Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 cited by

FinBen: A Holistic Financial Benchmark for Large Language Models

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2402.12659 v2 pith:2P3B2F6I submitted 2024-02-20 cs.CL cs.AIcs.CE

classification cs.CLcs.AIcs.CE
keywords llmsevaluationfinancialfinbentasksdatasetsgenerationtext
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

LLMs have transformed NLP and shown promise in various fields, yet their potential in finance is underexplored due to a lack of comprehensive evaluation benchmarks, the rapid development of LLMs, and the complexity of financial tasks. In this paper, we introduce FinBen, the first extensive open-source evaluation benchmark, including 36 datasets spanning 24 financial tasks, covering seven critical aspects: information extraction (IE), textual analysis, question answering (QA), text generation, risk management, forecasting, and decision-making. FinBen offers several key innovations: a broader range of tasks and datasets, the first evaluation of stock trading, novel agent and Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) evaluation, and three novel open-source evaluation datasets for text summarization, question answering, and stock trading. Our evaluation of 15 representative LLMs, including GPT-4, ChatGPT, and the latest Gemini, reveals several key findings: While LLMs excel in IE and textual analysis, they struggle with advanced reasoning and complex tasks like text generation and forecasting. GPT-4 excels in IE and stock trading, while Gemini is better at text generation and forecasting. Instruction-tuned LLMs improve textual analysis but offer limited benefits for complex tasks such as QA. FinBen has been used to host the first financial LLMs shared task at the FinNLP-AgentScen workshop during IJCAI-2024, attracting 12 teams. Their novel solutions outperformed GPT-4, showcasing FinBen's potential to drive innovation in financial LLMs. All datasets, results, and codes are released for the research community: https://github.com/The-FinAI/PIXIU.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. OpenAlex reports about 21 citations worldwide. Full citation record

  1. Frontier AI performance across the business disciplines: a case-grounded benchmark of knowledge work and analytical reasoning

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    On a new 615-question business-case benchmark graded by AI against instructor rubrics, frontier LLMs score 87-88% partial credit but complete only about half the questions.

  2. FORCE-Bench: A Benchmark, Dataset, and Evaluation Harness for Agentic AI in Enterprise Finance

    cs.AI 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    FORCE-Bench, a 251-question enterprise-finance benchmark with rubric scoring, shows a purpose-built Microsoft finance agent outperforming general-purpose agents on ERP and public-data tasks.

  3. CFBenchmark-MM: Chinese Financial Assistant Benchmark for Multimodal Large Language Model

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A 9,356-pair Chinese multimodal financial benchmark reveals that state-of-the-art multimodal LLMs, including GPT-4V, still score below 53% on objective and 39% on subjective financial chart tasks.

  4. FinMME: Benchmark Dataset for Financial Multi-Modal Reasoning Evaluation

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    FinMME is a new 11,099-sample financial chart benchmark where top AI models average around 50% and FinScore adds penalties for guessing.

  5. Enterprise Large Language Model Evaluation Benchmark

    cs.AI 2025-06 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    A 14-task enterprise LLM benchmark built mostly from GPT-4o-generated labels and scored by GPT-4o-as-judge shows open-source models closing the reasoning gap, but the dataset is not public and the evaluation is partly...

Pith tools