Algorithmic trading now represents a market exceeding $20 billion, where even marginal gains in signal robustness can translate into economically significant returns. Existing evaluations of equity prediction models do not explicitly target regime robustness during hyperparameter selection. Five model classes are trained on daily observations from approximately 300 large-cap US equities over eleven years, with Bayesian optimisation configured to target trading performance across three statistically different market regimes. Regime-robust hyperparameter selection is associated with out-of-sample generalisation, as signal precision remains above the random baseline across all four quarters of the test period, and portfolio performance slowly degrades under simulated input noise before collapsing beyond a defined threshold. No individual tabular deep learning architecture outperforms gradient-boosted trees, but combining XGBoost and TabNet using rank aggregation produces a Hybrid ensemble with an annualised return of 51.26%, a Sharpe ratio of 2.44, and a statistically significant CAPM alpha of 0.423 (p = 0.011). A near-zero beta indicates this outperformance is driven by stock selection, not market exposure. Alternative data plays a secondary role once technical and fundamental features are accounted for, as well as contributing more strongly on the short side than the long, and varies by model class. An interactive application makes these results explorable in real time, with live data integration the remaining step toward practical deployment.
Evaluating LLM coding agents in algorithmic trading is difficult because static benchmarks risk data contamination and numerical backtest outputs require ground truth from actual code execution. We present Backtrader-Bench, a framework with two complementary pipelines. A deterministic multiple-choice question (MCQ) pipeline generates questions from backtest configurations across five trading strategies, 33 templates, and three difficulty tiers, with an independent checker that re-derives every answer. A generator-solver filtering pipeline autonomously mines harder questions: a generator writes questions verified by executable code, converts them to MCQs, and discards any that a no-tool solver can answer without code execution. We evaluate 11 models without tools (10 runs each) and four with-tools configurations on a 30-question curated set. Tool-augmented agents reach 90.0% accuracy in a single pass (GPT-5.5 and Opus 4.7), outperforming the best no-tools baselines (73.0%, averaged over 10 runs) by 17 percentage points. On 38 separately mined questions, no-tools accuracy drops further, with half the models falling to roughly random-chance level (25%). Beyond evaluation, the scalable MCQ infrastructure is designed to produce a training corpus for reinforcement learning, with the ultimate goal of building a specialized agent for quantitative trading workflows.
Parent-order execution is a core problem in algorithmic trading, where the goal is to split a large order into smaller orders while reducing execution costs. Existing approaches either rely on pre-specified market assumptions that may not hold in practice, or require task-specific training that limits adaptability to new settings. To overcome these limitations, we present the first systematic study of large language models (LLMs) for parent-order execution. This extends the use of LLMs in finance from what to trade to how to execute. We propose PACE (Plan-Ahead Controlled Execution), a hierarchical framework that decomposes parent-order execution into long-horizon planning and short-horizon execution, requiring neither explicit market assumptions nor task-specific training. Experiments on Shenzhen Stock Exchange Level-1 data show that PACE outperforms TWAP, Almgren-Chriss, and learning-based baselines, exceeding the strongest baseline by 0.65 bps. Behavioral analysis reveals that LLMs make execution decisions differently from human investors: higher model confidence predicts better performance rather than worse returns, and the model trades earlier rather than procrastinating toward the deadline. These findings suggest that LLMs can complement human traders in execution decisions.
Recent advances in Generative AI have substantially improved financial sentiment analysis through post-trained financial large language models (LLMs). However, existing approaches remain confined to a market-agnostic, supervised learning paradigm that relies on limited, static and human-annotated datasets, and thus are incapable of adapting to evolving market conditions. To address this limitation, we introduce FinSMART, the first market-aligned reinforcement learning framework for financial sentiment analysis, which directly optimizes sentiment signals using realized market outcomes. To deal with the noisy, non-stationary, and multifactorial nature of financial markets, FinSMART incorporates a signal extraction pipeline that combines market-aware data filtering with a discrete asymmetric trading reward, enabling stable reinforcement learning from economically meaningful market feedback. Experimental results demonstrate that FinSMART significantly outperforms existing state-of-the-art methods in profitability, risk-adjusted performance, and sentiment signal quality, improving cumulative trading returns by 220% over the strongest baseline. Uniquely, the FinSMART framework naturally supports market-aware retraining, at any point in time, by replacing costly manual annotation with newly observed financial articles and their realized market outcomes. Such a retraining strategy enables the model to continuously adapt to changing market dynamics, resulting in consistent performance gains over its static counterpart. These findings demonstrate the practical applicability of market-aligned reinforcement learning and highlight its potential as a next-generation paradigm for developing adaptive financial LLMs.
We show that net demand for liquidity by algo strategies is identifiable from its trade and price history alone, with no knowledge of its signal or optimization problem. An exact multi-period regret decomposition implies that the sign of this statistic classifies a linear strategy as a net liquidity consumer or provider, recovering the Kyle (1985) informed-trader/market-maker dichotomy from observables alone. Under an AR(1) cost process, the same statistic equals the product of strategy size and the squared Roll (1984) implied spread, making the correction a direct proxy for prevailing illiquidity. Extending to endogenous price impact and aggregating across N correlated strategies yields a liquidity-balance condition whose violation produces welfare loss scaling as N squared, a closed-form fire-sale externality. We calibrate to CRSP equity data (2016-2025), tracking implied spreads through the COVID-19 and 2022 rate-shock episodes, with an estimator computable in O(Tnd) time.
Recent work shows that Large Language Models (LLMs) can act as semantic mutation operators for the evolutionary discovery of programs and proofs. Most current applications focus on static coding benchmarks. We extend this paradigm to algorithmic trading. This domain is uniquely challenging because it is noisy, non-stationary, and highly discontinuous. We present AlgoEvolve, an LLM-driven evolutionary framework that generates, evaluates, and iteratively improves executable trading strategies. These strategies are expressed as Python code and evaluated through a rigorous testing protocol. Across multiple experiments, the system exhibits emergent regime-adaptive strategy logic, including autonomous shifts in trading rules. We further introduce a meta-evolutionary outer loop that evolves the prompts guiding program synthesis in the inner loop. This outer loop discovers improved search heuristics. These heuristics balance exploration and exploitation while reducing zero-trade failures. They consistently outperform initial human-designed instructions. The results demonstrate that LLM-based semantic evolution provides a viable approach for continual program synthesis in complex environments.
Algorithmic trading systems on decentralised exchanges (DEXs) reject most candidate tokens they evaluate. The counterfactual outcome of rejected candidates (what would have happened had the system entered) is rarely measured. This paper introduces Post-Rejection Follow-up Sampling (PRFS). A separate tracking subsystem samples each rejected token's price and liquidity at a configurable cadence, over a horizon of up to twenty-four hours. PRFS produces the data needed to evaluate filter precision against actual market outcomes of rejected candidates, not against synthetic backtest reconstructions. The methodology, data architecture, and deposit format are described in Section III. The companion dataset contains 67,000 forward-outcome observation rows across 2,997 rejection events spanning 457 unique mints, collected over a continuous eight-day window (2026-04-10 to 2026-04-19, UTC). Approximately 55 percent of rejection events receive at least one forward observation; coverage at the mint level is complete. The principal binding constraint on downstream classification is per-event horizon density, not event-level coverage. PRFS is dataset-independent. It generalises to any algorithmic decision system in which rejections substantially outnumber executions.