Can AI replace economists and financial analysts?

[Alpha Marine]

I feel like the whole AI thing is being blown out of proportion. Every day, we see how AI might replace one job or another, from programmers to pilots, photographers, and many more. Generally speaking, AI won't replace those jobs. What AI will do is make those jobs easier. There will always be financial analysts and economists, but they will be able to there jobs better with the help of AI. A job that would have taken them a day to do can be done in an hour or two. That is how I see the role of AI in this world, not to replace jobs completely.

On most of these jobs that people fear will be replaced by AI, there is this human input that cannot be taught to a machine, not yet, at least. An AI cant think for itself, it works based on the programme it has been taught. It doesn't have an intuition or a feeling. The way I see it, AI is not a threat; it's an ally. A tool that will make people's jobs relatively easier and better.

[Alone055]

What we need to understand is that AI is still not developed to the point that it could replace jobs and take the positions of human workers. AI is still under development, and it isn't ready to replace any job in its current form. However, nothing could be said about the future, because once it gets more advanced and is able to do things more accurately, it might be able to replace a lot of jobs, including economists and financial analysts; however, there is one thing we need to understand about AI.

An AI model will mostly be trained by data that already exists, and the knowledge it has is basically the knowledge that is already available, which cannot be compared with a human brain, because a human has the ability to think about new things, and have thoughts that might not already be available in the world, and that's because humans have brains, and an AI doesn't have that, but it processes data, and then works through that.

That's why, there will always be some fields and jobs that can only be done by humans, with AIs maybe working as assistants with them.

[reefsea]

Even though the development of AI is very good, I don't think it will be able to replace everything.
Indeed, AI will be very helpful in making our work and analysis easier, but to replace everything completely is not something I can really consider.

We still need experts or professionals in their fields, including in economics, because programs created like AI cannot back up everything unless they are used as additional tools for reinforcement, in the sense that they become assistants in doing certain things that can be used as an advantage for professionals, which is very possible.
Nothing can completely replace humans in this regard, including AI. Even though its development is excellent and even exceeds expectations, experts will still be very much needed.

[tygeade]

Yes, AI is already doing that, maybe you didn't notice yet but it's already happening. I was watching a clip that one of my country's tech guy was explaining how AI can make financial analysis and how to use the tool for yourself for free, as I saw on that video everything was seamless and perfect, the AI provides you with all the necessary informations,  tips and reasons of why your choice of investment can be bad and also give reasons to why they are making recommendations for something else, after all the information have been tabled down, you now have to make a choice.

It is "trying". Believe me when I say this, if you start using AI right now, to do your financial analysis, then you are going to end up losing money.

You also need to be great at using AI as well, because you can't just assume it will give you a great analysis, go upload bitcoin chart right now and tell it to make you an analysis and it will not have higher than 50% chance to be right, it will say either up or down, and it will go either up or down, so if it's right, that will be because it's a coin toss, but if you keep asking long term, that will go down more and more and it will be wrong, very wrong. AI is not there right now, it will get there one day without a doubt, but it is not good enough to be used just yet, unless you are a wizard with prompts.

[Cryptomultiplier]

With predictive algorithms getting smarter every day, I can’t help but wonder: are we slowly handing over economic decision-making to machines? It feels like everywhere I look—financial markets, business forecasts, even policy simulations—AI models are stepping into roles that were once reserved for economists and financial analysts with years of training and experience.

I’m genuinely curious whether we’re moving toward a future where economists and analysts become more like supervisors, guiding AI tools rather than making the calls themselves. Or are we edging toward something more dramatic—where algorithms take the lead and humans step back?

AI won't replace economists and financial analysts because it is believed that we humans are still very much valuable in the areas that involves critical thinking, contextual judgement, making decisions and communication.
While AI may be only more restricted to heavy computational duties like recognizing patterns, simulation of different environments and data analysis.

It is left for we humans who work in these areas where AI may soon be integrated into, to learn fast and adapt to the workflow of AI inclusivity, or risk joblessness.

