Paper
Large Language Models and Stock Investing: Is the Human Factor Required?
Authors
Ricardo Crisostomo, Diana Mykhalyuk
Abstract
This paper investigates whether large language models (LLMs) can generate reliable stock market predictions. We evaluate four state-of-the-art models - ChatGPT, Gemini, DeepSeek, and Perplexity - across three prompting strategies: a naive query, a structured approach, and chain-of-thought reasoning. Our results show that LLM-generated recommendations are hindered by recurring reasoning failures, including financial misconceptions, carryover errors, and reliance on outdated or hallucinated information. When appropriately guided and supervised, LLMs demonstrate the capacity to outperform the market, but realizing LLMs' full potential requires substantial human oversight. We also find that grounding stock recommendations in official regulatory filings increases their forecasting accuracy. Overall, our findings underscore the need for robust safeguards and validation when deploying LLMs in financial markets.
Metadata
Related papers
Vibe Coding XR: Accelerating AI + XR Prototyping with XR Blocks and Gemini
Ruofei Du, Benjamin Hersh, David Li, Nels Numan, Xun Qian, Yanhe Chen, Zhongy... • 2026-03-25
Comparing Developer and LLM Biases in Code Evaluation
Aditya Mittal, Ryan Shar, Zichu Wu, Shyam Agarwal, Tongshuang Wu, Chris Donah... • 2026-03-25
The Stochastic Gap: A Markovian Framework for Pre-Deployment Reliability and Oversight-Cost Auditing in Agentic Artificial Intelligence
Biplab Pal, Santanu Bhattacharya • 2026-03-25
Retrieval Improvements Do Not Guarantee Better Answers: A Study of RAG for AI Policy QA
Saahil Mathur, Ryan David Rittner, Vedant Ajit Thakur, Daniel Stuart Schiff, ... • 2026-03-25
MARCH: Multi-Agent Reinforced Self-Check for LLM Hallucination
Zhuo Li, Yupeng Zhang, Pengyu Cheng, Jiajun Song, Mengyu Zhou, Hao Li, Shujie... • 2026-03-25
Raw Data (Debug)
{
"raw_xml": "<entry>\n <id>http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.19944v1</id>\n <title>Large Language Models and Stock Investing: Is the Human Factor Required?</title>\n <updated>2026-03-20T13:47:13Z</updated>\n <link href='https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.19944v1' rel='alternate' type='text/html'/>\n <link href='https://arxiv.org/pdf/2603.19944v1' rel='related' title='pdf' type='application/pdf'/>\n <summary>This paper investigates whether large language models (LLMs) can generate reliable stock market predictions. We evaluate four state-of-the-art models - ChatGPT, Gemini, DeepSeek, and Perplexity - across three prompting strategies: a naive query, a structured approach, and chain-of-thought reasoning. Our results show that LLM-generated recommendations are hindered by recurring reasoning failures, including financial misconceptions, carryover errors, and reliance on outdated or hallucinated information. When appropriately guided and supervised, LLMs demonstrate the capacity to outperform the market, but realizing LLMs' full potential requires substantial human oversight. We also find that grounding stock recommendations in official regulatory filings increases their forecasting accuracy. Overall, our findings underscore the need for robust safeguards and validation when deploying LLMs in financial markets.</summary>\n <category scheme='http://arxiv.org/schemas/atom' term='q-fin.TR'/>\n <category scheme='http://arxiv.org/schemas/atom' term='q-fin.ST'/>\n <published>2026-03-20T13:47:13Z</published>\n <arxiv:comment>33 pages; 6 tables; 2 figure</arxiv:comment>\n <arxiv:primary_category term='q-fin.TR'/>\n <author>\n <name>Ricardo Crisostomo</name>\n </author>\n <author>\n <name>Diana Mykhalyuk</name>\n </author>\n </entry>"
}