Benchmark Almanac

ExtractBench

LlamaExtract Agentic Plus 96.2% tops its leaderboard GPT-6.1 Sol 95.3% leads the models we track
Not in model cards

Systems read a full business document and return a schema-valid JSON object with every requested value. Unified value F1 compares the output with the expected values.

370 documents, 4,869 pages, 8 business domains and 67 document types. A later dataset revision added grounding boxes with documents and schemas unchanged. LlamaIndex says its own tiers now score above 93%.

Made by
LlamaIndex
Released
July 2026
Kind
Documents, charts and text in images
Level
Everyday
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Short answer
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
Claude Opus 5.5 #4 on the capability index
Last model added
October 2026
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

Enterprise workflows increasingly rely on agents for schema-guided extraction: given a document and a user-defined schema, the agent faithfully follows the schema to produce the correct output with source evidence as grounding metadata. We present ExtractBench, a benchmark for schema-guided extraction and, to our knowledge, the first to score value accuracy, record completeness at scale, grounding, and measured cost together. The evaluation system contains 4,869 pages across 370 enterprise documents, 8 business domains, and 67 document types, with clear tags differentiating their challenge scenarios. The scalable schema and ground-truth curation pipeline combines independent-system agreement for real documents, known values for synthetic lists, and human verification for forms. We report order-insensitive value F1 for value accuracy, plus two grounding metrics for source traceability: word- and page-level F1. Commercial VLMs perform well on short documents but often truncate record lists on long ones, while coding agents retain higher accuracy at much higher cost. LlamaExtract Agentic Plus ranks first on all three metrics, with accuracy comparable to coding agents at a fraction of the cost. Dataset and evaluation code are available on HuggingFace and GitHub.

Abstract of ExtractBench: A Benchmark for Schema-Guided Enterprise Document Extraction (arXiv:2607.29677, CC0)
53
Entries on its own leaderboard, 27 models we track

LlamaExtract Agentic Plus tops the leaderboard with 96.2%

Best score per entry from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on November 12th, 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best. Names in gray aren't in our model list: fine-tunes, agent systems, products and older models. They don't count toward leaders. The best model we track is GPT-6.1 Sol, at 95.3%.

  1. 1 LlamaExtract Agentic Plus 96.2%
  2. 2 LlamaExtract Agentic Plus (Max Effort) 96.2%
  3. 3 Reducto Deep Extract 96.1%
  4. 4 Pulse (Effort) 96.1%
  5. 5 LlamaExtract Agentic 95.7%
  6. 6 GPT-6.1 Sol low 95.3%
  7. 7 Claude Sonnet 5.5 medium 94.7%
  8. 8 KYNEX (GPT-6.1 Sol) medium 94.6%
  9. 9 GPT-6 Sol low 94.6%
  10. 10 Pulse (Non-effort) 94.5%
  11. 11 Extend Max Context + Review Agent 94.5%
  12. 12 GPT-6.1 Terra low 94.3%
  13. 13 LlamaExtract Cost-Effective 94.2%
  14. 14 KYNEX (GPT-5.5) medium 94.2%
  15. 15 GPT-5.6 Sol low 93.8%
  16. 16 Extend Performance + Review Agent 93.7%
  17. 17 GPT-5.5 low 93.3%
  18. 18 GPT-5.6 Terra low 92.3%
  19. 19 OpenAI GPT-6 Astra low 91.9%
  20. 20 GPT-5.6 Luna medium 91.2%
  21. 21 GPT-6 Luna medium 91%
  22. 22 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next off 89.9%
  23. 23 Qwen 3.8 27B off 89.8%
  24. 24 Parseur 88.5%
  25. 25 Qwen3.6 35B off 88.1%
  26. 26 Qwen3.5 35B off 88%
  27. 27 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash off 87.1%
  28. 28 Claude Opus 4.8 high 86.8%
  29. 29 Qwen3.5-9B off 86.1%
  30. 30 Claude Opus 5.5 medium 86.1%
  31. 31 Datalab (Accurate + Balanced) 85.7%
  32. 32 Reducto Extract 83.8%
  33. 33 Kimi K3 max 83.2%
  34. 34 Qwen3.5-4B off 82.4%
  35. 35 NuExtract3 off 81%
  36. 36 GLM-5.3-Flash max 80.8%
  37. 37 Google Gemini 3.8 Flash low 80.7%
  38. 38 Google Gemini 3.5 Flash low 79.8%
  39. 39 Reducto Extract (v4) 79.6%
  40. 40 Lift Datalab 9B 78.4%
  41. 41 OpenAI GPT-5.4 Nano off 74.9%
  42. 42 Gemma4 26B off 70.3%
  43. 43 Gemma 4 E4B off 69.6%
  44. 44 InternVL3.5-14B off 66.3%
  45. 45 InternVL3.5-8B off 64.6%
  46. 46 Qwen3.5-2B off 63.4%
  47. 47 Kimi-VL A3B off 57.8%
  48. 48 Gemma 4 E2B off 51.9%
  49. 49 NuExtract 2.0 8B 49.4%
  50. 50 Qwen3.5-0.8B off 46.6%
  51. 51 MiniCPM-V 4.5 off 45.9%
  52. 52 Gemma 4 12B off 45.4%
  53. 53 GLM-4.6V-Flash on 45.2%