I think the future of AI integration, not replacement nor like a working assistant is more like a future where there would be absolute division of labour, like humans being the supervisors and strategist instead of being forecasters or analyst with very evident human errors.

[Darker45]

The kind of things that AI can do a decade or two from now would be far more superior than what it can do now. In spite of that, however, I don't think it can fully replace what economists and analysts can do. I'm not saying economists and analysts are necessarily better than AI. Many of them are blabbering nonsense, but the economy, the reality, is more than just numbers and figures and patterns.

Times are similar and different at the same time. AI can't be as grounded as real people. AI can't live the moment. There seems to be a kind of sentiment and outlook that can only be derived from lived experience.

[michellee]

Handing over decision making to machines is not good. We are humans who can decide for ourselves after we research. AI can suggest but the final decision is ours. We can follow the AI suggestion if we want but we must research and compare the data and not let AI decide for us.

But if they want AI to decide for them, that will not be a problem. Every decision they make will involve risks so they must understand and accept it. Even if that is about AI suggestion, that will still have risks.

[martinex]

I feel like the whole AI thing is being blown out of proportion. Every day, we see how AI might replace one job or another, from programmers to pilots, photographers, and many more. Generally speaking, AI won't replace those jobs. What AI will do is make those jobs easier. There will always be financial analysts and economists, but they will be able to there jobs better with the help of AI. A job that would have taken them a day to do can be done in an hour or two. That is how I see the role of AI in this world, not to replace jobs completely.

On most of these jobs that people fear will be replaced by AI, there is this human input that cannot be taught to a machine, not yet, at least. An AI cant think for itself, it works based on the programme it has been taught. It doesn't have an intuition or a feeling. The way I see it, AI is not a threat; it's an ally. A tool that will make people's jobs relatively easier and better.

AI's primary function is to assist, but I'm concerned about my child's educational progress, and the apps he downloads on his phone aren't just for reference to teacher assignments, but also for completing the day's homework, which will be collected the next day at school.

Our children are mostly weak in math because they likely didn't have a strong foundation in elementary school, especially basic math. Once they reach junior high school, they're overwhelmed by assignments given by their math teacher, sometimes with difficult, college-level problems. So they resort to quick solutions, asking AI directly for answers. This creates dependency and poor performance in completing assignments.

The reason I mention this sector and not others is because the impact of high dependency and the lack of need for independent learning in reading and solving problems is quite severe. The impact is currently quite severe.

[charrles]

You're actually asking a very broader question in a single file but with the least I can tell, AI doesn't make economy decisions as it doesn't know how the world is regulatedband humans aim in the future neither does it analyse economy algorithm.

I also feel that humans should be making such important decisions. But, if we look at the current scenario, we have even on that part. Do you feel those who take such decisions are competent ??

[fortunecrypto]

-AI models are stepping into roles that were once reserved for economists and financial analysts with years of training and experience.

It can only try, but it cannot replace humans in their roles as economists and financial analysts; these AIs are limited to data and algorithms and lack common sense, insight, and perception.
Humans are guided by an intelligence coming from the subconscious, which is the superconscious, where everything we have right now was and is created.

Or are we edging toward something more dramatic—where algorithms take the lead and humans step back?

I don't think humans can let these things happen; humans are too proud to let these machines take over. They cannot let something they created overcome them.

[Hanadawa]

Nothing can completely replace humans in this regard, including AI. Even though its development is excellent and even exceeds expectations, experts will still be very much needed.

AI can be a very powerful assistant, but it can never replace humans. I believe experts and professionals are still relevant and necessary. AI is very adept at providing data analysis, but I don't think it can make decisions like economists. While AI can predict future economic directions, factors like human intervention and individual countries' economic policies can skew AI predictions. I really like having AI as my assistant because it can provide a wealth of data that is incredibly helpful to my business. However, AI can never replace me in making every decision in my business. Furthermore, AI models so far can only provide suggestions and provide positive feedback when asked to make decisions.

