Using Agents for Long-Horizon Financial Work — Aman Singh, Arca

0:00 We're actually not a SaaS company. We are we are the firm ourselves. Agents prompt people more than people prompt agents and it is a proactive kind of service that is running for them 24/7.

0:12 >> [music] >> So we're here at the AI Engineer New York conference 2026 and I'm here with Aman Singh from Arca and Arca's recently raised $64 million

0:24 for an AI native wealth management firm. So first of all, Aman, can you tell us a bit about your role at Arca and the financial services you provide and how you're using AI agents to run them?

0:38 >> Yeah, for sure. Thanks for having me. My role at Arca is I lead the AI platform team. So we're building the underlying sort of harness and our

0:48 capabilities to kind of run the business with AI, which is our ultimate goal. In terms of the services that we provide to our clients, this is a broad spectrum of financial

0:59 services. So that includes sort of financial advice, financial planning for for their assets and sort of um tax planning and insurance and estate

1:11 planning as as people get wealthier. Maybe you are someone who just sold a business for example and there's lots of complexities with all the different partners etc, right?

1:20 So we can help you think through that. We also have clients that are you know, really large technology executives that have are trying to figure out a real plan for

1:31 retiring retiring early, right? And also small families that um that are trying to buy their first home for example. >> Yeah.

1:39 >> Yeah. >> So the the clients that you have so far, are they do you have to kind of talk them through using agents and and why you're using

1:47 agents and tell them a little bit about the technology behind it? >> Yeah, so the role of AI at Arca is not to replace the advisor. It is to replace all of the

1:58 work around the advisor. So, our clients don't really interface with AI directly. All they experience is a level of service that has not been been been possible in this industry before,

2:09 delivered through the empathy and care of a human advisor. So, we're building the machinery behind every client that's constantly thinking about

2:20 you know what what is the market doing and how does it impact Richard? You know, what what what else is going on in your life? Like what are you what are the the

2:28 textures of your life that impact your finances? And we're able to be way way more proactive, way more responsive, and just deliver a better kind of level

2:37 of client service using AI that does all of the the back office stuff. >> Okay. So, let's get into the some of the technical aspects of it. Which models are you using to power your agents and

2:48 how do you decide which model is best for for which action? >> Yeah. So, today we're using the frontier models from from the frontier labs like

2:59 Anthropic and and Open AI. Claude is kind of our primary model has been but we've gone through several iterations of models over the years. We used to be in

3:09 Gemini way back when and then Open AI and then and then Anthropic. And what's guiding all of our decisions are our benchmarks that we have internally

3:19 for all of the various capabilities of our general harness that it has to express in in running our business.

3:28 And so, just recently for example, despite the external benchmarks claiming great things for Luna, it didn't really quite work out for us as as well as we had expected. It was way too slow or

3:40 and it was costing a lot. And so, our internal benchmarks kind of guide our model decisions and as a principle we we want to be model agnostic and and sort of not, um,

3:53 you know, um, take a dependency on on a a certain provider or certain harness from one of these labs and kind of keep that that optionality open for us.

4:01 >> Okay. So, you just mentioned harnesses. So, are you using different harnesses depending on which model you're using? >> No, we have we have our our own

4:11 kind of built internally that is model agnostic. >> Okay. So, you know, when when your when a

4:16 financial advisor is doing something like a taxation report or something like that, how does the harness decide which model to use? Is that automated? >> Well, yes. So, we have,

4:28 um, certain tiers of models based on different complexities of tasks. So, a task like assisting with a tax plan or doing a tax analysis would get our like heaviest tier of models.

4:39 Inside of that tier, it is a little bit flexible, so you could use, like an Opus tier model or a Sonic tier model or a heavy GPT model.

4:49 But, based on there's a lot of like background activity that our agents are participating in, right? That is using the a lower tier of model based on the

4:58 complexity of the task. So, that's kind of how we how we make decisions on on which model serves which task. >> Okay. So, is it the the financial advisor that's actually

5:08 making that decision while they're using the product? >> Not really. They're they're they're not aware of the happening. We've abstracted this

5:16 away from them entirely. They kind of just interact with our product as they would, and those decisions are made internally by us.

