Evaluating AI for Finance: Is AI Credible at Assessing Investment Risk?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We assess whether AI systems can credibly evaluate investment risk appetite-a task that must be thoroughly validated before automation. Our analysis was conducted on proprietary systems (GPT, Claude, Gemini) and open-weight models (LLaMA, DeepSeek, Mistral), using carefully curated user profiles that reflect real users with varying attributes such as country and gender. As a result, the models exhibit significant variance in score distributions when user attributes-such as country or gender-that should not influence risk computation are changed. For example, GPT-4o assigns higher risk scores to Nigerian and Indonesian profiles. While some models align closely with expected scores in the Low- and Mid-risk ranges, none maintain consistent scores across regions and demographics, thereby violating AI and finance regulations.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 2 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 May 2025.
Builds on
2 of 35 references.
References · 2
- 2018Learning Adversarially Fair and Transferable Representationscited by 353
- 2025Exposing Product Bias in LLM Investment Recommendationcited by 6
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.
1 paper.
- 2025Artificial Finance: How AI Thinks About Moneycited by 0
- 2025Artificial Finance: How AI Thinks About Money15 Jul 2025