[khiholangkang]

With predictive algorithms getting smarter every day, I can’t help but wonder: are we slowly handing over economic decision-making to machines? It feels like everywhere I look—financial markets, business forecasts, even policy simulations—AI models are stepping into roles that were once reserved for economists and financial analysts with years of training and experience.

I’m genuinely curious whether we’re moving toward a future where economists and analysts become more like supervisors, guiding AI tools rather than making the calls themselves. Or are we edging toward something more dramatic—where algorithms take the lead and humans step back?

It depends on how far AI can develop, I hesitate to say it but for now AI is not able to replace economists and analysts, even though they have data on what has happened in this world in the past, it does not necessarily predict the future based on what has happened in the past, unless this world continues to repeat the same thing every era, AI can have a probability of seeing the future with much greater accuracy, but in fact the world does not always repeat what has happened in the past, there are always new things and new innovations that cannot be predicted by anyone.

It takes a lot to lead humans, it will never happen, unless they have human-like consciousness.

[Alpha Marine]

Our children are mostly weak in math because they likely didn't have a strong foundation in elementary school, especially basic math. Once they reach junior high school, they're overwhelmed by assignments given by their math teacher, sometimes with difficult, college-level problems. So they resort to quick solutions, asking AI directly for answers. This creates dependency and poor performance in completing assignments.

Then the problem is the foundational education, not AI. Every teacher and parent should make sure their kid gets the foundation right. If they get the foundation right, kids will be able to do their assignments by themselves with AI as an assistant to make it easier. Before calculators became a thing, students calculated with their heads on a piece of paper. When calculators became mainstream in every part of the world, the work became easier, but the problem is it made students lazy. So the educational sector and parents made sure kids know the usual things in the elementary levels, so they won't need to use a calculator for common 5x5 arithmetic.
The same can be done with AI.

The problem with education these days is that young students just have the mindset of passing exams, so they don't read to know and understand what they're reading, as long as they can pass that paper some other way. That is why it's easy for them to use AI for assignments because even though they don't understand it, they can pass it.

[Robinrex77]

~

There is a disclaimer on some AI, about you being careful and how you should always check to verify key informations because they are not always correct. So a question is, can you or should you trust AI completely for key economic and financial decisions? I don’t think so.

Professionals in the field will always be needed to help verify and even make key decisions.

Indeed the professional ability of a human to regulate and anticipate the market is needed,
AI are made by humans and if has limit to what it can do, the system can malfunction sometimes

[aioc]

I’m genuinely curious whether we’re moving toward a future where economists and analysts become more like supervisors, guiding AI tools rather than making the calls themselves. Or are we edging toward something more dramatic—where algorithms take the lead and humans step back?

If I'm the President of a country or the CEO of a big company, I don’t think I could put the future of my country or my company to an AI, even if they can come out with a good percentage of accuracy.
Human thoughts are supreme, and AIs are their creation, so why put the welfare of a country or a company in your creation? AIs are good for small and medium tasks, but never for the future of your country or company.
The job of the economist and financial analyst is very complex and requires deep analysis far beyond data and statistics.
 

[o48o]

With predictive algorithms getting smarter every day, I can’t help but wonder: are we slowly handing over economic decision-making to machines? It feels like everywhere I look—financial markets, business forecasts, even policy simulations—AI models are stepping into roles that were once reserved for economists and financial analysts with years of training and experience.

I’m genuinely curious whether we’re moving toward a future where economists and analysts become more like supervisors, guiding AI tools rather than making the calls themselves. Or are we edging toward something more dramatic—where algorithms take the lead and humans step back?

That's not what AIs do. So no. They can be used to sort and compare data, when it's clearly formatted, but they don't understand the content they will produce.

They just seem to do so because people like to think it as intelligence. People have done programs that do predicting algorithms for ages now, AI can do those as well, but it needs to be directed by someone who actually understands those concepts. Trusting these digital parrots blindly is beyond ignorance, but as people are ignorant, that trust just seems to be growing.

[Fortify]

With predictive algorithms getting smarter every day, I can’t help but wonder: are we slowly handing over economic decision-making to machines? It feels like everywhere I look—financial markets, business forecasts, even policy simulations—AI models are stepping into roles that were once reserved for economists and financial analysts with years of training and experience.

