Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40936657›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in artificial intelligence2025

Large Language Models in equity markets: applications, techniques, and insights.

Aakanksha Jadhav, Vishal Mirza

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Predicting BRICS NIFTY50 returns using XAI and S.A.F.E AI lens.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Aakanksha JadhavIndependent Researcher, New York, NY, United States.
Vishal MirzaIndependent Researcher, New York, NY, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent breakthroughs in Large Language Models (LLMs) have the potential to disrupt equity investing by enabling sophisticated data analysis, market prediction, and automated trading. This paper presents a comprehensive review of 84 research studies conducted between 2022 and early 2025, synthesizing the state of LLM applications in stock investing. We provide a dual-layered categorization: first, by financial applications such as stock price forecasting, sentiment analysis, portfolio management, and algorithmic trading; second, by technical methodologies, including prompting, fine-tuning, multi-agent frameworks, reinforcement learning, and custom architectures. Additionally, we consolidate findings on the datasets used, ranging from financial statements to multimodal data (news, market trends, earnings transcripts, social media), and systematically compare general-purpose vs. finance-specialized LLMs used in research. Our analysis identifies key research trends, commonalities, and divergences across studies, evaluating both their empirical contributions and methodological innovations. We highlight the strengths of existing research, such as improved sentiment extraction and the use of reinforcement learning to factor market feedback, alongside critical gaps in scalability, interpretability, and real-world validation. Finally, we propose directions for future research, emphasizing hybrid modeling approaches, architectures that factor reasoning and large context windows, and robust evaluation frameworks to advance AI-driven financial strategies. By mapping the intersection of LLMs and equity markets, this review provides a foundation and roadmap for future research and practical implementation in the financial sector.

Indexed as

algorithmic tradingequityfinanceinvestingLarge Language ModelsLLMSNLPstock

Identifiers

PMID40936657
PMCPMC12421730

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.