Large language models (LLMs) have been widely applied across various domains of finance. Since their training data are largely derived from human-authored corpora, LLMs may inherit a range of human biases. Behavioral biases can lead to instability and uncertainty in decision-making, particularly when processing financial information. However, existing research on LLM bias has mainly focused on direct questioning or simplified, general-purpose settings, with limited consideration of the complex real-world financial environments and high-risk, context-sensitive, multilingual financial misinformation detection tasks (MFMD). In this work, we propose MFMDScen, a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating behavioral biases of LLMs in MFMD across diverse economic scenarios. In collaboration with financial experts, we construct three types of complex financial scenarios: (i) role- and personality-based, (ii) role- and region-based, and (iii) role-based scenarios incorporating ethnicity and religious beliefs. We further develop a multilingual financial misinformation dataset covering English, Chinese, Greek, and Bengali. By integrating these scenarios with misinformation claims, MFMDScen enables a systematic evaluation of 22 mainstream LLMs. Our findings reveal that pronounced behavioral biases persist across both commercial and open-source models. This project is available at https://github.com/lzw108/FMD.

Demand for personalized financial advice is growing, yet current LLM-based advisors often fail to provide consistent and specialized guidance. Simple persona prompts rarely specify how a financial advisor should reason and often drift toward generic recommendations. We propose Fund2Persona, a framework that builds financial-advisor personas from real-world fund disclosures and refines them through an actor–scorer–patcher loop. We test whether the resulting personas can predict held-out portfolio changes and produce commentary consistent with fund managers’ own explanations. They outperform generic baselines on both tasks. We further study two downstream diagnostics: market-scenario generation, where persona retrieval broadens plausible investment views, and multi-turn investor–advisor conversations, where matched personas give more specific and useful advice than a generic advisor. These results suggest that real fund data can bring manager-specific investment expertise to LLM advisors rather than merely changing an LLM’s surface style.

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.

Natural language processing (NLP) has been widely used in quantitative finance, but traditional methods often struggle to capture rich narratives in textual data, leaving potentially informative signals under-explored. Large language models (LLMs) offer a promising alternative as they are able to extract nuanced semantics. In this paper, we ask whether semantic signals extracted by LLMs from corporate disclosures predict abnormal returns (alpha) beyond broad market movements and common risk factors. We introduce a simple framework, *LLM as extractor, embedding as ruler*, which extracts context-aware, metric-focused textual spans and quantifies semantic changes across consecutive disclosure periods using embedding similarity. This allows us to measure the degree of metric shifting - how much firms move away from previously emphasized metrics, referred to as moving targets. In portfolio and cross-sectional regression tests against a recent traditional baseline, our method yields a moving-targets signal that delivers significant risk-adjusted alpha. Qualitative analysis suggests that these gains stem from preserving contextual qualifiers and filtering out non-metric terms that traditional approaches often miss.

Real-world financial analysis involves information across multiple languages and modalities, from reports and news to scanned filings and meeting recordings. Yet most existing evaluations of LLMs in finance remain text-only, monolingual, and largely saturated by current models. To bridge these gaps, we present MultiFinBen, the first expert-annotated multilingual (five languages) and multimodal (text, vision, audio) benchmark for evaluating LLMs in realistic financial contexts. MultiFinBen introduces two new task families: multilingual financial reasoning, which tests cross-lingual evidence integration from filings and news, and financial OCR, which extracts structured text from scanned documents containing tables and charts. Rather than aggregating all available datasets, we apply a structured, difficulty-aware selection based on advanced model performance, ensuring balanced challenge and removing redundant tasks. Evaluating 21 leading LLMs shows that even frontier multimodal models like GPT-4o achieve only 46.01% overall, stronger on vision and audio but dropping sharply in multilingual settings. These findings expose persistent limitations in multilingual, multimodal, and expert-level financial reasoning. All datasets, evaluation scripts, and leaderboards are publicly released.

We introduce RFC-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating large language models on financial misinformation under realistic news. RFC-Bench operates at the paragraph level and captures the contextual complexity of financial news where meaning emerges from dispersed cues. The benchmark defines two complementary tasks: reference-free misinformation detection and comparison-based diagnosis using paired original–perturbed inputs. Experiments reveal a consistent pattern: performance is substantially stronger when comparative context is available, while reference-free settings expose significant weaknesses, including unstable predictions and elevated invalid outputs. These results indicate that current models struggle to maintain coherent belief states without external grounding. By highlighting this gap, RFC-Bench provides a structured testbed for studying reference-free reasoning and advancing more reliable financial misinformation detection in real-world settings.

Prediction markets provide a unique setting where event-level time series are directly tied to natural-language descriptions, yet discovering robust lead–lag relationships remains challenging due to spurious statistical correlations. We propose a hybrid two-stage causal screener to address this challenge: (i) a statistical stage that uses Granger causality to identify candidate leader–follower pairs from market-implied probability time series, and (ii) an LLM-based semantic stage that re-ranks these candidates by assessing whether the proposed direction admits a plausible economic transmission mechanism based on event descriptions. Because causal ground truth is unobserved, we evaluate the ranked pairs using a fixed, signal-triggered trading protocol that maps relationship quality into realized profit and loss (PnL).On Kalshi Economics markets, our hybrid approach consistently outperforms the statistical baseline. Across rolling evaluations, the win rate increases from 51.4% to 54.5%. Crucially, the average magnitude of losing trades decreases substantially from 649 USD to 347 USD. This reduction is driven by the LLM’s ability to filter out statistically fragile links that are prone to large losses, rather than relying on rare gains. These improvements remain stable across different trading configurations, indicating that the gains are not driven by specific parameter choices. Overall, the results suggest that LLMs function as semantic risk managers on top of statistical discovery, prioritizing lead–lag relationships that generalize under changing market conditions.