JobBench
130 tasks from 35 occupations workers most want delegated. Agent works through messy reference files, graded by fact-anchored binary rubrics.
Framed as an alternative to GDPval's economic-value framing. Vendor-reported scores run higher than the paper's best (45.9%).
- Made by
- University of Washington + collaborators
- Released
- May 2026
- Kind
- Tasks from real jobs
- Level
- Expert
- Scored
- Graded by a model
- Answers
- Open-ended
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
- Claude Fable 5 #11 on the capability index
- Last in a launch post
- November 2026
- Last model added
- November 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
Current benchmarks for occupational AI agents are scoped primarily by economic values, telling a replacement story. We introduce JobBench, which evaluates AI agents on the workflows that experts identify as high-priority for delegation, empowering humans based on their needs instead of replacing them with GDP value. JobBench covers 130 agentic tasks across 35 occupations. Each task is packaged as a workspace of heterogeneous reference files, requiring the agent to reason through the cluttered information streams of real professional work. Outputs are graded by a fact-anchored chain of rubrics, averaging 35.6 binary criteria per task. We evaluate 36 models; the strongest, Claude Opus 4.7 under Claude Code, reaches only 45.9 %. We hope JobBench shifts the community's target labour-market effect from replacement to enhancement: building agents that do what humans actually want delegated, not only what is most economically valuable.
GLM-5.3 leads with 61.4% among models released by August 2026
Best score per model from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on November 12th, 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best.
Muse Wonder Full leads with 75.3%, 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 August 2026, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:
- Claude Fable 5.2
-
Gemini 4 Carbon
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- and 13 more
- 1 GLM-5.3 61.4%
- 2 Claude Fable 5 Claude Opus 4.8 fallback on refusals 57.4%
- 3
Muse Spark 1.1 54.7%
- 4 Kimi K3 54.3%
- 5
Qwen 3.8 Max 52.7%
- 6 Claude Opus 4.8 48.4%
- 7 GPT-5.6 Sol 45.4%
- 8 Claude Opus 4.7 44.5%
- 9 GLM-5.2 43.4%
- 10 GPT-5.5 38.3%
- 11 Claude Sonnet 4.6 36.6%
- 12
Gemini 3.5 Flash 31.5%
- 13
Inkling 31.1%
- 14
Nemotron 3 Ultra 27.2%
- 15 Claude Sonnet 4.5 20.7%
- 16
Gemini 3.1 Pro 15.9%
Source: Official JobBench leaderboard
- 75.3
Muse Wonder Full
- 70.5
Muse Wonder
- 70.5
Inkling 2 Small
- 65.4
LongCat-2.5
- 64.9
Muse Spark 1.3
- 64.0
Qwen3.8 Max (0902)
- 62.0 MiMo-V2.6 Pro
- 61.8
Muse Spark Open
- 61.7
Tencent Hy4 preview
- 61.4 GLM-5.3
- 59.0
Step 5 Preview
- 57.4 Claude Fable 5
- 55.7
Qwen3.8 Flash
- 54.7
Muse Spark 1.1
- 54.3 Kimi K3
- 53.4
Qwen 3.8 Max
- 48.4 Claude Opus 4.8
- 45.4 GPT-5.6 Sol
- 44.5 Claude Opus 4.7
- 43.4 GLM-5.2
- 38.3 GPT-5.5
- 36.6 Claude Sonnet 4.6
- 33.4
Qwen 3.8 27B
- 31.5
Gemini 3.5 Flash
- 31.1
Inkling
- 27.2
Nemotron 3 Ultra
- 20.7 Claude Sonnet 4.5
- 15.9
Gemini 3.1 Pro
- 1
Muse Wonder Full 75.3%
- 2
Muse Wonder 70.5%
- 3
Inkling 2 Small 70.5%
- 4
LongCat-2.5 65.4%
- 5
Muse Spark 1.3 64.9%
- 6
Qwen3.8 Max (0902) 64%
- 7 MiMo-V2.6 Pro 62%
- 8
Muse Spark Open 61.8%
- 9
Tencent Hy4 preview 61.7%
- 10 GLM-5.3 61.4%
- 11
Step 5 Preview 59%
- 12 Claude Fable 5 Claude Opus 4.8 fallback on refusals 57.4%
- 13
Qwen3.8 Flash 55.7%
- 14
Muse Spark 1.1 54.7%
- 15 Kimi K3 54.3%
- 16
Qwen 3.8 Max 53.4%
- 17 Claude Opus 4.8 48.4%
- 18 GPT-5.6 Sol 45.4%
- 19 Claude Opus 4.7 44.5%
- 20 GLM-5.2 43.4%
- 21 GPT-5.5 38.3%
- 22 Claude Sonnet 4.6 36.6%
- 23
Qwen 3.8 27B 33.4%
- 24
Gemini 3.5 Flash 31.5%
- 25
Inkling 31.1%
- 26
Nemotron 3 Ultra 27.2%
- 27 Claude Sonnet 4.5 20.7%
- 28
Gemini 3.1 Pro 15.9%
Sources: Labs’ model cards and official JobBench leaderboard
