Financial Fragility in Societies of LLM Agents: Coordination Failures and Stabilizing Mechanisms
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Financial trading and forecasting agents
Abstract (arXiv)
Individually protective decisions can produce avoidable collective failures. As large language model (LLM) agents take on greater roles in financial decision-making, financial AI safety must therefore be considered not only at the level of individual agents, but also at the level of the systems they jointly create. We study this problem with FRAIL, a controlled experimental framework that places LLM agents in three dynamic financial environments---bank runs, debt rollover, and reward crowdfunding---where agents' decisions reshape the financial conditions faced by others. Across seven leading LLMs, we find widespread collective fragility even when no agent is instructed to destabilize the system: 77% of baseline bank-run episodes and 83% of debt-rollover episodes end in failure. We then compare three interaction mechanisms based on compensated commitments, centralized commitment agreements, and participant-led coalitions. All three improve aggregate outcomes, but no single mechanism performs best across all financial structures. Across mechanisms, successful stabilization shares a common temporal pattern: broad commitment forms early, before defensive behavior becomes self-reinforcing. Our findings show that individually capable agents do not automatically form safe financial systems, highlighting system-level evaluation and interaction design as central problems for financial AI safety. Code is available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/FinFrail-CF26.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Financial trading and forecasting agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 14 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Sep 2026.
Builds on
14 of 29 references.
Closest ancestors · 1
Same direction, newest first
Other references · 13
- 2025Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail?cited by 604
- 2023Playing repeated games with Large Language Modelscited by 217
- 2025Multi-Agent Risks from Advanced AIcited by 163
- 2024A Multimodal Foundation Agent for Financial Trading: Tool-Augmented, Diversified, and Generalistcited by 137
- 2024Cooperate or Collapse: Emergence of Sustainable Cooperation in a Society of LLM Agentscited by 125
- 2023Welfare Diplomacy: Benchmarking Language Model Cooperationcited by 45
- 2023The Machine Psychology of Cooperation: Can GPT models operationalise prompts for altruism, cooperation, competitiveness and selfishness in economic games?cited by 22
- 2025Corrupted by Reasoning: Reasoning Language Models Become Free-Riders in Public Goods Gamescited by 20
- 2026CoopEval: Benchmarking Cooperation-Sustaining Mechanisms and LLM Agents in Social Dilemmascited by 16
- 2025Evaluating Generalization Capabilities of LLM-Based Agents in Mixed-Motive Scenarios Using Concordiacited by 12
- 2025Spontaneous Giving and Calculated Greed in Language Modelscited by 10
- 2025When AI Agents Collude Online: Financial Fraud Risks by Collaborative LLM Agents on Social Platformscited by 8
1 more
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Why Better Models Can Create Riskier Systems: Evidence from LLM Agents in Financial Markets
- 2026Toward Reliable Evaluation of LLM-Based Financial Multi-Agent Systems: Taxonomy, Coordination Primacy, and Cost Awareness
- 2026FinPersona-Bench: A Benchmark for Longitudinal Psychometric Stability of Autonomous Financial Agents
- 2025The Agentic Regulator: Risks for AI in Finance and a Proposed Agent-based Framework for Governance
- 2025Standard Benchmarks Fail -- Auditing LLM Agents in Finance Must Prioritize Risk
- 2026Can LLM Agents Be CFOs? Benchmarking Long-Horizon Resource Allocation in an Uncertain Enterprise Environment
- 2026SoK: Trading Agents or Market Crashers? Dissecting Robustness and Security Failures in Academic Financial LLM Trading Schemes
- 2026FinCom: A Financial Multi-Agent Demo with Disagree-or-Commit Deliberation