AI Financial Advice: Supply, Demand, and Life Cycle Implications
Taha Choukhmane, Tim de Silva, Weidong Lin, Matthew Akuzawa
Abstract
We ask a representative sample to write prompts seeking spending and investing advice from LLMs, then simulate the lifetime effects of following the advice under realistic asset and labor market conditions. Applying this method to GPT-5.2, we find following the advice would move respondents toward life cycle theory: broader participation in diversified equity funds, age-declining equity shares, and larger savings buffers. Recommendations vary systematically by gender, prior AI experience, and financial literacy. For gender, two-thirds of recommended equity-share differences arise from men and women writing different prompts (demand), while one-third arise from gender labels attached to otherwise identical prompts (supply).
Create a lesson
Related papers
PPML and Heavy-Tailed Trade and Factor Flows: Why Standard Inference Fails and How to Fix It
Peter H. Egger, Ting Ji, Yulong Wang
Multitask Reinforcement Learning for Assisting Choice Model Specification
Gabriel Nova, Stephane Hess, Sander Van Cranenburgh
Why a Non-Discriminatory Royalty Surcharge Is Not Chip-Neutral: The Error in FTC v. Qualcomm
Sang-Seung Yi
Whom Do AI Agents Work For? Role Assignment Induces Sponsorship Bias in LLM Recommenders
Davood Wadi, Yu Ma
An Integrative Multidimensional Conceptualization of Telework Behavior: A Systematic Review and Grounded Theory Approach
Sahar Babaei, Saeed Nosratabadi, Thabit Atobishi et al.
Global Poverty Beyond the Official Line: A bounded estimate of material insufficiency
Giancarlo Crocetti