FinanceReasoning
Models solve financial numerical reasoning problems that need one or more finance formulas. Answers are numbers checked against reference Python solutions.
The paper was accepted to ACL 2025 and includes 238 Hard problems. Ant Group reports it in the Ring-1T technical report.
- Made by
- Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications
- Released
- June 2025
- Kind
- Finance
- Level
- University
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Short answer
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
-
Gemini 2.0 Pro #139 on the capability index
- Last in a system card
- October 2025
- Last model added
- October 2025
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
We introduce FinanceReasoning, a novel benchmark designed to evaluate the reasoning capabilities of large reasoning models (LRMs) in financial numerical reasoning problems. Compared to existing benchmarks, our work provides three key advancements. (1) Credibility: We update 15.6% of the questions from four public datasets, annotating 908 new questions with detailed Python solutions and rigorously refining evaluation standards. This enables an accurate assessment of the reasoning improvements of LRMs. (2) Comprehensiveness: FinanceReasoning covers 67.8% of financial concepts and formulas, significantly surpassing existing datasets. Additionally, we construct 3,133 Python-formatted functions, which enhances LRMs' financial reasoning capabilities through refined knowledge (e.g., 83.2% → 91.6% for GPT-4o). (3) Challenge: Models are required to apply multiple financial formulas for precise numerical reasoning on 238 Hard problems. The best-performing model (i.e., OpenAI o1 with PoT) achieves 89.1% accuracy, yet LRMs still face challenges in numerical precision. We demonstrate that combining Reasoner and Programmer models can effectively enhance LRMs' performance (e.g., 83.2% → 87.8% for DeepSeek-R1). Our work paves the way for future research on evaluating and improving LRMs in domain-specific complex reasoning tasks.
DeepSeek-R1 (snapshot unspecified) tops the leaderboard with 88.1%
Best score per entry from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on November 12th, 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best. Every run is in the next chart. Names in gray aren't in our model list: fine-tunes, agent systems, products and older models. They don't count toward leaders. The best model we track is Gemini 2.0 Pro, at 86.3%.
Ring-1T leads with 87.4%, claims included
Best score per model from every source, including labs’ own numbers and claims Epoch AI collected from reports and papers. Labs pick their own settings, so a claim can beat an independent run of the same model.
The newest model with a score here came out in February 2025, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:
- Claude Fable 5.2
-
Gemini 4 Carbon
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- and 16 more
- 88.1 DeepSeek-R1 (snapshot unspecified)
- 86.9 OpenAI o3-mini
- 86.7 Claude 3.5 Sonnet (snapshot unspecified)
- 86.5 GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified)
- 86.3 OpenAI o1
- 86.3
Gemini 2.0 Pro
- 86.0
Qwen2.5-Max
- 85.8 OpenAI o1-mini
- 85.1
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking
- 81.2
Llama 3.1-405B
- 80.7 DeepSeek-V3 (snapshot unspecified)
- 80.7
Llama 3.3 70B
- 76.0
QwQ-32B-Preview
- 1 DeepSeek-R1 (snapshot unspecified) PoT 88.1%
- 2 OpenAI o3-mini PoT 86.9%
- 3 Claude 3.5 Sonnet (snapshot unspecified) PoT 86.7%
- 4 GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified) PoT 86.5%
- 5 OpenAI o1 CoT 86.3%
- 6
Gemini 2.0 Pro PoT 86.3%
- 7
Qwen2.5-Max PoT 86%
- 8 OpenAI o1-mini PoT 85.8%
- 9
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking Jan 2025, PoT 85.1%
- 10
Llama 3.1-405B PoT 81.2%
- 11 DeepSeek-V3 (snapshot unspecified) PoT 80.7%
- 12
Llama 3.3 70B PoT 80.7%
- 13
QwQ-32B-Preview CoT 76%
Source: Official FinanceReasoning leaderboard
- 1
Ring-1T 87.4%
- 2
Gemini 2.0 Pro PoT 86.3%
- 3
Qwen2.5-Max PoT 86%
- 4
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking Jan 2025, PoT 85.1%
- 5
Llama 3.1-405B PoT 81.2%
- 6
Llama 3.3 70B PoT 80.7%
- 7
QwQ-32B-Preview CoT 76%
