Abstract Background The largest sequence-based models of transcription control to date have been obtained by predicting genome-wide gene regulatory assays across the human genome. This setting is fundamentally correlative, as those models are exposed during training solely to the sequence variation between human genes that arose through evolution, questioning the extent to which those models capture genuine causal signals. Results Here we confront predictions of state-of-the-art models of transcription regulation against data from two large-scale observational studies and five deep perturbation assays. The most advanced of these sequence-based models, Enformer, by and large captures causal determinants of human promoters. However, models fail to capture the causal effects of enhancers on expression, notably in medium to long distances and particularly for highly expressed promoters. More generally, the predicted impact of distal elements on gene expression predictions is small and the ability to correctly integrate long-range information is significantly more limited than the receptive fields of the models suggest. This is likely caused by the escalating class imbalance between actual and candidate regulatory elements as distance increases. Conclusions Our results suggest that sequence-based models have advanced to the point that in-silico study of promoter regions and promoter variants can provide meaningful insights and we provide practical guidance on how to use them. Moreover, we foresee that it will require significantly more and particularly new kinds of data to train models accurately accounting for distal elements.