From Comprehension to Reasoning: A Hierarchical Benchmark for Automated Financial Research Reporting
arXiv:2603.19254v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate financial research reports, shifting from auxiliary analytic tools to primary content producers. Yet recent real-world deployments reveal persistent failures--factual errors, numerical inconsistencies, fabricated references, and shallow analysis--that can distort assessments of corporate fundamentals and ultimately trigger severe economic losses. However, existing financial benchmarks focus on comprehension over completed reports rather than evaluating whether a model can produce reliable analysis. Moreover, current evaluation frameworks merely flag hallucinations and lack structured measures for deeper analytical skills, leaving key analytical bottlenecks undiscovered. To address these gaps, we introduce FinReasoning, a benchmark that decomposes Chinese research-report generation into three stages aligned with real analyst workflows, assessing semantic consistency, data alig
arXiv:2603.19254v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate financial research reports, shifting from auxiliary analytic tools to primary content producers. Yet recent real-world deployments reveal persistent failures--factual errors, numerical inconsistencies, fabricated references, and shallow analysis--that can distort assessments of corporate fundamentals and ultimately trigger severe economic losses. However, existing financial benchmarks focus on comprehension over completed reports rather than evaluating whether a model can produce reliable analysis. Moreover, current evaluation frameworks merely flag hallucinations and lack structured measures for deeper analytical skills, leaving key analytical bottlenecks undiscovered. To address these gaps, we introduce FinReasoning, a benchmark that decomposes Chinese research-report generation into three stages aligned with real analyst workflows, assessing semantic consistency, data alignment, and deep insight. We further propose a fine-grained evaluation framework that strengthens hallucination-correction assessment and incorporates a 12-indicator rubric for core analytical skills. Based on the evaluation results, FinReasoning reveals that most models exhibit a understanding-execution gap: they can identify errors but struggle to generate accurate corrections; they can retrieve data but have difficulty returning it in correct format. Furthermore, no model achieves overwhelming superiority across all three tracks; Doubao-Seed-1.8, GPT-5, and Kimi-K2 rank as the top three in overall performance, yet each exhibits a distinct capability distribution. The evaluation resource is available at https://github.com/TongjiFinLab/FinReasoning.
Executive Summary
This article presents FinReasoning, a hierarchical benchmark for evaluating the analytical capabilities of large language models (LLMs) in generating financial research reports. The benchmark assesses semantic consistency, data alignment, and deep insight across three stages aligned with real analyst workflows. The evaluation framework incorporates a 12-indicator rubric for core analytical skills and reveals a significant understanding-execution gap in most models. The results indicate that no model achieves overwhelming superiority across all three tracks, highlighting distinct capability distributions among top-performing models. The study provides valuable insights into the limitations of current LLMs in financial research reporting and demonstrates the importance of developing more effective evaluation frameworks.
Key Points
- ▸ FinReasoning is a hierarchical benchmark for evaluating LLMs in financial research reporting
- ▸ The benchmark assesses semantic consistency, data alignment, and deep insight across three stages
- ▸ Most models exhibit an understanding-execution gap, struggling to generate accurate corrections and correct data formats
Merits
Comprehensive Evaluation Framework
FinReasoning provides a structured evaluation framework that assesses deep analytical skills and hallucination-correction assessment, addressing the limitations of current evaluation frameworks.
Insights into LLM Limitations
The study reveals significant limitations in current LLMs, including understanding-execution gaps and shallow analysis, highlighting the need for more effective evaluation frameworks.
Demerits
Limited Generalizability
The study focuses on a specific domain (financial research reporting) and may not be generalizable to other domains or applications.
Methodological Limitations
The evaluation framework relies on a 12-indicator rubric, which may be subjective and sensitive to bias.
Expert Commentary
The study presents a valuable contribution to the field of AI in finance, highlighting the need for more effective evaluation frameworks for LLMs in financial research reporting. The hierarchical benchmark proposed by the authors provides a comprehensive framework for assessing deep analytical skills and hallucination-correction assessment. However, the study's limitations, including limited generalizability and methodological limitations, should be carefully considered. The results have significant implications for practitioners and regulators, emphasizing the importance of developing more robust evaluation frameworks for AI-powered financial reporting tools.
Recommendations
- ✓ Develop more effective evaluation frameworks for AI-powered financial reporting tools
- ✓ Invest in research and development to improve the analytical capabilities of LLMs in financial research reporting
Sources
Original: arXiv - cs.CL