Source: Official ExtractBench leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 LlamaExtract Agentic Plus 96.2% llamaextract_agentic_plus Official leaderboard
2 LlamaExtract Agentic Plus (Max Effort) 96.2% llamaextract_agentic_plus_max_effort Official leaderboard
3 Reducto Deep Extract 96.1% reducto_deep_extract Official leaderboard
4 Pulse (Effort) 96.1% pulse_schema_effort Official leaderboard
5 LlamaExtract Agentic 95.7% llamaextract_agentic Official leaderboard
6 GPT-6.1 Sol 95.3% low, Codex Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
7 Claude Sonnet 5.5 94.7% medium, Claude Code Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
8 KYNEX (GPT-6.1 Sol) 94.6% medium, kynex_gpt_6_1_sol Official leaderboard
9 GPT-6 Sol 94.6% low, Codex Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
10 Pulse (Non-effort) 94.5% pulse_schema_non_effort Official leaderboard
11 Extend Max Context + Review Agent 94.5% extend_extract_max Official leaderboard
12 GPT-6.1 Terra 94.3% low, Codex Oct 2026 Official leaderboard
13 LlamaExtract Cost-Effective 94.2% llamaextract_cost_effective Official leaderboard
14 KYNEX (GPT-5.5) 94.2% medium, kynex_gpt_5_5 Official leaderboard
15 GPT-5.6 Sol 93.8% low, Codex Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
16 Extend Performance + Review Agent 93.7% extend_extract Official leaderboard
17 GPT-5.5 93.3% low, Codex Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
18 GPT-5.6 Terra 92.3% low, Codex Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
19 OpenAI GPT-6 Astra 91.9% low, openai_gpt_6_astra_reasoning_low_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Official leaderboard
20 GPT-5.6 Luna 91.2% medium, Codex Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
21 GPT-6 Luna 91% medium, Codex Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
22 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next 89.9% off, qwen3_8_flash_next_fp8_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
23 Qwen 3.8 27B 89.8% off, qwen3_8_27b_fp8_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
24 Parseur 88.5% parseur_extract_v3_vision Official leaderboard
25 Qwen3.6 35B 88.1% off, qwen3_6_35b_a3b_fp8_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Official leaderboard
26 Qwen3.5 35B 88% off, qwen3_5_35b_a3b_fp8_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Official leaderboard
27 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 87.1% off, deepseek_v4_1_flash_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
28 Claude Opus 4.8 86.8% high, Claude Code May 2026 Official leaderboard
29 Qwen3.5-9B 86.1% off, qwen3_5_9b_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
30 Claude Opus 5.5 86.1% medium, Claude Code Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
31 Datalab (Accurate + Balanced) 85.7% datalab_parse_accurate_extract_balanced Official leaderboard
32 Reducto Extract 83.8% reducto_extract Official leaderboard
33 Kimi K3 83.2% max, kimi_k3_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
34 Qwen3.5-4B 82.4% off, qwen3_5_4b_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
35 NuExtract3 81% off, nuextract3_extract Official leaderboard
36 GLM-5.3-Flash 80.8% max, glm_5_3_flash_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
37 Google Gemini 3.8 Flash 80.7% low, gemini_3_8_flash_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Official leaderboard
38 Google Gemini 3.5 Flash 79.8% low, gemini_3_5_flash_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Official leaderboard
39 Reducto Extract (v4) 79.6% reducto_extract_v4 Official leaderboard
40 Lift Datalab 9B 78.4% lift_extract Official leaderboard
41 OpenAI GPT-5.4 Nano 74.9% off, openai_gpt_5_4_nano_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Official leaderboard
42 Gemma4 26B 70.3% off, gemma4_26b_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Official leaderboard
43 Gemma 4 E4B 69.6% off, gemma4_e4b_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
44 InternVL3.5-14B 66.3% off, internvl3_5_14b_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
45 InternVL3.5-8B 64.6% off, internvl3_5_8b_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
46 Qwen3.5-2B 63.4% off, qwen3_5_2b_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
47 Kimi-VL A3B 57.8% off, kimi_vl_a3b_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Official leaderboard
48 Gemma 4 E2B 51.9% off, gemma4_e2b_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
49 NuExtract 2.0 8B 49.4% nuextract_2_8b_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Official leaderboard
50 Qwen3.5-0.8B 46.6% off, qwen3_5_0_8b_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
51 MiniCPM-V 4.5 45.9% off, minicpm_v_4_5_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
52 Gemma 4 12B 45.4% off, gemma4_12b_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
53 GLM-4.6V-Flash 45.2% on, glm_4_6v_flash_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file Dec 2025 Official leaderboard

