiment polarity are largely stable. Cross-asset transferability shows minimal degradation, while cross-language transfer remains the most challenging. Including emojis consistently reduces transfer gaps relative to text-only models. These results indicate that financial communication exhibits a partially shared ``emoji code,'' and that emojis provide compact, language-independent sentiment cues that improve model generalization across markets and platforms.

ESG-aware portfolio optimization is increasingly important for sustainable capital allocation, yet most learning-based methods still operationalize ESG by appending static scores to the policy observation or reward. This creates a mismatch for sequential control: ESG scores are noisy, provider-dependent, low-frequency, and temporally misaligned with sequential portfolio decisions, while financial evidence suggests that ESG is better treated as a portfolio preference, risk-exposure, or hedge dimension than as a robust alpha factor. We propose to impose ESG constraints without modifying the financial policy's observation or reward, using a Multimodal Action-Conditioned Constraint Field (MACF) that learns mechanism-specific ESG costs from point-in-time multimodal evidence and contemplated portfolio transitions. We then introduce MACF-X, a family of optimizer-specific adapters that converts MACF costs and uncertainties into native constrained-optimization interfaces through a shared slack- and uncertainty-aware pressure layer. Across multiple constraint-integration interfaces, MACF-X reduces tail ESG budget pressure while maintaining competitive financial performance. Ablations show that this improvement depends on dynamic evidence inputs and three-head decomposition, while static ESG-score proxies are nearly indistinguishable from score-shuffled noise baselines.

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.

Using Chronos-2, an open-source time-series foundation model, we evaluate pretrained time-series models for economic and financial forecasting with an emphasis on whether multivariate (MV) inputs improve accuracy relative to univariate (UV) baselines. The study covers two panels -- the Magnificent-7 equities and U.S. Treasury interest rates -- as well as a combined panel, using rolling monthly evaluations from 2000--2025. We vary input window lengths and forecast horizons and report RMSE and MAPE. Across datasets, MV forecasts consistently outperform UV forecasts, with especially strong gains for interest rates and meaningful improvements for equities. Series-level comparisons show MV improvements in every case, and error dispersion is generally lower under MV inputs. We also provide parameter-heatmap and time-series visualizations. However, mixing time series across equity and interest rate markets reduces forecast accuracy, indicating that adding noisy context degrades model performance. Overall, the results indicate that foundation models can leverage cross-series information to improve forecast accuracy in finance, and that the benefits are strongest when related series are modeled jointly under disciplined rolling protocols. Other than using an open-source foundation model, this paper also showcases how AI may be used for financial research.

We introduce Semantic State Abstraction Interfaces (SSAI): a methodological template for mapping sparse unstructured text into $K$ auditable, named coordinates with neutral defaults on no-news days, designed to separate representation hypotheses from optimisation variance in sequential decision systems. Our contribution is the framework and its evaluation protocol, not a claim that SSAI outperforms denser alternatives. We instantiate SSAI with $K=4$ axes (sentiment, risk, confidence, volatility forecast) on a US-equity panel (30 NASDAQ-100 names, FNSPID news, 2019--2023 test), and evaluate it across direct factor portfolios, supervised ridge forecasters, and RL agents (DP-PPO, SAC) that share the same fixed $φ$. The four-factor factor portfolio reaches 307.2% cumulative return and Sharpe 1.067, but apparent gains versus buy-and-hold (243.6%) fail coverage-stratified controls, reverse at $\geq 0.2$% costs, and are statistically fragile versus a sentiment-only baseline; a PC1 composite and a FinBERT portfolio baseline are stronger ranking signals in this setting. Ridge and RL blocks diagnose representation versus optimiser effects. We position SSAI as an interpretability-performance diagnostic and reusable protocol for sparse-text decision systems.