5:24 >> Okay. So, in your presentation at the conference earlier today, you talked about a tax bill

5:30 example. I just wondered if you could maybe walk us through an example of adjusting a client's portfolio, investment portfolio,

5:39 you know, from identifying a need to maybe rebalance the portfolio to executing trades. Can you talk us through, you know, what parts of that process the agent does and and what

5:50 parts the human advisor does? Right. >> Um so, just like in the talk, this is a thing that will span 10 days. Um and so, agents are ultimately um responsible for delivering that outcome,

6:03 but there are are are certain parts that they do and certain parts that they do not. So, in this example, um when uh when the client emails us uh with this whole tax bill, there's a there's a

6:13 piece of the analysis of like, where is this client's money allocated today? And what is the most optimal way um to liquidate some of that to to produce $100,000? That is best suited for agents

6:24 >> Right. >> to take on as an analysis task. >> Yeah. >> So, that they do exactly that. >> Do they have certain limits though that

6:30 they can't, you know, they can't execute a trade at correct amount? >> So, the analysis part is fully automated, but um they're unable to actually execute uh

6:38 any sort of money movement or liquidation automatically. We have a very deep integration with our custodian uh that actually gives us APIs to be able to do that, um but we have strict

6:49 guardrails around human in the loop for things that would either move money or liquidate assets or even directly communicate with our with our end clients uh because there's a level of

6:59 service that that uh service service and quality that we expect. Um so, all of the like internal analysis will be done by agents, but the the they will also pull in the right person to be able to

7:10 execute the trade when needed. So, and they'll give it give the personal plan that they they're able to review and kind of like adjust. Um and yeah, go from there.

7:19 >> Yeah. Yeah, so you mentioned that um these processes tend to be, you know, 10 days or at least a longer sort of uh running time than most sort of agent stuff these

7:29 days. So, um when an agent kind of resumes a task maybe days later than they, you know, than they started it, how do you restore How do you check that the plan still

7:39 fits the client's uh you know, uh needs. >> Yeah. Um so, this is an interesting interesting one to think about is

7:48 we have tons of these signals like I described in the talk. Um some are for example, you can imagine there's an email thread that is receiving responses and there's chatter

7:56 happening, right? You can imagine that that any ad- ad- additional response to that goes to the same agent that's kind of like reading that that email thread and reacting to it, right? But a a fresh

8:07 signal of it's like a like a phone call that was made in the middle, um that is a brand new signal that isn't attached with any other ongoing process. And so, there's like a fresh agent that

8:17 wakes up to figure out what this means, right? And the way they way they understand what is happening right now is our internal memory systems. So, we have um

8:27 we have this this persistence of for every client um what is happening right now, what are we trying to service, who owns what, what has happened so far, what are we tracking for next, right?

8:38 What what needs to happen immediately in the next couple of days, what are we tracking for the long term, right? Which individual is responsible for which action? All of this is being tracked by

8:47 our memory systems that our agents contribute to. But also, there is a a kind of really sort of dreaming process that reflects on the state of the world as it relates to Richard, the client, um

8:59 and is able to kind of like update these memory systems to to persist long horizon kind of tasks. So, that agent that received a new signal quickly ramps up on what uh the situation is with the

9:10 client and it'll know, "Okay, we're we're actually executing a big tax bill." Um and we'll be able to see, "Okay, my signal relates to that tax bill, so let

9:19 me kind of contribute to the to to the state of that world." >> Can you talk a little bit about the the safety sort of aspects that you've maybe built onto your product or harnessed to

9:28 to to to make sure obviously that uh no money is lost along the way? >> Yeah. Um so, all of our safety restrictions are are fully deterministic and they they take the decision making

9:39 off the the agent's hands. So, for example, um certain tools let the let the agent kind of execute the tool itself. So, if it's like a simple record keeping kind of tool, um it will execute

9:49 it. We also with every time a tool is called that writes data, we have um uh LLM based verification running on uh on that action. Um these like fast uh LLM calls that that analyze every single

10:04 write to our database. Um so, that's another layer of verification we're running. And then uh we also ingest a lot of like external information. So, there's emails coming

10:13 in, documents coming in, phone calls being made, which are targets for prompt injection. So, we run um sort of verifications at the at at the edges that detect presence of certain

