We are Rui and Michael and we’re building EdotEnv (https://edotenv.com): self-improving RL environments from Quant Trading workflows.

With all the benchmaxxing around, evals saturate and become meaningless for model comparison. Useful benchmarks should increase in difficulty as models advance. Back in our Quant jobs, Michael and I saw that the market has exactly this property: markets became more efficient as people profited from trading inefficiencies, making new profitable strategies harder to find and old ones decay over time.

This makes markets an ideal, continuously evolving benchmark for LLM training. The hard part is to turn professional quant workflows into reliable training envs, as this is a very niche expertise.

In our environments, we give LLMs a quant trading workflow and evaluate their performance on out-of-sample data: build predictive features/ models, design a portfolio, backtest strategies, adapt continuously to market regimes. Each step is a task with different self-built tools. For example, a predictive feature building task gives the agent cleaned market data of time period [0,T] to research ideas, a backtesting tool to test created features at time t on [0, t], an execution tool to trade strategies with the new features on [t+1, T] and a final evaluation. Our reward isolates the agent's feature building skills and yet benefits from market properties.

From running SOTA models in our environments, we see that i) they seem to struggle with iterating deeply on research ideas, preferring broad shallow searches; ii) higher reasoning does not seem to increase performance and iii) agents do not understand trading, e.g. when losing money they stop trading instead of trading smarter. Check out our blogs for more details! https://edotenv.com/?tab=blog

Quant workflows are essentially applied ML research, long-horizon planning and continual learning. Through our envs, we teach these transferable research skills, rather than task specific answers. Our environments are closer to a realistic research workflow: we use real-world data instead of synthetic ones; our envs naturally contain noise and real trade-offs; our rewards are verifiable and immediate, with no need for an additional LLM judge or human expert.

We open sourced a sample task repository: https://github.com/MMcollab-dotcom/feature-engineering. We plan to sell continuously improving envs to AI labs/researchers/enterprises training their own agents, who are interested in ML modelling capabilities, continual learning, long horizon planning or Quant Research in general.

We'd love feedback from anyone trying out their own agents in our envs, for either eval or post training. And of course, we are always happy to discuss the future of trading with LLMs (and no, it should not be asking the LLM to read tea leaves and give you the stock to buy tomorrow). Looking forward to your comments!


• feelingsonice 11 minutes ago

I'm not fully clear on this. Is this a quant trading benchmark for LLMs or a RL env?

• Mzzzzz 3 minutes ago

It is both. We can use the same setup for both RL and Benchmarking.

• hmokiguess 27 minutes ago

One thing I always think about whenever someone talks about solving investment is "and then what?"

Say there's a crystal ball, wouldn't everyone use such crystal ball? Wouldn't crystal ball become illegal? Wouldn't crystal ball nullify the effects of things?

What am I missing, can someone from this field educate me on how this stuff scales?

• RuiWang0811 21 minutes ago

this seems to be a common misconception, our envs use market data, but the goal is not (only) trading. Market data just happens to be a good source of hard data science tasks.

Re trading: I’d argue there is no such thing as solving investment nor is there “the one profitable strategy”. Every decision from personal risk appetite to trading horizon changes what is the optimal strategy for you and there are multiple strategies that make money.

Also note that even the most profitable alphas are no crystal balls. Someone else mentioned 5% correlation to future return - depending on horizon and data such level of correlation can make 9 figure PnL and is by no means easy to achieve

• hmokiguess 4 minutes ago

What's the margins that makes this worth chasing then? That's the part I maybe don't quite understand, why would you pour a lot of money and resources into something that is stochastic at best?

• cromwellian an hour ago

I'm skeptical frontier LLMs can actually do well (e.g. alpha 5%+) without fine-tuning, especially on historical market data. Presumably you support fine-tuned models?

• RuiWang0811 30 minutes ago

cofounder here - LLMs can do some model training, they train on ML competition data after all. But they do struggle with low signal to noise ratio of market data. But that’s exactly what our environments will teach.

• languagelearner 18 minutes ago

>Quant Trading RL Envs to Teach LLMs Research

Oh my Current Thing. This this enough current things?

• ak_111 3 hours ago

if the data is not synthetic, how do you ensure that the LLM hasn't learnt about this data for example from training on the Financial Times.

• Mzzzzz 3 hours ago

We do a 2 step anonymisation: 1. Mask all symbols, timestamps etc. So the agents cannot infer the assets/time periods. 2. Mathematically transform numerical values and returns. E.g. the market return targets are not the raw market returns, but neutralised and manipulated. So even the agents have certain bullish/bearish biases, it cannot make use of it, as we use the transformed values.

In addition, we did not observe such behaviour in our traces. An example: https://hub.harborframework.com/jobs/af0299f9-a3bb-44ea-8ced...

• ak_111 2 hours ago

ah i thought so, interesting. I think the challenge is to do 2 while still keeping it realistic, which actually gets very close to synthetic data generation.

• RuiWang0811 27 minutes ago

we do affine transformations of the data, so all return/ pnl measures are still the same as with untransformed data. The transformation doesn’t change the conditional distribution of the data, which is what alphas ultimately measure

• Mzzzzz 3 hours ago

Here is an example rollout trace with gpt 5.6 luna. Checkout if you are interested what kind alphas the agent found XD https://hub.harborframework.com/jobs/af0299f9-a3bb-44ea-8ced...

• jjallen an hour ago

I looked through the transcript/output of the model/run linked but didn't find anything that showed much, if any, alpha. Maybe I missed it?

• Mzzzzz a minute ago

It is the raw trace, so it is the most complete records but hard for human to read. We showcased some features they found in this research blog post: https://edotenv.com/blog/alpha-autoresearch

• RuiWang0811 29 minutes ago

not sure about your background, the trace shows the feature engineering the LLMs did