Explore more topics
Published model evaluations

GPT-4.1: trading task evaluations

See how openai/gpt-4.1 performed in 3 trading task evaluations, with exact version, measured results, dates and test inputs.

As of 2025-08-11

Jump to a section

TL;DR

GPT-4.1 (openai/gpt-4.1) appears in 3 published studies. 2025-07-11, Models generating financial SQL queries, July 2025: 0.733 for median score. 2025-08-11, Models turning plain-English trading rules into strategy configs: 0.800 for median score. 2025-04-15, Models generating SQL for financial questions, April 2025: 0.884 for average score. Each result belongs to its own task, date and grading method.

Exact tested ID
openai/gpt-4.1
Published studies
3
Provider
openai

Inspect this exact model

Step 1 of 3

Models generating financial SQL queries, July 2025

GPT-4.1: source evidence dated 2025-08-11.

Median score
0.733
Avg score
0.625
Success rate
77.53%
Avg time
41,058 ms
Input cost
$2.00/M
Output cost
$8.00/M
What you should see

The displayed values belong to the identified model versions and this published task, with their original metric units.

Step 2 of 3

How did this version perform on the job I need?

The first measured row below belongs to this model, not its provider's other models. Open that study to see the other arms and tested input.

2025-07-11: Models generating financial SQL queries, July 2025
What you should see

Select a model for the specific tested task. A profile with one study does not establish performance on other jobs.

Step 3 of 3

Test a strategy with Aurora

Select a model for the specific tested task. A profile with one study does not establish performance on other jobs.

Test a strategy with Aurora
What you should see

Keep reporting dates and units beside the answer, and inspect its original citations.

Models generating financial SQL queries, July 2025

See the complete models generating financial sql queries, july 2025

GPT-4.1 recorded 0.733 for median score in the 2025-07-11 publication. About 88 financial questions per the article text, 11 models.

Published metricValue
Median score0.733
Avg score0.625
Success rate77.53%
Avg time41,058 ms
Input cost$2.00/M
Output cost$8.00/M

Models generating financial SQL queries, July 2025: read these measurements

View task, sample and measurement units

About 88 financial questions per the article text, 11 models

Generate SQL queries that answer financial questions against a financial database.

  1. Scoring

    Three LLM judges assign a 0 to 1 quality score that is separate from whether the query executes. The article states the score measures query and answer assessment, not investment returns.

  2. Cost units

    List prices per million tokens, from $0.10/M input and $0.40/M output (Gemini 2.0 Flash) to $15.00/M input and $75.00/M output (Claude Opus 4). Total run spend was reported as over $200, with $171.88 on Requesty.

  3. Time units

    Average time in milliseconds, from 31,140 ms (Gemini 2.0 Flash) to 74,812 ms (Grok-4).

Models turning plain-English trading rules into strategy configs

Open every published row

GPT-4.1 recorded 0.800 for median score in the 2025-08-11 publication. 14 models on one sample of strategy requests, this article does not state the count (the companion article of 2025-08-12 describes the same table as 12 financial questions).

Published metricValue
Median score0.800
Avg score0.709
Success rate90.9%
Avg time (ms)92,755
Input cost$2.00/M
Output cost$8.00/M

Models turning plain-English trading rules into strategy configs: read these measurements

View task, sample and measurement units

14 models on one sample of strategy requests, this article does not state the count (the companion article of 2025-08-12 describes the same table as 12 financial questions)

Convert a natural-language trading strategy request into a NexusTrade portfolio configuration of actions and conditions.

  1. Scoring

    LLM judges score each configuration from 0 to 1 using published guidelines (1.0 perfect match, 0.8 to 0.9 minor issues, 0.5 to 0.7 significant discrepancies, 0.2 to 0.4 major errors, 0.0 to 0.1 complete mismatch). Success rate is reported separately.

  2. Cost units

    The table lists each model's list price per million input and output tokens. It does not publish total run cost.

  3. Time units

    Average time per generation in milliseconds, as published in the table.

Models generating SQL for financial questions, April 2025

Open every published row

GPT-4.1 recorded 0.884 for average score in the 2025-04-15 publication. 60 financial questions per the article text, 11 models.

Published metricValue
Average score0.884
Median score1.000
Std dev0.279
Success rate93.3%
Avg execution1,711 ms
Input cost$2.00/M
Output cost$8.00/M

Models generating SQL for financial questions, April 2025: read these measurements

View task, sample and measurement units

60 financial questions per the article text, 11 models

Generate SQL queries that correctly answer financial analysis questions.

  1. Scoring

    The article reports scores and success rates but refers readers to an earlier article for the methodology. The grader is not described in this article.

  2. Cost units

    List prices per million tokens, from $0.10/M input for GPT-4.1 Nano and Gemini 2.0 Flash to $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output for Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Grok-3-Beta. No measured run spend is published.

  3. Time units

    Average execution time in milliseconds, from 1,296 ms (Gemini 2.0 Flash) to 38,614 ms (GPT-4.1 Nano).

Continue exploring

Discussion

Sign in or create a free account to join the discussion.

No comments yet.

Aurora · AI research assistant

Try this in Aurora

Edit the request, then open it in Aurora. You choose when to send it.