Large language models (LLMs) are rapidly being adopted across various domains. However, their adoption in banking industry faces resistance due to demands for high accuracy, regulatory compliance, and the need for verifiable and grounded responses. We present a unified, data-efficient framework for training grounded domain-specific LLMs that optimizes answer quality, citation grounding, and calibrated refusal under real-world deployment constraints. First, we describe a data generation pipeline that combines LLM-as-a-Judge filtering, citation annotation, and curriculum learning with only 143M tokens. The resulting 12B model achieves high answer quality outperforming GPT-4.1 on citation grounding, with a modest citation tradeoff versus the untuned base. Second, we propose a calibrated refusal mechanism: training on 22% unanswerable examples yield a 12% "I don't know" rate, substantially improving over the base model's unsafe 4.3% rate while avoiding GPT-4.1's over-refusal (20.2%). Third, we present an end-to-end methodology spanning from data curation to quantized serving. The system is deployed at 40+ financial institutions, achieving a 7.1 percentage point improvement in query resolution (p < 0.001). Additionally, the model delivers 3-5x faster responses at 20-50x lower cost compared to GPT-4.1.

Financial document question answering (QA) demands complex multi-step numerical reasoning over heterogeneous evidence--structured tables, textual narratives, and footnotes--scattered across corporate filings. Existing retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) approaches adopt a single-pass retrieve-then-generate paradigm that struggles with the compositional reasoning chains prevalent in financial analysis. We propose FinAgent-RAG, an agentic RAG framework that orchestrates iterative retrieval-reasoning loops with self-verification, specifically engineered for the precision requirements of financial numerical reasoning. The framework integrates three domain-specific innovations: (1) a Contrastive Financial Retriever trained with hard negative mining to distinguish semantically similar but numerically distinct financial passages, (2) a Program-of-Thought reasoning module that generates executable Python code for precise arithmetic rather than relying on error-prone LLM-based mental computation, and (3) an Adaptive Strategy Router that dynamically allocates computational resources based on question complexity, reducing API costs by 41.3% on FinQA while preserving accuracy. Extensive experiments on three benchmark datasets--FinQA, ConvFinQA, and TAT-QA--demonstrate that FinAgent-RAG achieves 76.81%, 78.46%, and 74.96% execution accuracy respectively, outperforming the strongest baseline by 5.62--9.32 percentage points. Ablation studies, cross-backbone evaluation with four LLMs, and deployment cost analysis confirm the framework's robustness and practical viability for financial institutions.

Time series (TS) reasoning models (TSRMs) have shown promising capabilities in general domains, yet they consistently fail in the financial domain, which exhibits unique characteristics. We propose a general 2 x 2 capability taxonomy for TSRMs by crossing 1) single-entity vs. multi-entity analysis with 2) assessment of the current state vs. prediction of future behavior. We instantiate this taxonomy in the financial domain-where the distinction between deterministic assessment and stochastic prediction is particularly critical-as ten financial reasoning tasks, forming the FinTSR-Bench benchmark based on S&P stocks. To this end, we propose FinSTaR (Financial Time Series Thinking and Reasoning), trained on FinTSR-Bench with distinct chain-of-thought (CoT) strategies tailored to each category. For assessment, which is deterministic (i.e., computable from observable data), we employ Compute-in-CoT, a programmatic CoT that enables models to derive answers directly from raw prices. For prediction, which is inherently stochastic (i.e., subject to unobservable factors), we adopt Scenario-Aware CoT, which generates diverse scenarios before making a judgment, mirroring how financial analysts reason under uncertainty. The proposed method achieves 78.9% average accuracy on FinTSR-Bench, substantially outperforming LLM and TSRM baselines. Furthermore, we show that the four capability categories are complementary and mutually reinforcing through joint training, and that Scenario-Aware CoT consistently improves prediction accuracy over standard CoT. Code is available at https://github.com/seunghan96/FinSTaR.

Financial market forecasting is inherently uncertain, yet most deep learning approaches rely on point predictions that provide only single-value estimates without quantifying uncertainty. Such predictions are insufficient for risk-aware decision-making, as they fail to capture the range of possible outcomes and the associated confidence of forecasts.The problem can be solved using prediction intervals, which allow obtaining an upper and lower bound for the prediction, thus enabling uncertainty representation in the model. Yet, the current methods tend to disregard relationships between assets or cannot simultaneously ensure good calibration and sharpness of the resulting intervals in dynamically changing market regimes. In our work, we propose a spatio-temporal graph-based approach with a bi-level chaotic fusion technique to solve this problem. Our model uses separate nonlinear transformation functions to estimate the interval center and width. Additionally, a volatility-aware gating mechanism is used to make predictions dependent on the regime in which the market operates. Temporal dependencies are considered by embedding graph structures and sequentially modeling them. Training is conducted according to a Lower-Upper Bound Estimation (LUBE) objective. Our experimental results show significant improvements compared to existing baselines (LSTM, GRU, GCN, HGNN) when applied to data from 2016 to 2026 with 43 leading companies in eight sectors of the NSE. It provides the lowest Winkler score (0.0778), tightest prediction intervals (PIAW = 0.1407), and highest coverage (PICP = 96.6%), with all differences statistically significant (p < 0.001) according to the Diebold-Mariano test.

