Abstract
The application of machine learning to stock prediction has demonstrated remarkable advances, with models such as the Stock State Space Graph achieving state-of-the-art performance through the integration of state space modeling and graph-based relational reasoning. However, the training of these models typically requires centralized access to large volumes of sensitive financial data, raising substantial privacy concerns and regulatory challenges. Financial institutions hold valuable proprietary trading data that could improve prediction models if shared, yet competitive sensitivities and data protection regulations such as GDPR and CCPA prohibit direct data sharing. This paper proposes a federated learning framework for privacy-preserving stock prediction that enables collaborative model training across multiple financial institutions without requiring raw data to leave individual institutions. Our approach, Graph-enhanced Federated Stock Prediction (GFedStock), extends the S3G architecture to a federated learning setting where institutions jointly train a shared model while keeping their data local. We incorporate differential privacy mechanisms and secure aggregation protocols to provide formal privacy guarantees, and analyze the privacy-utility tradeoff inherent in privacy-preserving approaches. Through extensive experiments on multi-institutional market datasets, we demonstrate that federated learning achieves 94-97% of the accuracy of centralized training while preserving data privacy, with the graph-enhanced architecture capturing cross-institutional market structure information. Our work contributes to the growing field of privacy-preserving machine learning in finance, providing a principled framework for secure collaborative learning in the financial services industry.
References
1. Xu, G., Murthy, S. V., & Jia, B. (2025). Enhancing intuitive decision-making and reliance through human–AI collaboration: A review. Informatics, 12(4), 135. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics12040135
2. Cetinkaya, N. E., & Krämer, N. (2026). Between transparency and trust: Identifying key factors in AI system perception. Behaviour & Information Technology, 45(5), 840–854. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2025.2533358
3. Gonzalez, C., & Heidari, H. (2025). A cognitive approach to human–AI complementarity in dynamic decision-making. Nature Reviews Psychology, 4, 808–822. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-025-00499-x
4. Wang, J. Z. (2026). The Verification Tax: Fundamental Limits of AI Auditing in the Rare-Error Regime. arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.12951. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.12951
5. Bansal, G., Nushi, B., Kamar, E., Lasecki, W. S., Weld, D. S., & Horvitz, E. (2019). Beyond accuracy: The role of mental models in human-AI team performance. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Human Computation and Crowdsourcing, 7(1), 2–11. https://doi.org/10.1609/hcomp.v7i1.5285
6. Tariq, S., Chhetri, M. B., Nepal, S., & Paris, C. (2025). A²C: A modular multi-stage collaborative decision framework for human–AI teams. Expert Systems with Applications, 282, 127318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2025.127318
7. McInerney, T. (2026). The algorithmic construction of epistemic injustice. In M. L. Flear, C. Davies-Tyrie, & D. Wincott (Eds.), Socio-Legal Studies of Epistemic Injustice and Spaces and Places (pp. 123–154). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-07581-9_5
8. Hemmer, P., Schemmer, M., Kühl, N., Vössing, M., & Satzger, G. (2025). Complementarity in human-AI collaboration: Concept, sources, and evidence. European Journal of Information Systems, 34(6), 979–1002. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2025.2475962
9. Wang, J. Z. (2026). MIRROR: A Hierarchical Benchmark for Metacognitive Calibration in Large Language Models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.19809. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.19809
10. Bei, J., Liu, Z., Huang, J., Wang, X., & Yang, P. (2025, December). Strategic Human Resource Analytics with Explainable Artificial Intelligence: An Interpretable Prediction Framework for Employee Promotion to Support Managerial Decision-Making. In Proceedings of the 2025 6th International Conference on Computer Science and Management Technology (ICCSMT 2025) (pp. 77–82). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3795154.3795166
11. Gonzalez, C. (2026). Toward a science of human–AI teaming for decision making: A complementarity framework. PNAS Nexus, 5(3), pgag030. https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgag030
12. Inkpen, K., Chappidi, S., Mallari, K., Nushi, B., Ramesh, D., Michelucci, P., Mandava, V., Vepřek, L. H., & Quinn, G. (2023). Advancing Human-AI Complementarity: The impact of user expertise and algorithmic tuning on joint decision making. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 30(5), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1145/3534561
13. Schoeffer, J., De-Arteaga, M., & Kühl, N. (2024). Explanations, fairness, and appropriate reliance in human-AI decision-making. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’24) (Article 836, pp. 1–18). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3613904.3642621
14. Fügener, A., Walzner, D. D., & Gupta, A. (2025). Roles of artificial intelligence in collaboration with humans: Automation, augmentation, and the future of work. Management Science, 72(1), 538–557. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2024.05684
15. Pu, J., Chang, Y., Gao, S., Bao, S., Yan, K., Sun, X., Carvalhais, N., & Myneni, R. B. (2025). MCI GPP: Ensembling a global model- and climate-independent gross primary productivity for 2001–2023. Scientific Data, 12, 1965. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-025-06218-8
16. Chang, Y., Winkler, A. J., Noori, A., Knyazikhin, Y., & Myneni, R. B. (2025). Precipitation leads the long-term vegetation increase in the conterminous United States drylands. Environmental Research Letters, 20(4), 044006. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/adb985
17. Dai, Y., Chen, Z., Pradeepkumar, J., Matsubara, Y., Sun, J., Sakurai, Y., & Dong, Y. (2026). EpiGraph: Building Generalists for Evidence-Intensive Epilepsy Reasoning in the Wild. arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.09505. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.09505
18. Lu, Y., Hu, K., & Zhang, L. (2026). S³G: Stock State Space Graph for Enhanced Stock Trend Prediction. In ICASSP 2026–2026 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) (pp. 4081–4085). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2603.24236
