Can AI replace economists and financial analysts?

[batang_bitcoin]

There is still a huge difference in decision making between AI and human in an economical situation. I think that human's are still the best here but of course, the AI is adaptable to what it is learning and continually learning new things from the experts. Why not just the collaboration of it to make things more efficient. I think that's for the greater good of the economy if AI is utilized by these experts to become more productive and to have better economy.

[WillyAp]

Did any AI predict the latest fall of BTC?
They did not.

[charrles]

Did any AI predict the latest fall of BTC?
They did not.

Did any economist also make 100% correct predictions related to bitcoin movement ?
They did not.

[Synchronice]

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 makes lots of mistakes and it is provided with data to build a knowledge. It doesn't have the ability to think the way we think, it's not really an intelligence, it's a combination of very good algorithms that works very well to process data. AI is good at reasoning through complex problems and analyzing arguments, that's how it works. It doesn't have neurons the way we have, it doesn't really work like our brain.
It can replace bad economists, those who suck at analysis so bad that AI's complex problems and analyzing ability overpasses their abilities. It can't beat real experts though at anything.

AI is good at programming, right? The quality of code written by it sucks. The design created by it sucks. Compared to professionals, it sucks at everything. It's good at certain things but that doesn't mean it replaces professionals right now.

[charrles]

AI is good at programming, right? The quality of code written by it sucks. The design created by it sucks. Compared to professionals, it sucks at everything. It's good at certain things but that doesn't mean it replaces professionals right now.

But it is improving day by day at very fast pace. The speed at which it learns is much faster to normal human being learning.

[Webutxo]

Did any AI predict the latest fall of BTC?
They did not.

Did any economist also make 100% correct predictions related to bitcoin movement ?
They did not.

Yes they did. To should ask Jim Cramer. Although, he is famous for saying the opposite. If he says Bitcoin is going to zero then know that Bitcoin is going to make a run for what it's know for and if he start blabbing and talk how bullish Bitcoin will becomes, then start packing your bags. This may sound funny but times without number he has said this and it did came to pass and sometimes I wonder what he is upto and why they don't mind their traditional finance business.

AI or no AI, nobody can predict how the market will go next. If we all do trust me the market will not go as many people expect, it will take time than many of us expect. It's better we don't know but we have to be bullish about the market and have your coin in your bag just incase the market took off unaware, you will know that you have Bitcoin in your bag and you don't have regret not buying.

[Zlantann]

I can attest that I'm using three AIs, and there is inaccuracy in the results. Depending on the AI you're using, you'll need at least 3 AIs to compare and verify the results. AI's responses are not absolute facts.
Human can rectify the error, but AI's will sometimes stick to their results.
So companies and countries will never allow an AI to replace economists and analysts, given how much is at stake.

Every new products or inventions will have much flaws.  But they will improving in the future until the errors reduces to a larger extent. I watched a video of robots engaging in boxing last year and it was an eye sore. But the next edition of the boxing showed great improvement ans I enjoyed it a bit. But no matter what happens i will never spend my money to watch robot in the boxing ring. Humans will always be relevant in all professions no matter how perfect AI becomes.

[Davidvictorson]

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 will not replace economist. it will only make them more efficient. Efficient in the sense that they are able to build more advanced predictive models that can make very accurate predictions compared to what we used to have in the past. And this will in turn improve economic outcomes of countries that decide to embrace them and invest heavily in its research and development.
Lastly, I think AI is one of the most abused words.

[eightdots]

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 will not replace economist. it will only make them more efficient. Efficient in the sense that they are able to build more advanced predictive models that can make very accurate predictions compared to what we used to have in the past. And this will in turn improve economic outcomes of countries that decide to embrace them and invest heavily in its research and development.
Lastly, I think AI is one of the most abused words.

Artificial intelligence makes work more efficient and easier in many areas. AI is being used more extensively in some sectors. Change is becoming inevitable in some areas.  As AI-supported studies become increasingly widespread, AI-supported workspaces are also being created in the economics field. This also has benefits for economic management.

There are many opinions on whether AI will replace economists or analysts or how they can work together, but one of the most important is that utilizing AI in these fields offers significant positive benefits.

[Faisal2202]

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 can't replace anyone except the few job roles but seriously, recently I saw a video of China deploying their robot on LOC on the Indian border, they are getting more smart as usual and now this changes everything, like most of the time in harsh weather, these can't work I think but the weather in the video seems alright.

So it was just for observation which can be done via drones too but that robot might reduce the need of few militants, as the operator must be one that replaces a group I guess. Or they are just testing.

[doomloop]

Depends on the economists and financial analysts that you are talking about. The bad ones? Surely, because AI will be better than the bad ones. But the good ones? Good ones will not be replaced, they will be using AI to make even more. This way, instead of having 100 analyst that does analysis, you will have 50 and they will use AI to make as much as the 100 was making.

