Papers › Are ChatGPT and GPT-4 General-Purpose Solvers for Financial Text Analytics? A Study on...
Are ChatGPT and GPT-4 General-Purpose Solvers for Financial Text Analytics? A Study on Several Typical Tasks
Xianzhi Li, Samuel Chan, Xiaodan Zhu, Yulong Pei, Zhiqiang Ma, Xiaomo Liu, Sameena Shah
The most recent large language models(LLMs) such as ChatGPT and GPT-4 have shown exceptional capabilities of generalist models, achieving state-of-the-art performance on a wide range of NLP tasks with little or no adaptation. How effective are such models in the financial domain? Understanding this basic question would have a significant impact on many downstream financial analytical tasks. In this paper, we conduct an empirical study and provide experimental evidences of their performance on a wide variety of financial text analytical problems, using eight benchmark datasets from five categories of tasks. We report both the strengths and limitations of the current models by comparing them to the state-of-the-art fine-tuned approaches and the recently released domain-specific pretrained models. We hope our study can help understand the capability of the existing models in the financial domain and facilitate further improvements.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
No code repository is listed for this paper in the archive or in Syntology's graph.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Question Answering | ConvFinQA | GPT-4 (8k) | Execution Accuracy | 76.48 | #1 of 3 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Question Answering | ConvFinQA | General Crowd | Execution Accuracy | 46.90 | #3 of 3 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Question Answering | FinQA | GPT-4 (8k) | Execution Accuracy | 68.79 | #3 of 6 | Archive leaderboard | report |
Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.
Methods
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections