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.

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.

Making decent multi-lingual sentence representations is critical to achieve high performances in cross-lingual downstream tasks. In this work, we propose a novel method to align multi-lingual embeddings based on the similarity of sentences measured by a pre-trained mono-lingual embedding model. Given translation sentence pairs, we train a multi-lingual model in a way that the similarity between cross-lingual embeddings follows the similarity of sentences measured at the mono-lingual teacher model. Our method can be considered as contrastive learning with soft labels defined as the similarity between sentences. Our experimental results on five languages show that our contrastive loss with soft labels far outperforms conventional constrastive loss with hard labels in various benchmarks for bitext mining tasks and STS tasks. In addition, our method outperforms existing multi-lingual embeddings including LaBSE, for Tatoeba dataset.

While large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant capabilities in text generation, their utilization in areas requiring domain-specific expertise, such as law, must be approached cautiously. This caution is warranted due to the inherent challenges associated with LLM-generated texts, including the potential presence of factual errors. Motivated by this issue, we propose Eval-RAG, a new evaluation method for LLM-generated texts. Unlike existing methods, Eval-RAG evaluates the validity of generated texts based on the related document that are collected by the retriever. In other words, Eval-RAG adopts the idea of retrieval augmented generation (RAG) for the purpose of evaluation. Our experimental results on Korean Legal Question-Answering (QA) tasks show that conventional LLM-based evaluation methods can be better aligned with Lawyers’ evaluations, by combining with Eval-RAG. In addition, our qualitative analysis show that Eval-RAG successfully finds the factual errors in LLM-generated texts, while existing evaluation methods cannot.