Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

This study introduces TradeLens, a diagnostic toolkit that shifts the evaluation of LLM-based trading agents from simple performance metrics to a rigorous analysis of whether their operational costs generate measurable incremental profit. The research reveals that viability depends critically on intelligence-to-profit conversion rates, with specific models exhibiting distinct failure patterns in asset selection and timing that are amplified by capital scale and architecture. These findings provide a necessary framework for assessing the economic sustainability of agentic systems rather than just their raw capabilities.
Sources coveringarXiv, AI Alignment Forum, LessWrong, SiliconANGLE
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Can Agentic Trading Systems Pay for Their Own Intelligence?

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2607.10286v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly used in trading systems, where model reasoning, tool use, and continual decisions incur costs that are expected to produce trading value. Existing evaluations typically report performance metrics, but rarely examine agentic viability: whether dynamic LLM-mediated decisions convert their induced costs into measurable incremental profit. To apply this criterion, we introduce TradeLens, a trace-grounded diagnostic toolkit for evaluating agentic trading systems from their trading records, runtime traces, and deployment configurations. It reconstructs trading trajectories, attributes profit and cost to interpretable evidence, and diagnoses whether and why an agent pays for its own intelligence. We conduct extensive analysis across backbone models, capital scales, trading frequencies, and system architectures, together with deployment discussion. Our results show that viability hinges on intelligence-to-profit conversion: models exhibit different failure patterns, such as poor asset selection in DeepSeek-V3.2 and negative timing in GLM-4.7, while capital scale, trading frequency, and architecture matter only by amplifying or degrading decision-attributed timing value. These findings reframe the evaluation of LLM-based trading agents from capability-centric performance ranking to trace-grounded diagnosis of intelligence-to-profit conversion. Our code is available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/TradeLens.

Title:Can Agentic Trading Systems Pay for Their Own Intelligence?

Abstract:Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly used in trading systems, where model reasoning, tool use, and continual decisions incur costs that are expected to produce trading value. Existing evaluations typically report performance metrics, but rarely examine agentic viability: whether dynamic LLM-mediated decisions convert their induced costs into measurable incremental profit. To apply this criterion, we introduce TradeLens, a trace-grounded diagnostic toolkit for evaluating agentic trading systems from their trading records, runtime traces, and deployment configurations. It reconstructs trading trajectories, attributes profit and cost to interpretable evidence, and diagnoses whether and why an agent pays for its own intelligence. We conduct extensive analysis across backbone models, capital scales, trading frequencies, and system architectures, together with deployment discussion. Our results show that viability hinges on intelligence-to-profit conversion: models exhibit different failure patterns, such as poor asset selection in DeepSeek-V3.2 and negative timing in GLM-4.7, while capital scale, trading frequency, and architecture matter only by amplifying or degrading decision-attributed timing value. These findings reframe the evaluation of LLM-based trading agents from capability-centric performance ranking to trace-grounded diagnosis of intelligence-to-profit conversion. Our code is available at this https URL.

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Multiagent Systems (cs.MA)

arXiv:2607.10286 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2607.10286v2 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.10286 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 290 words

Related coverage