10:24 um you know, flavors of prompt injection. And then anytime there is a um there's a case where uh data leaves our system, for example, in like a a web search in in the most obvious case, but

10:34 also So, if we're sending a calendar invite to Richard, right? That's an external kind of uh data where we have both deterministic checks on presence of certain information that we know is PII,

10:46 uh but also a consensus of small models that that ensure that there isn't any kind of data exfil being attempted. Um so, we have tons of different different kind of guardrails built into the

10:56 harness uh with the principle that we want to kind of contain them at the edges of capability uh and not earlier than that. Yes. >> And and because you're in the financial

11:05 uh you know, industry, are there certain kind of regulations that uh are required that you have to sort of keep to in terms of the technology that you're using or is that is it just more

11:15 about outcomes and and the way you sort of deal with clients? >> Yeah, the the industry cares about outcomes, but um compliance cares about auditability, right? Um and so,

11:25 um our um our system is is is such that auditability is by default. Um >> we have every single action that that an agent

11:34 takes produces a change log of what changed, um, who changed it, from which part of the system, and when. And this [clears throat] applies not just to agents, by the way. It applies to human

11:46 actors as well. So, if you change something in the UI that affects the client, uh, we'll log that action. So, it lets us both get auditability by default, but also powers some of our

11:56 agentic capabilities where the same thing that that we tracks like a UI change also could be used to like inform the agent that that happened. >> Right.

12:05 >> Um, so auditability has been a big part of our, um, our story both for, obviously, compliance with regulation, uh, but also for our, um, agentic loop. >> Yes.

12:15 In your, uh, presentation, uh, you had a nice line, "Agents prompt people more than people prompt agents." Um, so how do the agents decide who to involve and, um, you know,

12:27 what sort of how much of the context that they need to provide that person in order to do what they need to do? >> Yeah. Um, another interesting one. So, um,

12:36 this is similar to how humans work in in in, uh, in our industry is there is a process that we're tracking over 10 days. There's multiple actors involved. The the actor at step seven may not need

12:49 to know about this just yet, right? They're pulled in at the right time. And so, our agents with our kind of like long memory persistence plus the daily reflection on what is happening, um,

13:01 reflect on where the the state of the world is at the moment. And they're able to pull in the right person at that time when it is when when there's a signal that that implies that that person must

13:12 be pulled in. And all of this is, um, work that we have done to operationalize the context of how this industry works. But not just that, but how does Arca want it to work? And what are our

13:23 principles of of how work happens in this industry? Um, and that is another advantage of us being sort of a a um, a not just a SaaS company. We're actually not a SaaS company. We are um,

13:35 we are the firm ourselves. So, we can standardize the way this work even happens. Um, so that our agents can participate in standard ways that um, that work must happen.

13:45 >> So, um, earlier in the conference, uh, Anthropic uh, did a workshop about their uh, managed agents uh, infrastructure. And a lot of it uh, even the orchestration is becoming more automated

13:56 now. So, do you foresee kind of using that type of functionality cuz it obviously it presents a danger in that the human is not necessarily always in the loop anymore. So, have you had any

14:06 thoughts about using that technology to automate even more of the process? >> Um, I think we are very bullish on the models from uh, from Anthropic and and labs like OpenAI. Um, but less so on on

14:19 taking a dependency on a product like managed agents. Um, because managed agents, one of their their key things is how the models kind of persist and and contribute memory as

14:31 to what is happening in the world. Um, and all of the operational knowledge that they need to be uh, need to use to to be successful. Um, and so, letting them own that part of the business is

14:43 kind of like um, a a risk because um, owning that is owning your intelligence is kind of uh, gives you the ability to impact the business. If you if you hand off uh, the

14:55 intelligence to to another provider, you lose some of that control that you need to kind of like build something that is unique and tailored to your business to such a great degree um, that it can

15:05 actually impact your business. >> And just on Anthropic, they've they've also recently released uh, financial services. So, they're partnering with a whole bunch of different firms. Do you

15:15 think what they're doing is kind of competitive to what you're trying to do or do you see them as different things? >> Yeah, I think uh, I think Anthropic getting into our kind of industry is is

15:23 very validating for for our industry. But the way I think about it is that it is very different to be an a a services firm that has access to AI tools versus a firm that was built to be AI native.

