IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2411.00856.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

AI in Investment Analysis: LLMs for Equity Stock Ratings

Author

Listed:
  • Kassiani Papasotiriou
  • Srijan Sood
  • Shayleen Reynolds
  • Tucker Balch

Abstract

Investment Analysis is a cornerstone of the Financial Services industry. The rapid integration of advanced machine learning techniques, particularly Large Language Models (LLMs), offers opportunities to enhance the equity rating process. This paper explores the application of LLMs to generate multi-horizon stock ratings by ingesting diverse datasets. Traditional stock rating methods rely heavily on the expertise of financial analysts, and face several challenges such as data overload, inconsistencies in filings, and delayed reactions to market events. Our study addresses these issues by leveraging LLMs to improve the accuracy and consistency of stock ratings. Additionally, we assess the efficacy of using different data modalities with LLMs for the financial domain. We utilize varied datasets comprising fundamental financial, market, and news data from January 2022 to June 2024, along with GPT-4-32k (v0613) (with a training cutoff in Sep. 2021 to prevent information leakage). Our results show that our benchmark method outperforms traditional stock rating methods when assessed by forward returns, specially when incorporating financial fundamentals. While integrating news data improves short-term performance, substituting detailed news summaries with sentiment scores reduces token use without loss of performance. In many cases, omitting news data entirely enhances performance by reducing bias. Our research shows that LLMs can be leveraged to effectively utilize large amounts of multimodal financial data, as showcased by their effectiveness at the stock rating prediction task. Our work provides a reproducible and efficient framework for generating accurate stock ratings, serving as a cost-effective alternative to traditional methods. Future work will extend to longer timeframes, incorporate diverse data, and utilize newer models for enhanced insights.

