Connect with us

Finance

Artificial intelligence and asset pricing: The power of transformers

Published

on

The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) has reshaped numerous fields, and finance is no exception. Asset pricing, a domain traditionally dominated by linear models and factor-based approaches, is now experiencing a transformative shift due to AI’s capacity to uncover persistent predictive patterns in financial data. The introduction of large-scale AI models – particularly transformer-based architectures – has significantly enhanced our capability to model complex relationships among assets and firms (Eisfeldt et al. 2023), leading to improved forecasting and risk assessment.

In this column, we explore how AI-driven asset pricing models, particularly those incorporating transformers, leverage cross-asset information sharing to reduce pricing errors and enhance predictive accuracy. These innovations offer a novel perspective on how financial markets process information and determine asset prices.

Traditional versus AI-driven asset pricing

Most traditional asset pricing models, such as the Fama and French (1993) framework, rely on predefined factors that explain asset returns. While effective, these models assume a fixed and linear relationship between asset characteristics and expected returns. AI, on the other hand, introduces a non-linear, data-driven approach, identifying patterns that are often invisible to traditional methods.

Machine learning models, including tree-based methods and neural networks (Gu et al. 2020), have improved asset return prediction by capturing complex relationships between firm characteristics and returns. However, these models typically focus on ‘own-asset prediction’, meaning that they use only an asset’s individual characteristics to estimate future returns. This approach ignores the broader context in which assets interact.

The role of transformers in asset pricing

In a recent paper (Kelly et al. 2024), we introduce the Artificial Intelligence Pricing Model (AIPM), which embeds transformer networks into the stochastic discount factor (SDF) framework. While initially developed for natural language processing, we show that transformers are remarkably effective in financial applications due to their ability to capture cross-sectional dependencies across assets.

Advertisement

Unlike traditional machine learning models, transformers incorporate the ‘attention mechanism’, allowing them to dynamically adjust the weight placed on different inputs based on their relevance. In the context of asset pricing, this means that the model not only considers an asset’s own characteristics but also how these characteristics interact with those of other assets. This approach significantly enhances predictive power by leveraging market-wide information.

Empirical findings: Performance of AI-based models

We evaluated the performance of the transformer-based AIPM using a dataset of US stock returns and conditioning variables. Compared to traditional asset pricing models and other machine learning approaches, the AIPM demonstrated:

  • Lower pricing errors: The model achieved significantly smaller out-of-sample pricing errors compared to traditional factor-based models and neural networks without attention mechanisms.
  • Higher Sharpe ratios: By integrating cross-asset dependencies, the transformer-based model outperformed existing approaches in terms of risk-adjusted returns out-of-sample.
  • Scalability and complexity gains: We found that increasing model complexity – by incorporating deeper transformer layers – consistently improved predictive performance. This supports the notion that AI models benefit from higher parameterisation when applied to asset pricing.

Empirical evidence from the literature on large language models (e.g. Kaplan et al. 2020) indicates that adding more transformer blocks enhances the capacity of models to effectively represent language. Models with deeper architectures are able to capture more abstract features and longer-range dependencies than shallower models. Each additional layer refines the attention distributions, allowing the model to consider both short-term and long-term relationships. Interestingly, the same benefits of transformer complexity emerge in the context of the asset pricing model.

These findings suggest that AI-driven asset pricing models are more efficient in processing vast amounts of financial data, leading to more accurate and robust predictions.

Implications for investors and policymakers

The integration of AI into asset pricing has profound implications for market participants and policymakers. Investors can benefit from improved portfolio allocation strategies driven by AI’s capability to identify subtle pricing inefficiencies, a concept aligned with research on AI and personality traits shaping economic returns (Makridis 2025). Meanwhile, regulators and policymakers must consider the impact of AI-driven trading on market stability and efficiency.

