aiqbench analysis
This study exposes severe temporal leakage in financial news NLP benchmarks, where random train-test splits artificially inflate performance metrics by up to 6.5 times compared to chronological evaluations. The audit reveals that only M&A events show a robust predictive signal under strict time-based splitting within specific European contexts, while general model fine-tuning often exacerbates rather than resolve this leakage issue. Researchers must adopt mandatory chronological splitting and disclosure protocols for financial NLP benchmarks to ensure reported gains reflect genuine event prediction capabilities rather than data contamination.
Temporal Leakage in Financial News NLP: A Multi-Architecture Audit with a Regime-Specific M&A Signal
arXiv:2608.17223v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Financial-news direction prediction has become a popular NLP benchmark, yet reported gains depend critically on whether the train-test split is chronological or random, i.e., on temporal leakage. We audit this dependence on a 49,799-article corpus across 16 feature-model combinations spanning TF-IDF, MiniLM, FinBERT, and fine-tuned RoBERTa-large / DeBERTa-v3-large, plus separate zero/few-shot and LoRA probes of Llama-3 and Qwen2.5 LLMs: random splits inflate MCC by $1.1\times$ to $6.5\times$, tracking model capacity and feature richness, and end-to-end FinBERT fine-tuning re-amplifies rather than closes the gap (size-matched ratio $1.75\times$). Conditioning on event type, mergers and acquisitions (M&A) is the only audited category with a positive locked-test signal under near-temporal chronological evaluation (TF-IDF MCC $= 0.138$ train-only, $0.068$ under train$\cup$val refit; 10,000-permutation $p < 10^{-3}$); the signal does not transfer to FNSPID's 2009-2020 U.S. corpus, localising the headline to our 2024-2025 European-tilted M&A semantics rather than a universal predictor. Three independent role labellers converge on acquirer-tagged articles as the signal locus, a power-limited qualitative convergence rather than a hypothesis-tested asymmetry. Chronological splitting plays for financial NLP the role characteristics-purging plays for asset pricing: it strips the predictable, stale component of news and leaves a residual that is small, event-localized, and lexically shallow. We advocate leakage audits as a required disclosure for financial-NLP benchmarks.
Abstract:Financial-news direction prediction has become a popular NLP benchmark, yet reported gains depend critically on whether the train-test split is chronological or random, i.e., on temporal leakage. We audit this dependence on a 49,799-article corpus across 16 feature-model combinations spanning TF-IDF, MiniLM, FinBERT, and fine-tuned RoBERTa-large / DeBERTa-v3-large, plus separate zero/few-shot and LoRA probes of Llama-3 and Qwen2.5 LLMs: random splits inflate MCC by $1.1\times$ to $6.5\times$, tracking model capacity and feature richness, and end-to-end FinBERT fine-tuning re-amplifies rather than closes the gap (size-matched ratio $1.75\times$). Conditioning on event type, mergers and acquisitions (M&A) is the only audited category with a positive locked-test signal under near-temporal chronological evaluation (TF-IDF MCC $= 0.138$ train-only, $0.068$ under train$\cup$val refit; 10,000-permutation $p < 10^{-3}$); the signal does not transfer to FNSPID's 2009-2020 U.S. corpus, localising the headline to our 2024-2025 European-tilted M&A semantics rather than a universal predictor. Three independent role labellers converge on acquirer-tagged articles as the signal locus, a power-limited qualitative convergence rather than a hypothesis-tested asymmetry. Chronological splitting plays for financial NLP the role characteristics-purging plays for asset pricing: it strips the predictable, stale component of news and leaves a residual that is small, event-localized, and lexically shallow. We advocate leakage audits as a required disclosure for financial-NLP benchmarks.
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2608.17223 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2608.17223v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.17223 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
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 · 307 words
Related coverage

News
Quantum Computing Report · Jul 25, 2026

[AINews] Meta Muse Wonder & Wonder Full: MSL’s Claude 5.5-tier Frontier Model
Latent Space · Oct 13, 2026

Vertical Advantage: Transforming Industries with Lakebase and Agentic AI
Databricks · Aug 27, 2026

Presentation: Building Evals for AI Adoption: from Principles to Practice
InfoQ · May 29, 2026