Earnings calls are a key source of financial information about public companies. However, extracting information from these calls is difficult. Unlike the templatic filings required by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to report a company's financial situation, earnings conference calls have no built-in labels, are unstructured, and feature conversational language. We explore this challenging domain by assessing the information captured by models trained on SEC filings and in-context learning methods. To establish a baseline, we first evaluate the generalization capabilities of SEC-trained models across established SEC datasets. To support our investigation, we introduce three novel benchmarks: (1) SEC Filings Benchmark (SECB), (2) Earnings Calls Benchmark (ECB), and ECB-A, a subset with 2,460 expert annotation groups to support our qualitative analysis. We find that encoder-based models struggle with the domain shift. Finally, we propose a system utilizing LLMs to perform open-ended extraction from unstructured call transcripts, verified by human evaluation (79.7% precision), providing a baseline for this valuable domain through the consistent tracking of emergent KPIs.

While sentiment analysis is the staple of financial NLP, capturing the nuances of 'why' behind that sentiment remains a challenge. There have been attempts to address this by analysing investor emotions alongside sentiment; however, this does not provide the additional granularity required to understand the target of the emotion/sentiment. We address this by augmenting the StockEmotions dataset with semantically structured opinion graphs, which provide granular semantic depth to the existing sentiment and emotion labels. Using a declarative LLM pipeline, we augment the StockEmotions dataset with opinion graphs for each sentence, derived from 10,000 comments collected from StockTwits. In addition, we study the effect of introducing opinion semantics on baseline classifiers using Graph Neural Networks (GNNs). Our analysis demonstrates that incorporating opinion semantics improves classification performance across different emotional spectrums

Applying concepts related to zero-shot meta-learning and pre-training of foundation models, we develop a meta reinforcement learning approach (denoted MetaRL) that is pre-trained on thousands of goals-based wealth management (GBWM) problems. Each GBWM problem involves a multiple year scenario over which the investor looks to optimally choose an investment portfolio each year and choose to fulfill all, some, or none of the different financial goals that arise each year. These choices seek to maximize the expected total investor utility obtained from the fulfilled financial goals. By eliminating separate training and optimization for each new investor problem, the MetaRL model in inference mode produces near-optimal dynamic investment portfolio and goal-fulfilling strategies for a new GBWM problem within a few hundredths of a second. This delivers expected utilities that are, on average, 97.8% of the optimal expected utilities (determined via Dynamic Programming). These results are remarkably robust to capital market regime changes, even when training uses only one capital market regime. Further, the MetaRL approach can enable solving problems with larger state spaces where Dynamic Programming becomes computationally infeasible.

Structured launch signals on Product Hunt contain statistically significant predictive information for Series A funding outcomes. We construct PHBench from 67,292 featured Product Hunt posts spanning 2019-2025, linked to Crunchbase funding records via deterministic domain matching, identifying 528 verified Series A raises within 18 months of launch (positive rate: 0.78%). Our best-performing model, a three-component ensemble (ENS_avg, ENS_ISO, XGB) selected by validation F0.5, achieves F0.5 = 0.097 and AP = 0.037 (95% CI: 0.024-0.072; 4.7x lift over random) on the private held-out test set (103 positives). A paired bootstrap confirms a statistically credible advantage over the logistic regression baseline (AP delta: +0.013, 95% CI: [0.004, 0.039], p < 0.001; F0.5 delta: +0.056, 95% CI: [0.006, 0.122], p = 0.016). Validation-set metrics (F0.5 = 0.284, AP = 0.126) reflect best-of-144 selection bias on 53 positives and are reported for benchmark reproducibility only. We further evaluate three zero-shot Gemini models (Gemini 2.5 Flash, Gemini 3 Flash, and Gemini 3.1 Pro) in an anonymized numerical setting. The best LLM achieves AP = 0.034 (Gemini 3 Flash), below the LR baseline AP of 0.044. Notably, the most capable Gemini variant (Gemini 3.1 Pro, AP = 0.023) performs worst -- an unexpected pattern that warrants further investigation across providers and prompting strategies. Both ML and LLM models show the same temporal performance decay tracking the 2020-2021 funding boom and subsequent contraction, confirming the dataset captures genuine market structure rather than noise. PHBench provides a reproducible framework comprising public training, validation, and blind test splits; 61 engineered features; a five-metric evaluation harness; and a public leaderboard at https://phbench.com. All code, baseline models, and anonymized dataset splits are publicly available.

