From Knowing to Doing: A Memory-Controlled Benchmark for LLM Trading Agents on Stock Markets
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Financial trading and forecasting agents
Abstract (arXiv)
Evaluating whether large language model (LLM) agents can profit in capital markets is increasingly framed as end-to-end trading: place an agent in a historical market, let it trade, and measure portfolio returns. This setup is vulnerable to two evaluation failures. First, long backtests often overlap with the knowledge cutoffs of frontier LLMs, allowing memorized tickers, dates, prices, and market narratives to substitute for investment reasoning. Second, raw returns are a noisy proxy for stock-selection ability, since positive performance may come from market beta, style exposure, or favorable regimes rather than genuine alpha. We introduce KTD-Fin (Knowing-To-Doing Financial Benchmark), an end-to-end stock-market trading benchmark that addresses both issues. KTD-Fin uses a data-side masking protocol to anonymize key identifiers and calendar information consistently across prompts and tools, separating historical market memory from investment decision-making. It also incorporates a Barra-style performance attribution framework that decomposes portfolio returns into market, style, and stock-selection alpha components. Across ten frontier LLM agents evaluated on the Chinese CSI300 over a 2024--2026 window, masking substantially changes agent rationales, pushing them towards anonymized factor-based reasoning. Attribution analysis further shows that LLM agents' cumulative returns under leakage-controlled evaluation are largely explained by passive market and style exposure, with limited evidence of persistent stock-selection alpha. These findings suggest that financial LLM benchmarks should evaluate not only whether an agent makes money, but also whether the source of returns reflects transferable investment skill. We release KTD-Fin as a reproducible template for leakage-controlled and attribution-aware evaluation of LLM trading agents.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Financial trading and forecasting agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 16 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 May 2026.
Builds on
16 of 31 references.
Closest ancestors · 1
Same direction, newest first
Other references · 15
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,355
- 2023Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Toolscited by 4,072
- 2024LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Codecited by 1,906
- 2023ToolLLM: Facilitating Large Language Models to Master 16000+ Real-world APIscited by 1,880
- 2024τ-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domainscited by 1,280
- 2021FinQA: A Dataset of Numerical Reasoning over Financial Datacited by 552
- 2021TAT-QA: A Question Answering Benchmark on a Hybrid of Tabular and Textual Content in Financecited by 402
- 2023FinanceBench: A New Benchmark for Financial Question Answeringcited by 261
- 2023PIXIU: A Large Language Model, Instruction Data and Evaluation Benchmark for Financecited by 217
- 2022ConvFinQA: Exploring the Chain of Numerical Reasoning in Conversational Finance Question Answeringcited by 194
- 2024A Multimodal Foundation Agent for Financial Trading: Tool-Augmented, Diversified, and Generalistcited by 137
- 2020Qlib: An AI-oriented Quantitative Investment Platformcited by 77
3 more
- 2024Benchmarking Large Language Models on CFLUE -- A Chinese Financial Language Understanding Evaluation Datasetcited by 23
- 2025Time Travel is Cheating: Going Live with DeepFund for Real-Time Fund Investment Benchmarkingcited by 21
- 2026OracleProto: A Reproducible Framework for Benchmarking LLM Native Forecasting via Knowledge Cutoff and Temporal Maskingcited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 7.
7 papers.
- 2026Evidence-Unit Fairness and the Limits of Query-Adaptive Sparse-Dense Fusion in Financial Document Retrievalcited by 1
- 2026HindsightBench: A Black-Box Behavioral Audit Protocol for Parametric Hindsight in Time-Indexed LLM Decision Taskscited by 0
- 2026FORESIGHT-9: Prospective and Process-Aware Evaluation of Adaptive Trading Agentscited by 0
- 2026What LLM Trading Agents Actually Do in Production: A Six-Month, Population-Scale Record from Two Fleetscited by 0
- 2026The Price of Thought: Does Test-Time Reasoning Pay in LLM Trading?cited by 0
- 2026Can Language Models Learn to Forecast Stock Pricescited by 0
- 2026LiveMACE: Process-Aware Evaluation of LLM Agent Capabilities in Evolving Marketscited by 0
- 2026LiveMACE: Process-Aware Evaluation of LLM Agent Capabilities in Evolving Markets7 Oct 2026
- 2026Can Language Models Learn to Forecast Stock Prices29 Sep 2026
- 2026The Price of Thought: Does Test-Time Reasoning Pay in LLM Trading?25 Sep 2026
- 2026What LLM Trading Agents Actually Do in Production: A Six-Month, Population-Scale Record from Two Fleets4 Sep 2026
- 2026FORESIGHT-9: Prospective and Process-Aware Evaluation of Adaptive Trading Agents29 Aug 2026
- 2026Evidence-Unit Fairness and the Limits of Query-Adaptive Sparse-Dense Fusion in Financial Document Retrieval31 Jul 2026
- 2026HindsightBench: A Black-Box Behavioral Audit Protocol for Parametric Hindsight in Time-Indexed LLM Decision Tasks21 Jul 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Evaluating Investment Logic in Large Language Models: A Real-World Benchmark Towards Personalzied Financial Agents
- 2026Agent Memory with Episodic Retrieval for Financial Decision-Making
- 2026Toward Expert Investment Teams:A Multi-Agent LLM System with Fine-Grained Trading Tasks
- 2025StockBench: Can LLM Agents Trade Stocks Profitably In Real-world Markets?
- 2025Agent Trading Arena: A Study on Numerical Understanding in LLM-Based Agents
- 2025LiveTradeBench: Seeking Real-World Alpha with Large Language Models
- 2025When Agents Trade: Live Multi-Market Trading Benchmark for LLM Agents
- 2026Learning to Trade Like an Expert: Cognitive Fine-Tuning for Stable Financial Reasoning in Language Models