StockGPT: A GenAI Model for Stock Prediction and Trading
Open accessAbstract
This paper introduces StockGPT, an autoregressive ``number'' model trained and tested on 70 million daily U.S.\ stock returns over nearly 100 years. Treating each return series as a sequence of tokens, StockGPT automatically learns the hidden patterns predictive of future returns via its attention mechanism. On a held-out test sample from 2001 to 2023, daily and monthly rebalanced long-short portfolios formed from StockGPT predictions yield strong performance. The StockGPT-based portfolios span momentum and long-/short-term reversals, eliminating the need for manually crafted price-based strategies, and yield highly significant alphas against leading stock market factors, suggesting a novel AI pricing effect. This highlights the immense promise of generative AI in surpassing human in making complex financial investment decisions.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In [31, 53, 57], rule based strategies such as 'Buy and Hold', 'Mean Reversion' and 'ShortTerm Reversal' are used as baseline.
“In [31, 53, 57], rule based strategy such as”
From Large Language Model Agent in Financial Trading: A Survey (2026) · cites this paper as [31]
Section 4.3 (Spanning Test; page unavailable) identifies short-term reversal as a historical-return trading strategy and compares StockGPT with benchmark factors. Section 5.2 (Portfolio Sorting; page unavailable) reports short-term reversal among the comparison factors. The passages do not establish that Buy and Hold or Mean Reversion were used as baselines in this paper. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn conventional quantitative trading models, numeric data has played a crucial role.
“In conventional quantitative trading models, numeric data has played a crucial role[2, 31].”
From Large Language Model Agent in Financial Trading: A Survey (2026) · cites this paper as [31]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Still being checked.
Research works printed but not linked: 21
- Baker, M., & Wurgler, J. (2006). Investor sentiment and the cross-section of stock returns. The journal of Finance, 61 (4), 1645-1680.
- Baldassarre, M. T., Caivano, D., Fernandez Nieto, B., Gigante, D., & Ragone, A. (2023). The social impact of generative ai: An analysis on ChatGPT. Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Information Technology for Social Good, 363-373.
- Brown, T., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J. D., Dhariwal, P., Neelakantan, A., Shyam, P., Sastry, G., Askell, A., et al. (2020). Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in neural information processing systems, 33, 1877-1901.
- De Bondt, W. F., & Thaler, R. (1985). Does the stock market overreact? Journal of Finance, 40 (3), 793-805.
- Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2018). BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirec- tional transformers for language understanding. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.04805. · arXiv
- Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (2015). A five-factor asset pricing model. Journal of financial eco- nomics, 116 (1), 1-22.
- Fama, E. F., & MacBeth, J. D. (1973). Risk, return, and equilibrium: Empirical tests. Journal of political economy, 81 (3), 607-636.
- Hou, K., Mo, H., Xue, C., & Zhang, L. (2021). An augmented q-factor model with expected growth. Review of Finance, 25 (1), 1-41.
- Jegadeesh, N. (1990). Evidence of predictable behavior of security returns. Journal of Finance, 45 (3), 881-898.
- Jegadeesh, N., & Titman, S. (1993). Returns to Buying Winners and Selling Losers: Implications for Stock Market Efficiency. Journal of Finance, 48 (1), 65-91.
- Jiang, J., Kelly, B. T., & Xiu, D. (2022). Expected returns and large language models. Available at SSRN.
- Kelly, B., Xiu, D., et al. (2023). Financial machine learning. Foundations and Trends® in Finance, 13 (3-4), 205-363.
- Kirtac, K., & Germano, G. (2024). Sentiment Trading with Large Language Models. Finance Re- search Letters.
- Kolm, P. N., Turiel, J., & Westray, N. (2023). Deep order flow imbalance: Extracting alpha at multiple horizons from the limit order book. Mathematical Finance, 33 (4), 1044-1081.
- Lopez-Lira, A., & Tang, Y. (2023). Can ChatGPT forecast stock price movements? Return pre- dictability and large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.07619. · arXiv
- Newey, W. K., & West, K. D. (1987). Hypothesis testing with efficient method of moments estima- tion. International Economic Review, 777-787.
- Noy, S., & Zhang, W. (2023). Experimental evidence on the productivity effects of generative artificial intelligence. Science, 381 (6654), 187-192.
- Otis, N., Clarke, R. P., Delecourt, S., Holtz, D., & Koning, R. (2023). The uneven impact of generative ai on entrepreneurial performance. Available at SSRN 4671369.
- Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., Kaiser, L., & Polo- sukhin, I. (2017). Attention is all you need. Advances in neural information processing systems, 30.
- Wu, S., Irsoy, O., Lu, S., Dabravolski, V., Dredze, M., Gehrmann, S., Kambadur, P., Rosenberg, D., & Mann, G. (2023). BloombergGPT: A large language model for finance. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.17564. · arXiv
- Zhang, S., Roller, S., Goyal, N., Artetxe, M., Chen, M., Chen, S., Dewan, C., Diab, M., Li, X., Lin, X. V., et al. (2022). OPT: Open pre-trained transformer language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.01068. · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Rafner, J., Zana, B., Bang Hansen, I., Ceh, S., Sherson, J., Benedek, M., & Lebuda, I. (2025) · Creativity Research Journal · doi:10.1080/10400419.2025.2587803 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
Large Language Model Agent in Financial Trading: A Survey
Ding, H., Li, Y., Wang, J., Chen, H., Guo, D., & Zhang, Y. (2026) · Proceedings of the 2026 9th International Conference on Computers in Management and Business · doi:10.1145/3802463.3802475 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Look-Ahead-Bench: a Standardized Benchmark of Look-ahead Bias in Point-in-Time LLMs for Finance
Benhenda, M. (2026) · arXiv
- Authors
- Mai, D.
- Corresponding author
- Mai, Dat
- ORCID
- Mai, Dat
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2024
- arXiv
- 2404.05101
- OpenAlex
- W4394672780
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Stock Market Forecasting Methods
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Financial Markets and Investment Strategies
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Financial Analysis and Corporate Governance
- Keywords
- stock return prediction, generative AI, long-short portfolios, momentum, short-term reversal, stock market anomalies, Generation Alpha, attention mechanism
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
