ExtractBench
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.
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%.
- 96.2 LlamaExtract Agentic Plus
- 96.2 LlamaExtract Agentic Plus (Max Effort)
- 96.1 Reducto Deep Extract
- 96.1 Pulse (Effort)
- 95.7 LlamaExtract Agentic
- 95.3 GPT-6.1 Sol
- 94.7 Claude Sonnet 5.5
- 94.6 KYNEX (GPT-6.1 Sol)
- 94.6 GPT-6 Sol
- 94.5 Pulse (Non-effort)
- 94.5 Extend Max Context + Review Agent
- 94.3 GPT-6.1 Terra
- 94.2 LlamaExtract Cost-Effective
- 94.2 KYNEX (GPT-5.5)
- 93.8 GPT-5.6 Sol
- 93.7 Extend Performance + Review Agent
- 93.3 GPT-5.5
- 92.3 GPT-5.6 Terra
- 91.9 OpenAI GPT-6 Astra
- 91.2 GPT-5.6 Luna
- 91.0 GPT-6 Luna
- 89.9
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- 89.8
Qwen 3.8 27B
- 88.5 Parseur
- 88.1 Qwen3.6 35B
- 88.0 Qwen3.5 35B
- 87.1
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- 86.8 Claude Opus 4.8
- 86.1
Qwen3.5-9B
- 86.1 Claude Opus 5.5
- 85.7 Datalab (Accurate + Balanced)
- 83.8 Reducto Extract
- 83.2 Kimi K3
- 82.4
Qwen3.5-4B
- 81.0 NuExtract3
- 80.8 GLM-5.3-Flash
- 80.7 Google Gemini 3.8 Flash
- 79.8 Google Gemini 3.5 Flash
- 79.6 Reducto Extract (v4)
- 78.4 Lift Datalab 9B
- 74.9 OpenAI GPT-5.4 Nano
- 70.3 Gemma4 26B
- 69.6
Gemma 4 E4B
- 66.3
InternVL3.5-14B
- 64.6
InternVL3.5-8B
- 63.4
Qwen3.5-2B
- 57.8 Kimi-VL A3B
- 51.9
Gemma 4 E2B
- 49.4 NuExtract 2.0 8B
- 46.6
Qwen3.5-0.8B
- 45.9
MiniCPM-V 4.5
- 45.4
Gemma 4 12B
- 45.2 GLM-4.6V-Flash
- 1 LlamaExtract Agentic Plus 96.2%
- 2 LlamaExtract Agentic Plus (Max Effort) 96.2%
- 3 Reducto Deep Extract 96.1%
- 4 Pulse (Effort) 96.1%
- 5 LlamaExtract Agentic 95.7%
- 6 GPT-6.1 Sol low 95.3%
- 7 Claude Sonnet 5.5 medium 94.7%
- 8 KYNEX (GPT-6.1 Sol) medium 94.6%
- 9 GPT-6 Sol low 94.6%
- 10 Pulse (Non-effort) 94.5%
- 11 Extend Max Context + Review Agent 94.5%
- 12 GPT-6.1 Terra low 94.3%
- 13 LlamaExtract Cost-Effective 94.2%
- 14 KYNEX (GPT-5.5) medium 94.2%
- 15 GPT-5.6 Sol low 93.8%
- 16 Extend Performance + Review Agent 93.7%
- 17 GPT-5.5 low 93.3%
- 18 GPT-5.6 Terra low 92.3%
- 19 OpenAI GPT-6 Astra low 91.9%
- 20 GPT-5.6 Luna medium 91.2%
- 21 GPT-6 Luna medium 91%
- 22
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next off 89.9%
- 23
Qwen 3.8 27B off 89.8%
- 24 Parseur 88.5%
- 25 Qwen3.6 35B off 88.1%
- 26 Qwen3.5 35B off 88%
- 27
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash off 87.1%
- 28 Claude Opus 4.8 high 86.8%
- 29
Qwen3.5-9B off 86.1%
- 30 Claude Opus 5.5 medium 86.1%
- 31 Datalab (Accurate + Balanced) 85.7%
- 32 Reducto Extract 83.8%
- 33 Kimi K3 max 83.2%
- 34
Qwen3.5-4B off 82.4%
- 35 NuExtract3 off 81%
- 36 GLM-5.3-Flash max 80.8%
- 37 Google Gemini 3.8 Flash low 80.7%
- 38 Google Gemini 3.5 Flash low 79.8%
- 39 Reducto Extract (v4) 79.6%
- 40 Lift Datalab 9B 78.4%
- 41 OpenAI GPT-5.4 Nano off 74.9%
- 42 Gemma4 26B off 70.3%
- 43
Gemma 4 E4B off 69.6%
- 44
InternVL3.5-14B off 66.3%
- 45
InternVL3.5-8B off 64.6%
- 46
Qwen3.5-2B off 63.4%
- 47 Kimi-VL A3B off 57.8%
- 48
Gemma 4 E2B off 51.9%
- 49 NuExtract 2.0 8B 49.4%
- 50
Qwen3.5-0.8B off 46.6%
- 51
MiniCPM-V 4.5 off 45.9%
- 52
Gemma 4 12B off 45.4%
- 53 GLM-4.6V-Flash on 45.2%
Source: Official ExtractBench leaderboard
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | | 89.9% | off, qwen3_8_flash_next_fp8_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 23 | | 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 | | 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 | | 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 | | 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 | | 69.6% | off, gemma4_e4b_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 44 | | 66.3% | off, internvl3_5_14b_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 45 | | 64.6% | off, internvl3_5_8b_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 46 | | 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 | | 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 | | 46.6% | off, qwen3_5_0_8b_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 51 | | 45.9% | off, minicpm_v_4_5_vllm_extract_oneshot_structured_output_file | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 52 | | 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.
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.
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
- 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%