Benchmark Almanac

BankerToolBench

Tencent Hy4 preview 78.6% leads since August 2026
In use

100 end-to-end junior-banker tasks producing Excel, PowerPoint and Word deliverables. Agentic grader scores ~150 weighted expert rubric criteria.

Built with 502 investment bankers. Packaged as a Harbor task suite. Grader repo Handshake-AI-Research/gandalf-the-grader.

Released
April 2026
Kind
Finance
Level
Expert
Scored
Graded by a model
Answers
Open-ended
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
MiniMax-M3 #79 on the capability index
Last in a launch post
October 2026
Last model added
October 2026

In the authors’ words

Existing AI benchmarks lack the fidelity to assess economically meaningful progress on professional workflows. To evaluate frontier AI agents in a high-value, labor-intensive profession, we introduce BankerToolBench (BTB): an open-source benchmark of end-to-end analytical workflows routinely performed by junior investment bankers. To develop an ecologically valid benchmark grounded in representative work environments, we collaborated with 502 investment bankers from leading firms. BTB requires agents to execute senior banker requests by navigating data rooms, using industry tools (market data platform, SEC filings database), and generating multi-file deliverables–including Excel financial models, PowerPoint pitch decks, and PDF/Word reports. Completing a BTB task takes bankers up to 21 hours, underscoring the economic stakes of successfully delegating this work to AI. BTB enables automated evaluation of any LLM or agent, scoring deliverables against 100+ rubric criteria defined by veteran investment bankers to capture stakeholder utility. Testing 9 frontier models, we find that even the best-performing model (GPT-5.4) fails nearly half of the rubric criteria and bankers rate 0% of its outputs as client-ready. Our failure analysis reveals key obstacles (such as breakdowns in cross-artifact consistency) and improvement directions for agentic AI in high-stakes professional workflows.

Abstract of BankerToolBench: Evaluating AI Agents in End-to-End Investment Banking Workflows (arXiv:2604.11304, CC0)
3
Models scored in lab cards
3
Launch posts list it, from 2 labs

Tencent Hy4 preview leads with 78.6%

Best score per model as labs report them in their own cards. Labs pick their own settings, so these compare less cleanly than independent runs.

  1. 1 Tencent Hy4 preview 78.6%
  2. 2 MiniMax-M3.1-Flash 76.2%
  3. 3 MiniMax-M3 76.1%

Source: Labs’ model cards

#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Tencent Hy4 preview 78.6% Aug 2026 Lab model card
2 MiniMax-M3.1-Flash 76.2% Oct 2026 Lab model card
3 MiniMax-M3 76.1% Jun 2026 Lab model card

2 models have held number one in labs’ own numbers since its release in April 2026

Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.

MiniMax Tencent
Lab claims 2 leaders

Source: Labs’ model cards

Scores over time

All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.

Reported by the lab in its model card Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Tencent Hy4 preview MiniMax-M3 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Tencent Hy4 preview

Source: Labs’ model cards

2 labs put it in a launch post in the last six months

Launch posts from every lab that has listed it, one tick per post. Tall colored ticks include it, and short gray ones leave it out.

MiniMax
Tencent
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
Oct 19, 2026 MiniMax-M3.1-Flash 76.2 BankerToolBench
Aug 28, 2026 Tencent Hy4 preview 78.6 BankerToolBench
Jun 1, 2026 MiniMax-M3 76.1 BankerToolBench

Versions

We switch the top row to each new version when it comes out. Open it for one row per version. An old version stays in play while people still test it, so whoever first takes it past 85% gets credit for closing it out.

MiniMax Tencent Anthropic
BankerToolBench v1.1 3 leaders
BankerToolBench 2 leaders

Sources: Official leaderboards and labs’ model cards

More in Law, finance and medicine

All 179 in Law, finance and medicine
  • MedXpertQA-MM In use Models answer expert-level medical exam questions that combine images with clinical records and test results. Scoring is accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 80.4%
  • HealthBench Professional In use 525 physician-authored tasks from real clinician chats (care consult, documentation, research) with physician-adjudicated rubrics. Claude Sonnet 5.5 69.2%
  • HealthBench In use 5,000 realistic health conversations graded against physician-written rubrics. A length-adjusted variant penalizes verbosity. GPT-5 67.2%
  • FinSearchComp In use Agents search the web to fetch live financial data, look up history, and run multi-step investigations, across 635 expert-written questions. Scored by answer accuracy. Ling-3.1-flash 81.7%
  • KBL In use Models answer Korean legal knowledge and reasoning tasks and Korean bar exam questions. It has 7 knowledge tasks, 4 reasoning tasks and 2,510 bar exam items. Solar Pro 4 77.5%
  • KorMedMCQA In use Models answer 7,469 multiple-choice questions from Korean licensing exams for doctors, nurses, pharmacists and dentists, held from 2012 to 2024. Solar Pro 4 93.2%