Agentic payment systems extend delegated action to financial transfers, but scaling them on stablecoin rails in regulated settings requires safeguards that remain effective when humans are not continuously in the loop. We present a compliance-aware architecture that combines x402-style, signature-based payment authorisation and relayed execution with programmable compliance embedded as an on-chain guardrail via a policy wrapper and policy manager coordinating modular checks. By enforcing compliance at the point of execution, rather than as a separate off-chain workflow, the approach preserves low-friction settlement when conditions are satisfied, records transaction-linked on-chain attestations, and supports structured resolution when requirements are pending.

As LLMs become credible readers of earnings calls, investor-relations Q&A, guidance, and disclosure language, supervised financial NLP benchmarks increasingly function as decision evidence for model selection and deployment. A hidden assumption is that gold labels make such evidence objective. This assumption breaks down when the benchmark ruler itself is sensitive to rubric wording, metric choice, or aggregation policy. We study this measurement risk on Japanese Financial Implicit-Commitment Recognition (JF-ICR; a pinned 253-item test split x 4 frontier LLMs x 5 rubrics x 3 temperatures x 5 ordinal metrics). Three findings follow. First, rubric wording materially changes model-assigned labels: R2--R3 agreement ranges from 70.0% to 83.4%, with the dominant movement near the +1 / 0 implicit-commitment boundary. This pattern is consistent with a pragmatic-boundary interpretation, but is not a validated linguistic-causality claim because the present rubric variants confound semantics, examples, and verbosity. Second, not every metric remains informative under the JF-ICR class distribution. Within-one accuracy is too easy because near misses receive credit and the majority class dominates; worst-class accuracy is too noisy because the rarest class has only two examples. Exact accuracy, macro-F1, and weighted \k{appa} are therefore the identifiable metrics under our operational rule. Third, ranking claims become more defensible only after this metric-identifiability audit: Bradley--Terry, Borda, and Ranked Pairs agree on the identifiable metric subset, while the full five-metric sweep produces disagreement on the closest pair. The contribution is not a new leaderboard, but a reporting discipline for supervised financial benchmarks whose gold labels exist and whose evaluation ruler still requires governance.

LLM-based financial agents increasingly produce investment rationales before the outcomes needed to evaluate them are observable. This creates a delayed-ground-truth evaluation problem: realized returns remain the eventual arbiter of investment quality, but they arrive too late and are too noisy to guide many model-development and governance decisions. LLM judges offer a tempting shortcut for pre-deployment evaluation of AI-finance systems, but unvalidated judges may reward verbosity, confidence, or rubric mimicry rather than financial judgment. This paper introduces ValueBlindBench, a preregistered agreement-gated stress-test protocol for deciding when LLM-judged investment-rationale claims are publishable, qualified, or invalid. In a controlled market-state capital-allocation prototype with 1,000 honest decision cycles and 100 preregistered adversarial controls (1,100 trajectories, 5,500 judge calls), ValueBlindBench clears the aggregate agreement gate at $\barκ_w = 0.7168$ but prevents several overclaims. Lower-rank systems collapse into a tie-class, one rubric dimension fails the per-dimension gate (\texttt{constraint_awareness}, $\barκ_w = 0.2022$), single-judge rankings are family-dependent, and terse-correct rationales receive a $Δ= -2.81$ rubric-point penalty relative to honest rationales. A targeted anchor-specificity probe further shows that financial constructs such as constraint awareness are operationally load-bearing. The scientific object is therefore not a leaderboard and not a claim to measure true investment skill. ValueBlindBench is a pre-calibration metrology layer for AI-finance evaluation: it governs whether a proposed LLM-judge-based investment-rationale claim is stable enough, agreed enough, and uncontaminated enough to be reported at all.

