Explore more topics
Published model evaluations

o4-mini: trading task evaluations

See how openai/o4-mini 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

o4-mini (openai/o4-mini) appears in 3 published studies. 2025-07-11, Models generating financial SQL queries, July 2025: 0.967 for median score. 2025-08-10, GPT-5 family and peers generating financial SQL queries: 0.933 for median score. 2025-08-11, Models turning plain-English trading rules into strategy configs: 0.933 for median score. Each result belongs to its own task, date and grading method.

Exact tested ID
openai/o4-mini
Published studies
3
Provider
openai

Inspect this exact model

Step 1 of 3

Models generating financial SQL queries, July 2025

o4-mini: source evidence dated 2025-08-11.

Median score
0.967
Avg score
0.675
Success rate
79.78%
Avg time
48,481 ms
Input cost
$1.10/M
Output cost
$4.40/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

o4-mini recorded 0.967 for median score in the 2025-07-11 publication. About 88 financial questions per the article text, 11 models.

Published metricValue
Median score0.967
Avg score0.675
Success rate79.78%
Avg time48,481 ms
Input cost$1.10/M
Output cost$4.40/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).

GPT-5 family and peers generating financial SQL queries

Open every published row

o4-mini recorded 0.933 for median score in the 2025-08-10 publication. EvaluateGPT financial question set (count not restated in this article), 8 models.

Published metricValue
Median score0.933
Avg score0.733
Success rate84.27%
Avg time48,708 ms
Input cost$1.10/M
Output cost$4.40/M

GPT-5 family and peers generating financial SQL queries: read these measurements

View task, sample and measurement units

EvaluateGPT financial question set (count not restated in this article), 8 models

Generate syntactically and semantically valid SQL queries for real-world financial questions.

  1. Scoring

    LLM-judge scores from 0 to 1 as described in the linked GPT-oss article (Claude Sonnet 4, Gemini 2.5 Pro and GPT-4.1 judges in that article). This article does not restate the judges.

  2. Cost units

    List prices per million tokens, from $0.05/M input and $0.40/M output (GPT-5 Nano) to $1.25/M input and $10.00/M output (Gemini 2.5 Pro, GPT-5, GPT-5 Chat). Total spend was reported as around $200.

  3. Time units

    Average time in milliseconds, from 40,236 ms (Gemini 2.5 Flash) to 113,743 ms (GPT-5).

Models turning plain-English trading rules into strategy configs

Open every published row

o4-mini recorded 0.933 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 score0.933
Avg score0.711
Success rate100.0%
Avg time (ms)139,055
Input cost$1.10/M
Output cost$4.40/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.

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.