15:37 The firm with AI tools requires their users to prompt the use the the agents kind of to to produce work or to do work. But here like I said in at Arca agents

15:49 prompt people more than people prompt agents and it is a proactive kind of service that is running for them 24/7 and it's kind of like running the business in the most standard way that

15:59 we that we expect at the level of service that we that we aspire to which looks very different if you're if you're a an AI AI sorry a company with

16:09 AI tools. >> Yes. Yes. Okay. So a little bit more about on the security side. So can you explain like what in your processes runs inside a

16:18 sandbox and how do you verify like a change to a financial plan you know before anyone acts on it? Um >> Yeah. So [clears throat]

16:29 this the the way we use sandboxes is that the the sandbox is a one component of our harness. Our agent isn't actually inside of the sandbox. It uses the sandbox to offload computation

16:42 and we've we've built systems to make it safe for code inside of that sandbox to access our data. Um so we kind of like have this thing which translates the code it wrote into a strict format that

16:55 we expect throw away the code and you kind of instill guardrails on that format before it reaches your back end. So we allow the agents kind of to use code to query our data which means that

17:08 they can like aggregate it and they can munch it they can kind of like work with it as they as they see fit to produce such a thing like a like a financial plan.

17:17 Um inside of the same sandbox they produce this, you know, beautiful artifacts that we we can share with clients that has like it's a PDF of like here's your financial plan and here's

17:27 how we're going to planning to kind of like approach your life uh financially. Um and once that is produced is where we run our verifiers. So, um it's a certain type of artifact that is produced from

17:40 the sandbox. The moment that is produced we run bunch of different different verifications on it. Um some deterministic that check for presence of like, "Hey, did you just put like a raw

17:50 account number in there?" You should not do that. Um so, deterministically we can check that. Um but also um fast models like um like the the smaller models or Jev um to analyze for presence

18:01 of things that might make this artifact non-compliant. Like for example, you really should not be like um promising returns uh in in that artifact. So, that's

18:12 another thing that we will check before it is um it is kind of a publishable. Um and the last thing I'll say on that is that um doing this is actually um makes our kind

18:23 of compliance uh better than if humans were doing it because AI is tireless at at at finding even the smallest mention of a non-compliant um piece of writing in there.

18:34 Um so, yeah, we'll continue to invest in in in more of that and kind of like uh constrain at the capability edges. >> Yes. Yeah, you uh mentioned Jev there. Um so, uh you have started to use

18:44 decision models uh as part of your process. So, what other um products other than Jev are you sort of looking at? >> Yeah, so what we noticed is um when when

18:53 models are um working with financial data, right? When they're answering questions that require financial knowledge, they are they're very confident in in uh

19:03 in the knowledge that they have. So, a small example is that um models will very happily use the tax brackets from 2025 um to to come up with an analysis and be like, all right, that is it. Um,

19:15 but that is that is obviously incorrect. And so, um, that is one of the ways in which we're using decision models in in our harness is to to check when the the model is about to make a financial

19:25 recommendation or or anything any action that requires financial rigor will detect and will nudge the model to kind of use our knowledge base of verified facts about the world that is true

19:36 today. And or use their kind of web search. So, kind of makes it um, this is kind of a a a point about the the harness and and owning the harness

19:45 that lets you do things like this that that help your um, your models be be accurate where it matters. >> And do you use um, decision models in for example, recovery if like a trade

19:55 fails to execute? Is there a decision model involved there or is there another path to to get the agent back on track? >> No, not today. That is not a use case that we're exploring today.

20:04 >> Okay. Um, so, um, you know, if a step a trade does fail for example, how does the agent recover at the moment in your process?

20:13 >> So, um, so, at the moment, we are not doing autonomous trading with with agents. It is very much a um, the agents will propose that we we make trades.

20:23 >> I see. >> Um, and it is fully up to kind of our our experts to figure out if that is the right trade to be making and to execute the trade.

20:31 >> Okay. So, uh, on the on the same sort of uh, line of that, um, your slides um, say that every staff edit or cancellation comes with a Y and come it becomes an

20:42 eval. So, um, how does that feedback uh, get turned back into uh, the system as a measurable improvement? >> Yeah.