I’m genuinely curious whether we’re moving toward a future where economists and analysts become more like supervisors, guiding AI tools rather than making the calls themselves. Or are we edging toward something more dramatic—where algorithms take the lead and humans step back?

AI is likely to determine exactly the same trends and forecasts as people, but the thing with the future is.. it'll often change based on what we expect to happen. For example if the gold price is anticipated to keep on going up, more people pile in and potentially create a bubble in that asset - which has a tendency to burst. AI can collate a lot of useful information and process it in a variety of ways, but it may also be subject to hallucinations, so a person might still need to sift through, sample and verify all it's conclusions are reliable. Generally you'd also want to apply certain patterns to it or feed in assumptions, because it might not really know where to start looking unless you direct it, so financial specialists might still have a purpose in steering it creatively.

[reefsea]

Nothing can completely replace humans in this regard, including AI. Even though its development is excellent and even exceeds expectations, experts will still be very much needed.

AI can be a very powerful assistant, but it can never replace humans. I believe experts and professionals are still relevant and necessary. AI is very adept at providing data analysis, but I don't think it can make decisions like economists. While AI can predict future economic directions, factors like human intervention and individual countries' economic policies can skew AI predictions. I really like having AI as my assistant because it can provide a wealth of data that is incredibly helpful to my business. However, AI can never replace me in making every decision in my business. Furthermore, AI models so far can only provide suggestions and provide positive feedback when asked to make decisions.

I would strongly agree when making AI as an assistant or helper to make our work easier but not when saying they can replace humans in solving a problem especially in a company or certain agencies including in economic matters.

The development of AI cannot be denied that currently even AI can be a fairly deadly weapon even when we talk about the trade war that occurred for the US and China some time ago also spread to several companies they built including AI where chatgpt and DeepSeek elbowed each other showing that AI can be one of the weapons that is deadly enough to put pressure on other countries.
But in the end, this condition must also be intervened by experts because however the machine can still be damaged, including for technology.

[doomloop]

I’m genuinely curious whether we’re moving toward a future where economists and analysts become more like supervisors, guiding AI tools rather than making the calls themselves. Or are we edging toward something more dramatic—where algorithms take the lead and humans step back?

Human needs years of training to achieve success in these fields but AI has already got that training from industry experts who have fed all the required data and all AI has to do is compile the data and give results. AI is much more efficient is what I think because these economists or financial analysts can take hours or maybe days to analyze and study the markets where as AI can just take a couple of seconds and the output might be much similar to the real one. I think AI can be a threat to these analysts but I do not think this is something to really worry about.

These analysts or economists should learn and up skill themselves to integrate AI into their study which will make their study much easier and also the results can be way more convincing.

[Smack That Ace]

I’m genuinely curious whether we’re moving toward a future where economists and analysts become more like supervisors, guiding AI tools rather than making the calls themselves. Or are we edging toward something more dramatic—where algorithms take the lead and humans step back?

Human needs years of training to achieve success in these fields but AI has already got that training from industry experts who have fed all the required data and all AI has to do is compile the data and give results. AI is much more efficient is what I think because these economists or financial analysts can take hours or maybe days to analyze and study the markets where as AI can just take a couple of seconds and the output might be much similar to the real one. I think AI can be a threat to these analysts but I do not think this is something to really worry about.

These analysts or economists should learn and up skill themselves to integrate AI into their study which will make their study much easier and also the results can be way more convincing.

AI has most of the data it needs and it doesn't take much time to aggregate, compile and come up with the final result. But I don't think they can come up with the same results as the analysts. Because one thing AI doesn't have is experience, which analysts have to accumulate through practice, relying on intuition and reasoning to achieve.

Therefore, I do not think AI can pose a threat to economic and financial analysts. On the contrary, AI will likely become a tool that benefits them.

The advent of AI will likely take away many jobs, but it is unlikely to threaten and take away jobs in fields like financial analysis and economics. Because these fields require more practical experience and thinking than just theory.