Moreover, the adoption of AI in asset pricing challenges traditional views on market efficiency, echoing broader concerns about AI’s macroeconomic impact and productivity gains (Filippucci et al. 2024). If AI models consistently outperform classical frameworks, it may suggest that markets are less efficient than previously thought, opening the door for further research into the nature of pricing anomalies.

Advertisement

Conclusion

The fusion of artificial intelligence and finance is revolutionising asset pricing. Our research demonstrates that transformer-based models significantly enhance return predictions by leveraging cross-asset information sharing. As AI continues to evolve, its role in financial decision-making will only grow, offering new opportunities for investors and reshaping our understanding of market dynamics.

References

Gu, S, B Kelly and D Xiu (2020), “Empirical Asset Pricing via Machine Learning”, Review of Financial Studies 33 (5): 2223-2273.

Eisfeldt, A, G Schubert and M B Zhang (2023), “Generative AI and Firm Valuation”, VoxEU.org, 4 June.

Fama, E and K French (1993), “Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds”, Journal of Financial Economics 33(1): 3-56.

Filippucci, F, P Gal, and M Schief (2024), “Miracle or Myth? Assessing the Macroeconomic Productivity Gains from Artificial Intelligence”, VoxEU.org, 8 December.

Advertisement

Kaplan, J, S McCandlish, T Henighan et al. (2020), “Scaling laws for neural language models”, arXiv preprint arXiv:2001.08361.

Kelly, B Kuznetsov, S Malamud and T Xu (2024), “Artificial Intelligence Asset Pricing Models”, NBER Working Paper No. w33351

Makridis, C (2025), “The Role of Personality Traits in Shaping Economic Returns Amid Technological Change”, VoxEU.org, 31 January.

Vaswani, A, N Shazeer, N Parmar, J Uszkoreit, L Jones, A N Gomez, L Kaiser and I Polosukhin (2017), “Attention is all you need”, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Finance

Norway faces dilemma on openness in wealth fund ethical divestments, finance minister says

Published

on

Norway faces dilemma on openness in wealth fund ethical divestments, finance minister says
When Norway’s $2.2 trillion wealth fund — the world’s largest — sells a company’s shares over ethical concerns, should it explain why? This seemingly simple question has ​become a dilemma for its guardians, the finance minister told Reuters, as a government commission reviews the rules that have made the fund a ‌global benchmark for ethical investing.
Continue Reading

Finance

Morgan Stanley sees writing on wall for Citi before major change

Published

on

Morgan Stanley sees writing on wall for Citi before major change

Banks have had a stellar first quarter. The major U.S. banks raked in nearly $50 billion in profits in the first three months of the year, The Guardian reported.

That was largely due to Wall Street bank traders, who profited from a volatile stock exchange, Reuters showed.

But even without the extra bump from stock trading, banks are doing well when it comes to interest, the same Reuters article found. And some banks could stand to benefit even more from this one potential rule change.

Morgan Stanley thinks it could have a major impact on Citi in particular.

Upcoming changes for banks

To understand why Morgan Stanley thinks things are going to change at Citi, you need to understand some recent bank rule changes.

Advertisement

Banks make money by lending out money, which usually comes from depositors. But people need access to their money and the right to withdraw whenever they want.

So, banks keep a percentage of all money deposited to make sure they can cover what the average person needs.

But what happens if there is a major demand for withdrawals, as we saw during the financial crisis of 2008?

That’s where capital requirements come in. After the financial crisis, major banks like Citi were required by law to hold a higher percentage of money in order to avoid major bank failures.

For years, banks had to put aside billions of dollars. Money that couldn’t be lent out or even returned to shareholders.

Advertisement

Now, that’s all about to change.

Morgan Stanley thinks Citigroup could see an uptick in profit. Getty Images

Capital change requirements for major banks

Banks that are considered globally systemically important banking organizations (G-SIBs) have a higher capital buffer than community banks as they usually engage in banking activity that is far more complicated than your average market loan.

The list depends on the size of the bank and its underlying activity, according to the Federal Reserve.

Current global systemically important banks

A proposal from U.S. federal banking regulators could drastically reduce the amount that these large banks have to hold in reserve.