Time series models predict numbers; decision-makers need advisory -- directional signals with reasoning, actionable suggestions, and risk management. Training language models for such predictive advisory faces a fundamental challenge: quality depends on outcomes unknown at prediction time. We bridge two ideas from reinforcement learning -- using information unavailable during execution to retrospectively generate training signal, and preference alignment -- and propose Hindsight Preference Optimization: observed outcomes let an LLM judge rank candidate advisories on dimensions that scalar metrics cannot capture, producing preference pairs for DPO without human annotation. We apply this to Vision-Language-Model-based predictive advisories on S&P 500 equity time series, demonstrated by a 4B model outperforming its 235B teacher on both accuracy and advisory quality.

Large language models are increasingly deployed as advisors in high-stakes domains -- answering medical questions, interpreting legal documents, recommending financial products -- where good advice requires integrating a user's full context rather than responding to salient surface features. We investigate whether frontier LLMs actually do this, or whether they instead exhibit heuristic collapse: a systematic reduction of complex, multi-factor decisions to a small number of dominant inputs. We study the phenomenon in investment advice, where legal standards explicitly require individualized reasoning over a client's full circumstances. Applying interpretable surrogate models to LLM outputs, we find systematic heuristic collapse: investment allocation decisions are largely determined by self-reported risk tolerance, while other relevant factors contribute minimally. We further find that web search partially attenuates heuristic collapse but does not resolve it. These findings suggest that heuristic collapse is not resolved by web search augmentation or model scale alone, and that deploying LLMs as advisors requires auditing input sensitivity, not just output quality.

Financial AI systems must produce answers grounded in specific regulatory filings, yet current LLMs fabricate metrics, invent citations, and miscalculate derived quantities. These errors carry direct regulatory consequences as the EU AI Act's high-risk enforcement deadline approaches (August 2026). Existing hallucination detectors treat all claims uniformly, missing 43% of computational errors that require arithmetic re-verification against structured tables. We present FinGround, a three-stage verify-then-ground pipeline for financial document QA. Stage 1 performs finance-aware hybrid retrieval over text and tables. Stage 2 decomposes answers into atomic claims classified by a six-type financial taxonomy and verified with type-routed strategies including formula reconstruction. Stage 3 rewrites unsupported claims with paragraph- and table-cell-level citations. To cleanly isolate verification value from retrieval quality, we propose retrieval-equalized evaluation as standard methodology for RAG verification research: when all systems receive identical retrieval, FinGround still reduces hallucination rates by 68% over the strongest baseline ($p < 0.01$). The full pipeline achieves a 78% reduction relative to GPT-4o. An 8B distilled detector retains 91.4% F1 at 18x lower per-claim latency, enabling $0.003/query deployment, supported by qualitative signals from a four-week analyst pilot.

Financial institutions must track over 60,000 regulatory events annually, overwhelming manual compliance teams; the industry has paid over USD 300 billion in fines and settlements since the 2008 financial crisis. We present ComplianceNLP, an end-to-end system that automatically monitors regulatory changes, extracts structured obligations, and identifies compliance gaps against institutional policies. The system integrates three components: (1) a knowledge-graph-augmented RAG pipeline grounding generations in a regulatory knowledge graph of 12,847 provisions across SEC, MiFID II, and Basel III; (2) multi-task obligation extraction combining NER, deontic classification, and cross-reference resolution over a shared LEGAL-BERT encoder; and (3) compliance gap analysis that maps obligations to internal policies with severity-aware scoring. On our benchmark, ComplianceNLP achieves 87.7 F1 on gap detection, outperforming GPT-4o+RAG by +3.5 F1, with 94.2% grounding accuracy ($r=0.83$ vs. human judgments) and 83.4 F1 under realistic end-to-end error propagation. Ablations show that knowledge-graph re-ranking contributes the largest marginal gain (+4.6 F1), confirming that structural regulatory knowledge is critical for cross-reference-heavy tasks. Domain-specific knowledge distillation (70B $\to$ 8B) combined with Medusa speculative decoding yields $2.8\times$ inference speedup; regulatory text's low entropy ($H=2.31$ bits vs. $3.87$ general text) produces 91.3% draft-token acceptance rates. In four months of parallel-run deployment processing 9,847 updates at a financial institution, the system achieved 96.0% estimated recall and 90.7% precision, with a $3.1\times$ sustained analyst efficiency gain. We report deployment lessons on trust calibration, GRC integration, and distributional shift monitoring for regulated-domain NLP.