5 models have held number one on the official leaderboard since its release in July 2026

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

OpenAI Anthropic
Own leaderboard Passed 85% in Jul 2026, by GPT-5.5
GPT-6.1 Sol 95.3%

Source: Official ExtractBench leaderboard

Qwen3.5-9B on the official leaderboard passed 85% in February 2026

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

On the benchmark’s own leaderboard Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 2027 Near the ceiling (85%) GPT-6.1 Sol GPT-5.5 Qwen3.5-9B InternVL3.5-14B MiniCPM-V 4.5 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 2027 Near the ceiling (85%) GPT-6.1 Sol Qwen3.5-9B

Source: Official ExtractBench leaderboard

No lab model card reports it yet

We read the headline results of 522 launch posts from 52 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.

More in Vision

All 281 in Vision
  • MMMU In use 11.5K college-level multimodal questions across 30 subjects. Multiple-choice and open accuracy. GPT-5.1 85.4%
  • MMMU-Pro In use Harder MMMU: college-level multimodal questions with more options and vision-only inputs to remove text shortcuts. GPT-5.6 Sol 84.6%
  • CharXiv In use Chart understanding on real arXiv figures. Reasoning questions require synthesizing information from complex charts. Claude Fable 5 93.5%
  • MATH-Vision (MathVision) In use 3,040 competition math problems with visual context. Answer accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 97.7%
  • MMStar In use Models answer 1,500 human-curated image questions that cannot be solved without the image, across 6 core capabilities. Scored by accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 85.9%
  • ChartQA In use Models answer human-written and generated questions about chart images that need visual and arithmetic reasoning. Scored by relaxed accuracy with a 5 percent numeric tolerance. Command A Vision 90.9%