{"title":"Assessing Look-Ahead Bias in Stock Return Predictions Generated By GPT Sentiment Analysis","authors":"Paul Glasserman, Caden Lin","doi":"arxiv-2309.17322","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Large language models (LLMs), including ChatGPT, can extract profitable\ntrading signals from the sentiment in news text. However, backtesting such\nstrategies poses a challenge because LLMs are trained on many years of data,\nand backtesting produces biased results if the training and backtesting periods\noverlap. This bias can take two forms: a look-ahead bias, in which the LLM may\nhave specific knowledge of the stock returns that followed a news article, and\na distraction effect, in which general knowledge of the companies named\ninterferes with the measurement of a text's sentiment. We investigate these\nsources of bias through trading strategies driven by the sentiment of financial\nnews headlines. We compare trading performance based on the original headlines\nwith de-biased strategies in which we remove the relevant company's identifiers\nfrom the text. In-sample (within the LLM training window), we find,\nsurprisingly, that the anonymized headlines outperform, indicating that the\ndistraction effect has a greater impact than look-ahead bias. This tendency is\nparticularly strong for larger companies--companies about which we expect an\nLLM to have greater general knowledge. Out-of-sample, look-ahead bias is not a\nconcern but distraction remains possible. Our proposed anonymization procedure\nis therefore potentially useful in out-of-sample implementation, as well as for\nde-biased backtesting.","PeriodicalId":501372,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - QuantFin - General Finance","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - QuantFin - General Finance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2309.17322","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs), including ChatGPT, can extract profitable
trading signals from the sentiment in news text. However, backtesting such
strategies poses a challenge because LLMs are trained on many years of data,
and backtesting produces biased results if the training and backtesting periods
overlap. This bias can take two forms: a look-ahead bias, in which the LLM may
have specific knowledge of the stock returns that followed a news article, and
a distraction effect, in which general knowledge of the companies named
interferes with the measurement of a text's sentiment. We investigate these
sources of bias through trading strategies driven by the sentiment of financial
news headlines. We compare trading performance based on the original headlines
with de-biased strategies in which we remove the relevant company's identifiers
from the text. In-sample (within the LLM training window), we find,
surprisingly, that the anonymized headlines outperform, indicating that the
distraction effect has a greater impact than look-ahead bias. This tendency is
particularly strong for larger companies--companies about which we expect an
LLM to have greater general knowledge. Out-of-sample, look-ahead bias is not a
concern but distraction remains possible. Our proposed anonymization procedure
is therefore potentially useful in out-of-sample implementation, as well as for
de-biased backtesting.