Graph-based anti-money laundering (AML) systems on blockchain networks can score suspicious activity at two granularity levels -- transactions or actor addresses -- yet compliance action is conducted per actor. This paper contributes an evaluation methodology for measuring how scoring granularity affects investigation queue composition under fixed review budgets. We formalize the evaluation through a projection framework mapping transaction-level scores to the actor-level action unit via four aggregation operators, and introduce budgeted investigation metrics -- yield@budget, burden decomposition, and case fragmentation. Using the public Elliptic++ Bitcoin dataset (203,769 transactions; 822,942 address occurrences), we train independent random forest classifiers at each level under a causal temporal protocol and compare review queues through Jaccard overlap, burden decomposition, and feature-matching ablations. At one-percent budget, temporal evaluation yields mean Jaccard of 0.374 (SD 0.171); static pooled evaluation yields 0.087 (95% CI [0.079, 0.094]). An enriched address model receiving all 237 features produces even lower overlap (Jaccard=0.051), with 4.3% illicit per 100 reviews versus 30.2% for the transaction-projected queue. Address-level detection value is temporally concentrated: two timesteps exceed 91% illicit per 100 reviews while the static burden is only 3.4%. A fixed hybrid policy underperforms the best single-level queue by 5.05pp (CI [-10.2pp, -0.9pp]). These findings establish that scoring granularity is a consequential design variable for AML investigation systems -- same data, same budget, different queues, different addresses investigated.

We introduce Deep FinResearch Bench, a practical and comprehensive evaluation framework for deep research (DR) agents in financial investment research. The benchmark assesses three dimensions of report quality: qualitative rigor, quantitative forecasting and valuation accuracy, and claim credibility and verifiability. Particularly, we define corresponding qualitative and quantitative evaluation metrics and implement an automated scoring procedure to enable scalable assessment. Applying the benchmark to financial reports from frontier DR agents and comparing them with reports authored by financial professionals, we find that AI-generated reports still fall short across these dimensions. These findings underscore the need for domain-specialized DR agents tailored to finance, and we hope the work establishes a foundation for standardized benchmarking of DR agents in financial research.

Large language models trained on human feedback may suppress fraud warnings when investors arrive already persuaded of a fraudulent opportunity. We tested this in a preregistered experiment across seven leading LLMs and twelve investment scenarios covering legitimate, high-risk, and objectively fraudulent opportunities, combining 3,360 AI advisory conversations with a 1,201-participant human benchmark. Contrary to predictions, motivated investor framing did not suppress AI fraud warnings; if anything, it marginally increased them. Endorsement reversal occurred in fewer than 3 in 1,000 observations. Human advisors endorsed fraudulent investments at baseline rates of 13-14%, versus 0% across all LLMs, and suppressed warnings under pressure at two to four times the AI rate. AI systems currently provide more consistent fraud warnings than lay humans in an identical advisory role.

Evaluating the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) for complex, quantitative financial tasks is a critical and unsolved challenge. Standard benchmarks often fail to isolate an agent's core ability to parse queries and orchestrate computations. To address this, we introduce a novel evaluation methodology and benchmark designed to rigorously measure an LLM agent's reasoning for financial time-series analysis. We apply this methodology in a large-scale empirical study using our framework, Time Series Augmented Generation (TSAG), where an LLM agent delegates quantitative tasks to verifiable, external tools. Our benchmark, consisting of 100 financial questions, is used to compare multiple SOTA agents (e.g., GPT-4o, Llama 3, Qwen2) on metrics assessing tool selection accuracy, faithfulness, and hallucination. The results demonstrate that capable agents can achieve near-perfect tool-use accuracy with minimal hallucination, validating the tool-augmented paradigm. Our primary contribution is this evaluation framework and the corresponding empirical insights into agent performance, which we release publicly to foster standardized research on reliable financial AI.

