Building on prior research, we revisited the 21 personal finance scenarios using OpenAI’s newer ChatGPT-4o to observe whether its financial guidance has meaningfully evolved. Our qualitative analysis relied on expert assessments to examine both the content and tone of the model’s advice, considering how prompt engineering influenced ChatGPT outputs. We observed that ChatGPT-4o often produced more thorough suggestions and paid closer attention to tax implications—though it still overlooked some important details. It also showed more creative thinking in certain situations. However, some of the same shortcomings persisted: Generalizations remained too broad with respect to certain topics, legal references were occasionally misleading, and emotional empathy continued to feel artificial, even with carefully crafted prompts. We also extended our analysis to the newest ChatGPT model (ChatGPT-5). We found that the recommendations generated by ChatGPT-5 were quite similar to those generated by ChatGPT-4o, but the accuracy in the numerical problems was better under ChatGPT-5. While not a replacement for financial professionals, ChatGPT appears to be maturing into a more useful supporting tool for both advisors and clients. Our findings not only suggest cautious optimism but also underscore the need for careful oversight when using such tools in personal financial decision-making.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Schlosky et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: