IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2603.20965.html

Learning to Aggregate Zero-Shot LLM Agents for Corporate Disclosure Classification

Author

Listed:
  • Kemal Kirtac

Abstract

This paper studies whether a lightweight supervised aggregator can combine diverse zero-shot large language model outputs into a stronger downstream signal for corporate disclosure classification. Zero-shot LLMs can read disclosures without task-specific fine-tuning, but their predictions often vary across prompt perspectives, model families, and confidence levels. I examine this problem with a multi-prompt framework in which three fixed zero-shot LLM classifiers read each disclosure from different financial perspectives and output a sentiment label, a confidence score, and a short rationale. A logistic meta-classifier then aggregates these outputs to predict next-day stock return direction. To reduce pretrained-model contamination, I restrict evaluation to a post-release sample of 9{,}860 U.S.\ corporate disclosures issued by large publicly traded firms between January 2025 and March 2026, after the release of the frozen base LLMs used in the experiment. Results show that the trained aggregator outperforms single classifiers, majority vote, confidence-weighted voting, a zero-shot LLM judge, and a FinBERT baseline. Balanced accuracy rises from 0.566 for the best single classifier to 0.606 for the trained aggregator. The gain is largest in mixed-signal disclosures where classifiers disagree. The results suggest that zero-shot LLM outputs contain complementary financial signals, while also showing that the strongest gains come from supervised aggregation rather than from zero-shot voting alone.

Suggested Citation

  • Kemal Kirtac, 2026. "Learning to Aggregate Zero-Shot LLM Agents for Corporate Disclosure Classification," Papers 2603.20965, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2026.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2603.20965
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2603.20965
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul C. Tetlock & Maytal Saar‐Tsechansky & Sofus Macskassy, 2008. "More Than Words: Quantifying Language to Measure Firms' Fundamentals," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 63(3), pages 1437-1467, June.
    2. Tim Loughran & Bill Mcdonald, 2011. "When Is a Liability Not a Liability? Textual Analysis, Dictionaries, and 10‐Ks," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 66(1), pages 35-65, February.
    3. Li, Feng, 2008. "Annual report readability, current earnings, and earnings persistence," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(2-3), pages 221-247, August.
    4. Hailiang Chen & Prabuddha De & Yu (Jeffrey) Hu & Byoung-Hyoun Hwang, 2014. "Wisdom of Crowds: The Value of Stock Opinions Transmitted Through Social Media," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 27(5), pages 1367-1403.
    5. Paul C. Tetlock, 2007. "Giving Content to Investor Sentiment: The Role of Media in the Stock Market," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 62(3), pages 1139-1168, June.
    6. Zhi Da & Joseph Engelberg & Pengjie Gao, 2011. "In Search of Attention," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 66(5), pages 1461-1499, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mohamed Al Guindy & James P. Naughton & Ryan Riordan, 2024. "The evolution of corporate twitter usage," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(3-4), pages 819-845, March.
    2. Tsai, Feng-Tse & Lu, Hsin-Min & Hung, Mao-Wei, 2016. "The impact of news articles and corporate disclosure on credit risk valuation," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 100-116.
    3. Ingrid E. Fisher & Margaret R. Garnsey & Mark E. Hughes, 2016. "Natural Language Processing in Accounting, Auditing and Finance: A Synthesis of the Literature with a Roadmap for Future Research," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(3), pages 157-214, July.
    4. Anastassia Fedyk, 2024. "Front‐Page News: The Effect of News Positioning on Financial Markets," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 79(1), pages 5-33, February.
    5. Qingbin Meng & Congyi Ju & Qinghua Huang & Song Wang, 2023. "The informativeness of investor communication with corporate insiders: Evidence from China," International Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 189-207, August.
    6. Anand, Abhinav & Basu, Sankarshan & Pathak, Jalaj & Thampy, Ashok, 2021. "The impact of sentiment on emerging stock markets," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 161-177.
    7. Onur Bayar & Emre Kesici, 2024. "The impact of social media on venture capital financing: evidence from Twitter interactions," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 62(1), pages 195-224, January.
    8. Lehkonen, Heikki & Heimonen, Kari & Pukthuanthong, Kuntara, 2025. "Media tone is a priced risk factor in currency markets," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    9. Chau, Michael & Lin, Chih-Yung & Lin, Tse-Chun, 2020. "Wisdom of crowds before the 2007–2009 global financial crisis," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    10. Benjamin Clapham & Michael Siering & Peter Gomber, 2021. "Popular News Are Relevant News! How Investor Attention Affects Algorithmic Decision-Making and Decision Support in Financial Markets," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 477-494, April.
    11. Tim Loughran & Bill Mcdonald, 2016. "Textual Analysis in Accounting and Finance: A Survey," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 54(4), pages 1187-1230, September.
    12. Ardia, David & Bluteau, Keven & Boudt, Kris, 2022. "Media abnormal tone, earnings announcements, and the stock market," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    13. Lauren Cohen & Christopher Malloy & Quoc Nguyen, 2018. "Lazy Prices," NBER Working Papers 25084, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Ahmad, Khurshid & Han, JingGuang & Hutson, Elaine & Kearney, Colm & Liu, Sha, 2016. "Media-expressed negative tone and firm-level stock returns," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 152-172.
    15. Daniele Ballinari & Simon Behrendt, 2021. "How to gauge investor behavior? A comparison of online investor sentiment measures," Digital Finance, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 169-204, June.
    16. Lauren Cohen & Christopher Malloy & Quoc Nguyen, 2020. "Lazy Prices," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 75(3), pages 1371-1415, June.
    17. Umar, Tarik, 2022. "Complexity aversion when SeekingAlpha," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(2).
    18. Lachana, Ioanna & Schröder, David, 2025. "Investor sentiment and stock returns: Wisdom of crowds or power of words? Evidence from Seeking Alpha and Wall Street Journal," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    19. Marlene Amstad & Leonardo Gambacorta & Chao He & Dora Xia, 2021. "Trade sentiment and the stock market: new evidence based on big data textual analysis of Chinese media," BIS Working Papers 917, Bank for International Settlements.
    20. Steven Heston & Nitish R. Sinha, 2016. "News versus Sentiment : Predicting Stock Returns from News Stories," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2016-048, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2603.20965. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.