Good Papers

FinMTM: A Multi-Turn Multimodal Benchmark for Financial Reasoning and Agent Evaluation

FinMTM introduces a bilingual multi-turn multimodal benchmark with 11,133 financial visual QA pairs to evaluate vision-language models on reasoning and agent tasks, revealing significant limitations in fine-grained perception and complex workflows.

Chenxi Zhang, Ziliang Gan, Liyun Zhu, Youwei Pang, Qing Zhang, Rongjunchen Zhang

Published 2026Sydney Poster Session 3 · Wed, Dec 9, 10:00 AM–1:00 PM local time · Hall 1-4arXiv ↗OpenReview ↗

76%
OverallHighly rated
?
OverallHighly ratedVote to see the scoreThe exact score shows once you've voted, so every vote is your own call. The first half of each home page shelf shows its scores.
Readers
–

Only vote on papers you've read. Sign in with GitHub to vote.

AI panel10/20reviewers recommend it
lenient 5/5
medium 3/10
strict 2/5
AI panel?Vote to see what the 20 AI reviewers said

Abstract

The financial domain poses substantial challenges for vision-language models (VLMs) due to specialized chart formats and knowledge-intensive reasoning requirements. However, existing financial benchmarks are largely single-turn and rely on a narrow set of question formats, limiting comprehensive evaluation in realistic application scenarios. To address this gap, we propose FinMTM, a multi-turn multimodal benchmark that expands diversity along both data and task dimensions. On the data side, we curate and annotate 11{,}133 bilingual (Chinese and English) financial QA pairs grounded in financial visuals, including candlestick charts, statistical plots, and report figures. On the task side, FinMTM covers single- and multiple-choice questions, multi-turn open-ended dialogues, and agent-based tasks. We further design task-specific evaluation protocols, including a set-overlap scoring rule for multiple-choice questions, a weighted combination of turn-level and session-level scores for multi-turn dialogues, and a composite metric that integrates planning quality with final outcomes for agent tasks. Extensive experimental evaluation of 22 VLMs reveal their limitations in fine-grained visual perception, long-context reasoning, and complex agent workflows.