This will of course cause a lot of layoffs and all the bad ones that did not make money will be gone, but it would allow the best ones to make more, while CEO makes even more. This is not an easy decision to make yet because AI is not there yet, but AI will improve and be better and then we can make this work, I think that would be the best case.

[Miles2006]

If then the AI level is not professional enough anyone can still turn to an economist, this is optional besides if thinking in this manner I’m sure the work rate for such profession will decrease. AI can’t take the working place of humans although consulting doesn’t mean AI is fully replacing financial analysis hell no rather making different kinds of assumption etc. There’s absolutely nothing different seeking knowledge from both sides, obviously this is  not a comparison because replacing humans will take a lot and from previous history the record involving AI being able to replace humans seems small.

[FiliOrangGila]

If everything can be analyzed with AI, even those who create the AI are already wealthy beforehand. Because if the analysis is accurate, the creators of the AI who can invest in stocks, forex markets, etc., would certainly be wealthy first due to the accuracy, rather than the users who are just trying to use AI to analyze the economy, economic conditions, money markets, and stock markets.

[WillyAp]

If everything can be analyzed with AI, even those who create the AI are already wealthy beforehand.

With errors in the result you need to check it.
A search and double-check is advised in all things financial.
 
That makes AI a no go. If you are a huge company and have already staff to check fine, just most people play around.
Even translations you need to check and checking is most of the time more expensive.   

[Jatiluhung]

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?

I think everything will come together in the end. That is, AI will be utilized in various sectors. For example, an analyst will develop their own AI that will make their work easier. People will still need experts in this field, but experts will be assisted by AI in formulating problems. Decisions and conclusions made by AI sometimes contain errors. I have tried it in my work. Perhaps the next generation of AI will be more reliable. However, I think the current AI still has certain weaknesses. Sometimes they make mistakes. They even admit it when I point it out to them. So, the point is that current AI models are not yet fully helpful. However, their accuracy is indeed increasing. And for financial analysis, they may develop further but still need to be monitored by an expert.

[Muba20]

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?

In recent times, AI is really playing an important role in every sector. People can easily perform their work using it. AI can analyze a lot of data in a short time. A man has to take a lot of time to take decisions. AI can easily do these tasks. He can guess the direction of the market trend very quickly, but when a person wants to take a decision maually, he will need a lot of time to review that data.

This is definitely reducing the work of humans and it will become more usable in the future but there are some things that are never possible without a human. That is why no matter how smart AI is, there is a need for humans. However, I agree that many people will lose jobs due to AI, on the other hand, some jobs will also be created.

[GiftedMAN]

AI will not replace economist. it will only make them more efficient. Efficient in the sense that they are able to build more advanced predictive models that can make very accurate predictions compared to what we used to have in the past. And this will in turn improve economic outcomes of countries that decide to embrace them and invest heavily in its research and development. 

Some advance countries are taking advantage of the invention of AI to change their economy while some other countries are seeing it as something that has come to replace the job of humans which is not really the reason for the invention of AI. economist knows that their job is going to be made easier through the invention of AI they will only need to do more research and think so that they can have a good idea to blend in with everything that AI will be providing so that more good discoveries will be achieved and things made way easier.

[zeuner]

"AI" can replace any human expertise. Just be sure to be be far away when it happens.

[o48o]

Did any AI predict the latest fall of BTC?
They did not.

Everyone who believed in cycle repetition knew that bear market was incoming. And to be fair, no economist, technical analysist or financial analyst would have knew what day or week it would happen. Anyone saying they did would be lying.

And since chatgpt just parrots randomly stuff, it probably predicted that as well. But it wouldn't have "opinion" other then copying opinion of majority of statements it has stored to itself.

And just to be clear, Current AI tech doesn't have any insight about economics or financial analysis because it doesn't understand the concept of them. It's a freaking glorified text predicting software and there's no intelligence behind that parroting and sorting.

[Joy_learns_crypto]

If AI can do the work of financial analysts and economists, why not replace them with AI? I do not think there is anything that is bad there. As some jobs will be lost because of AI, some jobs will be created.

But I think that AI can not replace economists and financial analysts but AI will help economists and financial analysts instead.

This is what I found out about it:

AI will not fully replace economists and financial analysts, but will transform their roles by automating repetitive tasks, enhancing efficiency, and creating new opportunities for strategic, human-centric work. Instead of replacement, the trend is toward an "augmentation" where analysts use AI to gain deeper insights and make more informed decisions, shifting the focus to skills like strategic thinking, complex problem-solving, and client management that AI cannot replicate.

This has been what AI have done. AI don’t completely replace Jobs but helps transform those in that job but it can pamper incompetent people in that role as AI won’t only help improve the experienced and good at their job people but also it can transform the incompetent ones who without AI will fall off considerably.
If one can master the AI they don’t have to be experienced economists to become transformed economist analysts.