Demand for personalized financial advising is growing, but consistent advisor expertise is difficult to obtain, scale, and encode in LLM systems. Simple persona prompts rarely specify how a financial advisor should reason and often drift toward generic recommendations.
arXiv:2605. 27864v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly applied in finance, yet most existing work emphasizes trading signals or financial NLP tasks centered on prediction.
The paper investigates how user context—such as memory, profiles, and role prompts—affects large language models’ financial analysis. By testing 3,575 SEC filings across twelve LLMs, the study distinguishes between evidence selection and interpretation, finding that interpretation under different roles drives most user-context spillover. Two mitigation strategies—using a user profile instead of an assistant role and separating evidence-based from personalized outputs—reduce but do not eliminate this spillover, with effectiveness varying by model.
The study examines how user context—such as memory, profiles, and role prompts—affects Large Language Models’ (LLMs) financial analysis. Using 3,575 SEC filings and twelve LLMs, the authors distinguish between evidence selection and interpretation, finding that most context spillover arises from differing interpretations under various roles rather than from retrieving different evidence. They evaluate two mitigation strategies—expressing investor mindset as a user profile instead of an assistant role, and separating evidence-based from personalized outputs—both of which reduce but do not eliminate spillover, with effectiveness varying across models.
arXiv:2605.27864v5 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly applied in finance, yet most existing work emphasizes trading signals or financial NLP tasks centered...
arXiv:2608. 04095v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly used as personalized assistants in high-stakes domains such as financial advising, yet it remains unclear whether they can maintain and update an individualized user model over long horizons.
FinSkillBench is an evaluation suite that tests whether language model agents can use financial domain skills to solve investment management tasks across portfolio construction, risk management, and fundamental analysis. The benchmark contains 12 subtasks with 2,603 episodes, each providing point‑in‑time inputs, hidden ground truth, and a verifier. Experiments show that curated skill packages improve performance significantly, while self‑generated skills offer little benefit, indicating that reliable procedural skills are crucial for effective AI agents in this domain.
arXiv:2606. 30997v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We present a three-phase deep reinforcement learning system for personalized portfolio management that addresses three limitations shared by all prior financial RL work: 1) ticker lock-in, 2) monolithic objectives , and 3) static user models.
arXiv:2603. 23300v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We introduce a new agentic artificial intelligence (AI) platform for portfolio management.
arXiv:2606. 19887v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Existing safety benchmarks target general adversarial scenarios but miss finance-specific risks.
The study investigates how people evaluate AI-generated financial advice by conducting a randomized vignette experiment with 285 U.S. adults. Participants were presented with consistent financial recommendations delivered in three styles—AI, expert, and online community—alongside source labels. The results show that advice style most strongly influenced message and safety appraisals, expert labels increased perceived source knowledge, and decision context shaped risk and safety judgments, with these appraisals explaining a large portion of overall quality, trust, and intended reliance.
arXiv:2608. 09019v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As generative AI increasingly becomes a common source of daily decision-making, including financial choices, it is critical to understand how people evaluate AI-generated financial advice.