20:51 Um, that is another one of the advantages of us um, being the business and not a SaaS company um, is that we have um, we have the ability to have to require them to

21:00 give us feedback. Um, and yeah, the way that we loop the feedback back into improvements is something that you would um, you would expect is all of that feedback gets piped into

21:11 um a data store that um that couples that feedback with the trace of the agent that produced it. Um and so we're able to kind of like take that take take that trace um put it put it next to the

21:23 the feedback and every night we run this process where we take collect traces from uh the real world from our agents in the wild and run run a meta agent on top that suggests changes to our

21:35 harness. So maybe tools that were misleading or um things that were were errored or there's missing knowledge in our knowledge base um and they'll surface this information to us and then

21:46 we'll we'll be able to kind of improve it. Um today we still have a a human in in like a human engineer in the loop before we actually ship a prompt change. Yes. Um I've noticed that uh that agents

21:58 will will make really nasty prompt changes if you leave them leave them do it. Um every little fix becomes the whole prompt. Hm. Uh and they're they're unable to stay meta and kind of

22:08 generalize uh the fix into into a prompt that generalizes. Um so but yeah we have we have feedback loops from our product that we collect directly as first class product features to collect evals and

22:19 turn them into improvements. >> Hm. >> Okay. Um and you also mentioned in your presentation about uh turning knowledge of how a firm works into agent context

22:29 which is actually something a lot of forward deployed engineers uh do try to do is is turn an organization's kind of internal knowledge into uh actionable things for agents. Um

22:41 what does that look like uh for your company technically and and how do you sort of keep it up to date? >> Yeah. So we have um a knowledge base of um of files that is represented as as um

22:53 as files and um the way we keep that up to date is we we've handed it to our experts to curate and update. So it is a a first-class um feature in our product. So, on the

23:06 left-hand side there's a tab called knowledge, which has the full operational context that our agents are using. And as they they work on

23:16 work on things, they're able to cite knowledge. And so, it kind of like creates this this loop of like, oh, we notice that the knowledge is incorrect. And

23:27 we that gets surfaced to us in our trace analysis. And because it is a a part of the product itself, people are able to go in and like edit the edit the skill

23:37 directly. That's how it kind of works. >> All right. Okay. So, you know, you mentioned you're you're you're actually offering these

23:46 services to to clients through, you know, I'm assuming you have a staff of financial advisers in your firm. So, can you maybe give us an example of some, you know, a client that you've had

23:59 that's had a measurable improvement in their investments or taxation or whatever through the agent system and and maybe some sort of details about what in the agent architecture kind of

24:09 helped that client, you know, get such a good return? >> Yeah, I'll give you a recent example. This is this person wasn't a client yet,

24:19 but they were they were at the the point of becoming a client. So, we had all of their their documents, their statements, their current investments, et cetera. And this

24:29 person was already working with an adviser. And so, they meet with us, they tell us that, hey, I have this adviser already. They're charging me $1,500

24:39 for for their services, and they're not very responsive to me. So, I'm I'm chatting with you. And so, our agents have kind of like, you know, read through all of those documents,

24:50 they've analyzed them, they've analyzed what the person's goals are that they state, right? They've also analyzed the statement of like who this current advisor is, uh, right? And how much

24:59 they're they're charging them. And, um, they discover that that there is there are fees that this person was charging them that they weren't aware of. Uh, and surfaces this it to them, um, and kind

25:11 of like makes them not only aware of, um, of the fact that they're being overcharged, but also aware that that person wasn't even fiduciary. Um, so

25:21 they're not uh, obligated to act in their interests. So, it is this is the sort of like attention to detail that our agents bring about in in when they're analyzing a financial picture,

25:33 um, that that sort of, um, would not have been possible possible if we didn't have, um, have these. There's several examples of,

25:40 um, proactivity, uh, that our agents kind of like produce of like someone has a deadline coming up. Or they're at risk of missing their RMD or, um, that kind of thing. And so,

25:51 um, this is difficult at scale for humans to keep track of, but it is the the default behavior of, uh, of our agents at at Arca. >> Yeah.

25:59 Wonderful. Well, that's probably a good, uh, point to stop at. So, thank you very much, Aman, for joining us. Thank you for having me.