Changes would result in the largest U.S. banks holding an average 4.8% less. While that might seem like a small percentage number, for banks of this size, it equates to billions of dollars, according to a Federal Reserve memo.

Advertisement

The proposed changes were a long time coming, Robert Sarama, a financial services leader at PwC, told TheStreet.

“It’s a bit of a recognition that perhaps the pendulum swung a little too far in the higher capital requirement following the financial crisis, making it harder for banks to participate in some markets,” he said.

Citi’s upcoming relief  

Citi is a G-SIB and as such, is subject to the capital requirement rules. And the fact that it could get 4.8% of its money back to spend elsewhere is why Morgan Stanley is so optimistic about the bank.

In a research note, Morgan Stanley analysts said they expect Citi’s annualized net income to be better than expected due to the upcoming capital relief.

Advertisement

While Citi stated its return on average tangible common equity (ROTCE), a type of financial measure, to be close to 13% by 2028, “the fact that Citi’s near-term and medium-term targets excluding capital relief were only marginally below our expectations including capital relief actually suggest upside to our numbers if Citi can deliver,” the note said.

More bank news

In fact, Citigroup’s own projections are likely conservative and it’s likely to show improvement each year, the analysts expanded.

“We have high conviction that the proposed capital rules will be finalized later this year and expect Citi can eventually revise the medium-term targets higher, suggesting further upside to consensus,” the Morgan Stanley analysts wrote.

Related: Citi just added an AI agent to your wealth management team

Advertisement

This story was originally published by TheStreet on May 11, 2026, where it first appeared in the Investing section. Add TheStreet as a Preferred Source by clicking here.

Continue Reading

Finance

Couple forced to live in caravan buy first home as ‘stars align’ in off-market sale

Published

on

Couple forced to live in caravan buy first home as ‘stars align’ in off-market sale
Natasha, 34, and Luke, 45, settled on their new home last month. (Source: Supplied)

Natasha Luscri and Luke Miller consider themselves among the lucky ones. The couple recently bought their first home in the northwest suburbs of Melbourne.

It wasn’t something they necessarily expected to be able to do, but some good fortune with an investment in silver bullion and making use of government schemes meant “the stars aligned” to get into the market. Luke used the federal government’s super saver scheme to help build a deposit, and the couple then jumped on the 5 per cent deposit scheme, which they say made all the difference.

“We only started looking because of the government deposit scheme. Basically, we didn’t really think it was possible that we could buy something,” Natasha told Yahoo Finance.

RELATED

Last month they settled on their two bedroom unit, which the pair were able to purchase in an off-market sale – something that is becoming increasingly common in the market at the moment.

Advertisement

Rather perfectly, they got it for about $20-30,000 below market rate, Natasha estimated, which meant they were under the $600,000 limit to avoid paying stamp duty under Victoria’s suite of support measures for first home buyers.

“They wanted to sell it quickly. They had no other offers. So we got it for less than what it would have gone for if it had been on market,” Natasha said.

“We didn’t have a lot of cash sitting in an account … I think we just got lucky and made some smart investment decisions which helped.”

It’s a far cry from when the couple couldn’t find a home due to the rental crisis when they were previously living in Adelaide and had to turn to sub-standard options.

“We’ve managed to go from living in a caravan because we were living in Adelaide and we couldn’t find a rental with our dogs … So we’ve gone from living in a caravan, being kind of tertiary homeless essentially because we couldn’t get a rental, to now having been able to purchase our first home,” Natasha explained.

Advertisement

Rate rises beginning to bite for new homeowners

Natasha, 34, and Luke, 45, are among more than 300,000 Australians who have used the 5 per cent deposit scheme to get into the housing market with a much smaller than usual deposit, according to data from Housing Australia at the end of March. However that’s dating back to 2020 when the program first launched, before it was rebranded and significantly expanded in October last year to scrap income or placement caps, along with allowing for higher property price caps.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending