FinRED: An Expert-Guided Benchmark Generation and Evaluation Framework for Financial LLM Red-Teaming
Abstract
FinRED is an expert-guided red-teaming framework that evaluates financial LLM safety using regulatory-aligned taxonomies, document-derived behavioral prompts, and expert-validated rubrics to reduce critical false negatives.
Existing safety benchmarks target general adversarial scenarios but miss finance-specific risks. Financial LLMs face regulatory compliance violations, fraud facilitation, and systemic trust erosion that require targeted evaluation. We introduce FinRED, an expert-guided red-teaming framework for financial LLM safety evaluation developed with financial experts. FinRED uses a novel two-level taxonomy mapping global standards (e.g., FATF and EU DORA) to threats ranging from regulatory evasion to complex fraud, integrated with a scalable pipeline that converts real financial documents into context-rich red-teaming Behavioral Prompts (seeds) through an expert-defined schema. Rigorous expert validation confirms seed plausibility and realism for meaningful LLM safety evaluation. We also provide an expert-validated, finance-specific rubric that goes beyond disclaimer checks, aligns more closely with human experts than static one-size-fits-all rubrics, and reduces critical false negatives from 28 to 12. Aligned with internationally adopted risk-management and information-security standards (e.g., ISO/IEC 27001), FinRED is deployed in South Korea's Financial Security Institute (FSI) regulatory sandbox for generative AI security evaluation in real financial services. To mitigate dual-use risks, the dataset, generation pipeline, prompt template, and evaluation framework are gated for qualified researchers at https://github.com/selectstar-ai/FinRED-paper and https://huggingface.co/datasets/datumo/FinRED.
Community
Folks, this is the number bank teams should frame on the wall. Your finance specific judge rubric cut critical false negatives from 28 to 12, a 57% reduction, against a panel of twelve FSI experts. A generic rubric that misses 28 criticals is NOT a go-live gate. It's a guess. And 5,805 expert validated seeds deployed in the FSI regulatory sandbox? That's real supervision work. Tremendous.
You also say FinRED decouples the threat taxonomy from the retrieval corpora so jurisdiction specific supervisory documents can be added with minimal effort.
Question: when a team swaps in another regulator's documents, for example the CBUAE's February 2026 Guidance Note on AI and machine learning for UAE financial institutions, does the five dimensional judge rubric stay fixed, or do you re-validate it with local experts before trusting the 28 to 12 result? And since Table I lists Korean/English, has the rubric been checked on Arabic prompts yet?
Get this paper in your agent:
hf papers read 2606.19887 Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 0
No dataset linking this paper