Suggested Citation

  • Kassiani Papasotiriou & Srijan Sood & Shayleen Reynolds & Tucker Balch, 2024. "AI in Investment Analysis: LLMs for Equity Stock Ratings," Papers 2411.00856, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2411.00856
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2411.00856
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alireza Jafari & Saman Haratizadeh, 2022. "GCNET: graph-based prediction of stock price movement using graph convolutional network," Papers 2203.11091, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2022.
    2. Yang Li & Yangyang Yu & Haohang Li & Zhi Chen & Khaldoun Khashanah, 2023. "TradingGPT: Multi-Agent System with Layered Memory and Distinct Characters for Enhanced Financial Trading Performance," Papers 2309.03736, arXiv.org.
    3. Nerissa C. Brown & Kelsey D. Wei & Russ Wermers, 2014. "Analyst Recommendations, Mutual Fund Herding, and Overreaction in Stock Prices," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(1), pages 1-20, January.
    4. Brad M. Barber & Reuven Lehavy & Brett Trueman, 2010. "Ratings Changes, Ratings Levels, and the Predictive Value of Analysts’ Recommendations," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 39(2), pages 533-553, June.
    5. Barber, Brad M. & Lehavy, Reuven & McNichols, Maureen & Trueman, Brett, 2006. "Buys, holds, and sells: The distribution of investment banks' stock ratings and the implications for the profitability of analysts' recommendations," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1-2), pages 87-117, April.
    6. Jaideep Singh & Matloob Khushi, 2021. "Feature Learning for Stock Price Prediction Shows a Significant Role of Analyst Rating," Papers 2103.09106, arXiv.org.
    7. repec:bla:jfinan:v:59:y:2004:i:3:p:1083-1124 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Georgios Fatouros & Konstantinos Metaxas & John Soldatos & Dimosthenis Kyriazis, 2024. "Can Large Language Models Beat Wall Street? Unveiling the Potential of AI in Stock Selection," Papers 2401.03737, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2024.
    9. Jegadeesh, Narasimhan & Kim, Woojin, 2006. "Value of analyst recommendations: International evidence," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 274-309, August.
    10. Yupeng Cao & Zhi Chen & Qingyun Pei & Fabrizio Dimino & Lorenzo Ausiello & Prashant Kumar & K. P. Subbalakshmi & Papa Momar Ndiaye, 2024. "RiskLabs: Predicting Financial Risk Using Large Language Model Based on Multi-Sources Data," Papers 2404.07452, arXiv.org.
    11. Jean Lee & Nicholas Stevens & Soyeon Caren Han & Minseok Song, 2024. "A Survey of Large Language Models in Finance (FinLLMs)," Papers 2402.02315, arXiv.org.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Han Ding & Yinheng Li & Junhao Wang & Hang Chen, 2024. "Large Language Model Agent in Financial Trading: A Survey," Papers 2408.06361, arXiv.org.
    2. Rosella Castellano & Annalisa Ferrari, 2019. "Are stock price dynamics affected by financial analysts recommendations? Evidence from Italian green energy stocks," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(5), pages 2535-2544, September.
    3. Alan Crane & Kevin Crotty, 2020. "How Skilled Are Security Analysts?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 75(3), pages 1629-1675, June.
    4. William Baker & Gregory Dumont, 2014. "Equity Analyst Recommendations: A Case for Affirmative Disclosure?," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(1), pages 96-123, March.
    5. Medovikov, Ivan, 2014. "Can analysts predict rallies better than crashes?," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 319-325.
    6. Boris Groysberg & Paul Healy & George Serafeim & Devin Shanthikumar, 2013. "The Stock Selection and Performance of Buy-Side Analysts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(5), pages 1062-1075, May.
    7. Cheolwoo Lee, 2013. "Analyst firm parent–subsidiary relationship and conflict of interest: evidence from IPO recommendations," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 53(3), pages 763-789, September.
    8. Yezegel, Ari, 2015. "Why do analysts revise their stock recommendations after earnings announcements?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 163-181.
    9. Tsung-Yu Hsieh & Tsai-Yin Lin & Fangjhy Li & Yi-Ting Huang, 2023. "Analyst’s Target Price Revision and Dealer’s Trading Behavior Analysis: Evidence from Taiwanese Stock Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-9, February.
    10. Kucheev, Yury O. & Ruiz, Felipe & Sorensson, Tomas, 2015. "Star sell-side analysts listed by Institutional Investor, The Wall Street Journal and StarMine. Whose recommendations are most profitable?," INDEK Working Paper Series 2015/11, Royal Institute of Technology, Department of Industrial Economics and Management.
    11. Kucheev, Yury O. & Sorensson, Tomas, 2016. "The origin of outperformance for stock recommendations by sell-side analysts," INDEK Working Paper Series 2016/13, Royal Institute of Technology, Department of Industrial Economics and Management.
    12. Autore, Don M. & Kovacs, Tunde & Sharma, Vivek, 2009. "Do analyst recommendations reflect shareholder rights?," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 193-202, February.
    13. Jan Klobucnik & Daniel Kreutzmann & Soenke Sievers & Stefan Kanne, 2012. "To buy or not to buy? The value of contradictory analyst signals," Cologne Graduate School Working Paper Series 03-03, Cologne Graduate School in Management, Economics and Social Sciences.
    14. Devos, Erik & Hao, Wei & Prevost, Andrew K. & Wongchoti, Udomsak, 2015. "Stock return synchronicity and the market response to analyst recommendation revisions," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 376-389.
    15. Xiaoting Wei & Viet Do, 2022. "Equity analysts' recommendation revisions and corporate bond price reactions," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 22(4), pages 669-687, December.
    16. Dan Bernhardt & Chi Wan & Zhijie Xiao, 2016. "The Reluctant Analyst," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 987-1040, September.
    17. Jiang, Shuai & Guo, Yanhong & Zhou, Wenjun & Li, Xianneng, 2023. "Identifying predictors of analyst rating quality: An ensemble feature selection approach," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 1853-1873.
    18. Lily Fang & Ayako Yasuda, 2014. "Are Stars’ Opinions Worth More? The Relation Between Analyst Reputation and Recommendation Values," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 46(3), pages 235-269, December.
    19. Sébastien Galanti & Zahra Ben Braham, 2017. "Information efficiency on an emerging market: analysts' recommendations in Tunisia," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 37(1), pages 377-390.
    20. Yury O. Kucheev & Felipe Ruiz & Tomas Sorensson, 2017. "Do Stars Shine? Comparing the Performance Persistence of Star Sell-Side Analysts Listed by Institutional Investor, the Wall Street Journal, and StarMine," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 52(3), pages 277-305, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2411.00856. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.