Benchmark Almanac

FinanceReasoning

DeepSeek-R1 (snapshot unspecified) 88.1% tops its leaderboard Gemini 2.0 Pro 86.3% leads the models we track
Ring-1T 87.4% leads since October 2025
Only in system cards

Models solve financial numerical reasoning problems that need one or more finance formulas. Answers are numbers checked against reference Python solutions.

The paper was accepted to ACL 2025 and includes 238 Hard problems. Ant Group reports it in the Ring-1T technical report.

Released
June 2025
Kind
Finance
Level
University
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Short answer
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
Gemini 2.0 Pro #139 on the capability index
Last in a system card
October 2025
Last model added
October 2025
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

We introduce FinanceReasoning, a novel benchmark designed to evaluate the reasoning capabilities of large reasoning models (LRMs) in financial numerical reasoning problems. Compared to existing benchmarks, our work provides three key advancements. (1) Credibility: We update 15.6% of the questions from four public datasets, annotating 908 new questions with detailed Python solutions and rigorously refining evaluation standards. This enables an accurate assessment of the reasoning improvements of LRMs. (2) Comprehensiveness: FinanceReasoning covers 67.8% of financial concepts and formulas, significantly surpassing existing datasets. Additionally, we construct 3,133 Python-formatted functions, which enhances LRMs' financial reasoning capabilities through refined knowledge (e.g., 83.2% → 91.6% for GPT-4o). (3) Challenge: Models are required to apply multiple financial formulas for precise numerical reasoning on 238 Hard problems. The best-performing model (i.e., OpenAI o1 with PoT) achieves 89.1% accuracy, yet LRMs still face challenges in numerical precision. We demonstrate that combining Reasoner and Programmer models can effectively enhance LRMs' performance (e.g., 83.2% → 87.8% for DeepSeek-R1). Our work paves the way for future research on evaluating and improving LRMs in domain-specific complex reasoning tasks.

Abstract of FinanceReasoning: Benchmarking Financial Numerical Reasoning More Credible, Comprehensive and Challenging (arXiv:2506.05828, CC0)
13
Entries on its own leaderboard, 6 models we track
1
System card reports it, from 1 lab

DeepSeek-R1 (snapshot unspecified) tops the leaderboard with 88.1%

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. Every run is in the next chart. 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 Gemini 2.0 Pro, at 86.3%.

Ring-1T leads with 87.4%, claims included

Best score per model from every source, including labs’ own numbers and claims Epoch AI collected from reports and papers. Labs pick their own settings, so a claim can beat an independent run of the same model.

The newest model with a score here came out in February 2025, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:

  1. 1 DeepSeek-R1 (snapshot unspecified) PoT 88.1%
  2. 2 OpenAI o3-mini PoT 86.9%
  3. 3 Claude 3.5 Sonnet (snapshot unspecified) PoT 86.7%
  4. 4 GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified) PoT 86.5%
  5. 5 OpenAI o1 CoT 86.3%
  6. 6 Gemini 2.0 Pro PoT 86.3%
  7. 7 Qwen2.5-Max PoT 86%
  8. 8 OpenAI o1-mini PoT 85.8%
  9. 9 Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking Jan 2025, PoT 85.1%
  10. 10 Llama 3.1-405B PoT 81.2%
  11. 11 DeepSeek-V3 (snapshot unspecified) PoT 80.7%
  12. 12 Llama 3.3 70B PoT 80.7%
  13. 13 QwQ-32B-Preview CoT 76%

Source: Official FinanceReasoning leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 DeepSeek-R1 (snapshot unspecified) 88.1% PoT Official leaderboard
2 OpenAI o3-mini 86.9% PoT Official leaderboard
3 Claude 3.5 Sonnet (snapshot unspecified) 86.7% PoT Official leaderboard
4 GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified) 86.5% PoT Official leaderboard
5 OpenAI o1 86.3% CoT Official leaderboard
6 Gemini 2.0 Pro 86.3% PoT Feb 2025 Official leaderboard
7 Qwen2.5-Max 86% PoT Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
8 OpenAI o1-mini 85.8% PoT Official leaderboard
9 Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking Jan 2025 85.1% PoT Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
10 Llama 3.1-405B 81.2% PoT Jul 2024 Official leaderboard
11 DeepSeek-V3 (snapshot unspecified) 80.7% PoT Official leaderboard
12 Llama 3.3 70B 80.7% PoT Dec 2024 Official leaderboard
13 QwQ-32B-Preview 76% CoT Nov 2024 Official leaderboard
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Ring-1T 87.4% Oct 2025 Lab model card
2 Gemini 2.0 Pro 86.3% PoT Feb 2025 Official leaderboard
3 Qwen2.5-Max 86% PoT Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
4 Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking Jan 2025 85.1% PoT Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
5 Llama 3.1-405B 81.2% PoT Jul 2024 Official leaderboard
6 Llama 3.3 70B 80.7% PoT Dec 2024 Official leaderboard
7 QwQ-32B-Preview 76% CoT Nov 2024 Official leaderboard

Labs report scores for 1 model in their cards. Switch the scores above to rank them together.

Scores at each effort level

Models the leaderboard ran at two or more effort levels. We don’t have enough cost data here to say what the extra effort costs.

Lowest effort to highest, light to dark
Gemini 2.0 Pro
CoT PoT
86.3%
Qwen2.5-Max
CoT PoT
86%
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking
CoT PoT
85.1%
Llama 3.1-405B
CoT PoT
81.2%
Llama 3.3 70B
CoT PoT
80.7%
QwQ-32B-Preview
PoT CoT
76%

Source: Official FinanceReasoning leaderboard

ModelEffortHarnessScoreCost per taskOutput tokens
Gemini 2.0 Pro PoT 86.3%
Qwen2.5-Max PoT 86%
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking Jan 2025 PoT 85.1%
Gemini 2.0 Pro CoT 82.6%
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking Jan 2025 CoT 81.5%
Llama 3.1-405B PoT 81.2%
Llama 3.3 70B PoT 80.7%
Qwen2.5-Max CoT 80.6%
QwQ-32B-Preview CoT 76%
Llama 3.1-405B CoT 72.5%
Llama 3.3 70B CoT 71%
QwQ-32B-Preview PoT 69.8%

Number one over time 2 models have held number one with claims included since its release in June 2025

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

Google DeepMind
Own leaderboard Passed 85% in Jun 2025, by Gemini 2.0 Pro

Source: Official FinanceReasoning leaderboard

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking on the official leaderboard passed 85% in January 2025

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 Reported by the lab in its model card Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Ring-1T Gemini 2.0 Pro Llama 3.1-405B 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Ring-1T Llama 3.1-405B

Sources: Official FinanceReasoning leaderboard and labs’ model cards

Labs report it only in system cards

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

One system card reports it

Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
Oct 21, 2025 Ring-1T technical report 87.4 FinanceReasoning (Table 1) Capabilities

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%