We introduce IndiaFinBench, to our knowledge the first publicly available evaluation benchmark for assessing large language model (LLM) performance on Indian financial regulatory text. Existing financial NLP benchmarks draw exclusively from Western financial corpora (SEC filings, US earnings reports, English-language financial news), leaving a significant gap in coverage of non-Western regulatory frameworks. IndiaFinBench addresses this gap with 406 expert-annotated question-answer pairs drawn from 192 documents sourced from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), spanning four task types: regulatory interpretation (174 items), numerical reasoning (92 items), contradiction detection (62 items), and temporal reasoning (78 items). Annotation quality is validated through a model-based secondary pass (kappa=0.918 on contradiction detection; 90.7% overall agreement on a 150-item subset) and a 180-item human inter-annotator agreement study across three annotation rounds (kappa=0.645 on contradiction detection; 77.2% overall agreement; 44.3% benchmark coverage). We evaluate twelve models under zero-shot conditions, with accuracy ranging from 70.4% (Gemma 4 E4B) to 89.7% (Gemini 2.5 Flash). All models substantially outperform a non-specialist human baseline of 69.0%. Numerical reasoning is the most discriminative task, with a 35.9 percentage-point spread across models. Bootstrap significance testing (10,000 resamples) reveals three statistically distinct performance tiers. The dataset, evaluation code, and all model outputs are available at https://github.com/rajveerpall/IndiaFinBench

English financial NLP has advanced rapidly through benchmarks targeting earnings analysis, market sentiment, tabular reasoning, and financial question answering, yet Arabic financial NLP remains virtually nonexistent, despite 422 million speakers, $4.9 trillion in Gulf sovereign wealth, and a$4-5 trillion Islamic finance industry requiring specialized Shari'ah compliance over instruments like sukuk, murabaha, and takaful. We introduce Sahm, the first Arabic financial benchmark spanning seven tasks: AAOIFI standards QA, fatwa-based QA/MCQ, accounting and business exams, financial sentiment analysis, extractive summarization, and event-cause reasoning, comprising 14,380 expert-verified instances from authentic regulatory, juristic, and corporate sources. Evaluating 20 LLMs, we find Arabic fluency does not imply financial reasoning: models achieving 91% on recognition tasks drop sharply on generation, and event-cause reasoning exposes the widest performance gap (1.89-9.84/10). We release the benchmark and dataset to support trustworthy Arabic financial assistants.

We introduce a multi-agent framework intended to emulate parts of a quantitative research team and support equity factor research on large financial panel datasets. QRAFTI integrates a research toolkit for panel data with MCP servers that expose data access, factor construction, and custom coding operations as callable tools. It can help replicate established factors, formulate and test new signals, and generate standardized research reports accompanied by narrative analysis and computational traces. On multi-step empirical tasks, using chained tool calls and reflection-based planning may offer better performance and explainability than dynamic code generation alone.

High-fidelity, scalable market simulation is a key instrument for mechanism evaluation, stress testing, and counterfactual policy analysis. Yet existing simulators rarely achieve \emph{mechanism fidelity} beyond single-asset intraday settings, \emph{microstructure fidelity} against historical limit order books (LOB), and \emph{computational tractability} at market scale in a single system. This paper presents \textit{EvoMarket}, a discrete-event, multi-agent financial market simulator designed for intervention-oriented experiments in multi-asset and cross-day environments. EvoMarket couples a high-throughput execution core (optimized LOB data structures, hierarchical scheduling under propagation delays, and asynchronous per-asset matching) with explicit institutional mechanisms (market calendars, opening call auctions, price limits, and T+1 settlement). To avoid expensive black-box calibration, EvoMarket introduces an Oracle-guided in-run self-calibration mechanism that interprets microstructure discrepancy as missing order flow and synthesizes corrective orders at recording checkpoints. Experiments on China A-share order-flow and LOB data show close replay alignment over five trading days, fidelity gains from budgeted in-run calibration across depth levels, broad agent order-space coverage, and scalable performance under increasing input order rates and market breadth. We further demonstrate cross-asset linkage and event-study style intervention evaluation that produces structured dependence and interpretable event-time responses.