Sources: Labs’ model cards and official FinanceReasoning leaderboard
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | DeepSeek-R1 (snapshot unspecified) | 88.1% | PoT | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | OpenAI o3-mini | 86.9% | PoT | Official leaderboard | |
| 3 | Claude 3.5 Sonnet (snapshot unspecified) | 86.7% | PoT | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified) | 86.5% | PoT | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | OpenAI o1 | 86.3% | CoT | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | | 86.3% | PoT | Feb 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | | 86% | PoT | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 8 | OpenAI o1-mini | 85.8% | PoT | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | | 85.1% | PoT | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 10 | | 81.2% | PoT | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 11 | DeepSeek-V3 (snapshot unspecified) | 80.7% | PoT | Official leaderboard | |
| 12 | | 80.7% | PoT | Dec 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 13 | | 76% | CoT | Nov 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 87.4% | Oct 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | | 86.3% | PoT | Feb 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 3 | | 86% | PoT | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 4 | | 85.1% | PoT | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 5 | | 81.2% | PoT | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | | 80.7% | PoT | Dec 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | | 76% | CoT | Nov 2024 | Official leaderboard |
Labs report scores for 1 model in their cards. Switch the scores above to rank them together.
Scores at each effort level
Models the leaderboard ran at two or more effort levels. We don’t have enough cost data here to say what the extra effort costs.
Source: Official FinanceReasoning leaderboard
| Model | Effort | Harness | Score | Cost per task | Output tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | PoT | 86.3% | |||
| | PoT | 86% | |||
| | PoT | 85.1% | |||
| | CoT | 82.6% | |||
| | CoT | 81.5% | |||
| | PoT | 81.2% | |||
| | PoT | 80.7% | |||
| | CoT | 80.6% | |||
| | CoT | 76% | |||
| | CoT | 72.5% | |||
| | CoT | 71% | |||
| | PoT | 69.8% |
Number one over time 2 models have held number one with claims included since its release in June 2025
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Source: Official FinanceReasoning leaderboard
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking on the official leaderboard passed 85% in January 2025
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Sources: Official FinanceReasoning leaderboard and labs’ model cards
Labs report it only in system cards
We read the headline results of 522 launch posts from 52 labs, and none of them list this benchmark. Some system cards do, below.
One system card reports it
Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 21, 2025 | | 87.4 | FinanceReasoning (Table 1) | Capabilities |
More in Law, finance and medicine
- MedXpertQA-MM In use Models answer expert-level medical exam questions that combine images with clinical records and test results. Scoring is accuracy.
Qwen 3.8 Max 80.4%
- HealthBench Professional In use 525 physician-authored tasks from real clinician chats (care consult, documentation, research) with physician-adjudicated rubrics. Claude Sonnet 5.5 69.2%
- HealthBench In use 5,000 realistic health conversations graded against physician-written rubrics. A length-adjusted variant penalizes verbosity. GPT-5 67.2%
- FinSearchComp In use Agents search the web to fetch live financial data, look up history, and run multi-step investigations, across 635 expert-written questions. Scored by answer accuracy.
Ling-3.1-flash 81.7%
- KBL In use Models answer Korean legal knowledge and reasoning tasks and Korean bar exam questions. It has 7 knowledge tasks, 4 reasoning tasks and 2,510 bar exam items.
Solar Pro 4 77.5%
- KorMedMCQA In use Models answer 7,469 multiple-choice questions from Korean licensing exams for doctors, nurses, pharmacists and dentists, held from 2012 to 2024.
Solar Pro 4 93.2%