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GLM-5.3 | 61.4% | OpenCode | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 2 | Claude Fable 5 | 57.4% | Claude Opus 4.8 fallback on refusals, OpenCode | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 3 | | 54.7% | OpenCode | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 4 | Kimi K3 | 54.3% | OpenCode | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 5 | | 52.7% | OpenCode | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | Claude Opus 4.8 | 48.4% | OpenCode | May 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | GPT-5.6 Sol | 45.4% | OpenCode | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 8 | Claude Opus 4.7 | 44.5% | OpenCode | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 9 | GLM-5.2 | 43.4% | OpenCode | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 10 | GPT-5.5 | 38.3% | OpenCode | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 11 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | 36.6% | OpenCode | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 12 | | 31.5% | OpenCode | May 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 13 | | 31.1% | OpenCode | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 14 | | 27.2% | OpenCode | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 15 | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | 20.7% | OpenCode | Sep 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 16 | | 15.9% | OpenCode | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 75.3% | Oct 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | | 70.5% | Oct 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | | 70.5% | Nov 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 4 | | 65.4% | Nov 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 5 | | 64.9% | Sep 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 6 | | 64% | Sep 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 7 | MiMo-V2.6 Pro | 62% | Sep 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 8 | | 61.8% | Oct 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 9 | | 61.7% | Aug 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 10 | GLM-5.3 | 61.4% | OpenCode | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 11 | | 59% | Sep 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 12 | Claude Fable 5 | 57.4% | Claude Opus 4.8 fallback on refusals, OpenCode | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 13 | | 55.7% | Aug 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 14 | | 54.7% | OpenCode | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 15 | Kimi K3 | 54.3% | OpenCode | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 16 | | 53.4% | Aug 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 17 | Claude Opus 4.8 | 48.4% | OpenCode | May 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 18 | GPT-5.6 Sol | 45.4% | OpenCode | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 19 | Claude Opus 4.7 | 44.5% | OpenCode | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 20 | GLM-5.2 | 43.4% | OpenCode | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 21 | GPT-5.5 | 38.3% | OpenCode | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 22 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | 36.6% | OpenCode | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 23 | | 33.4% | Aug 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 24 | | 31.5% | OpenCode | May 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 25 | | 31.1% | OpenCode | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 26 | | 27.2% | OpenCode | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 27 | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | 20.7% | OpenCode | Sep 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 28 | | 15.9% | OpenCode | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
Labs report scores for 15 models in their cards. Switch the scores above to rank them together.
4 models have held number one on the official leaderboard since its release in May 2026 7 models have held number one with claims included since its release in May 2026
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release. We draw one row each for the benchmark’s own leaderboard and what labs claim in their cards.
Sources: Official JobBench leaderboard and 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.
Sources: Official JobBench leaderboard and labs’ model cards
8 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.
| Date | Launch post | Score | As the post writes it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 5, 2026 | 70.5 | JobBench | |
| Nov 2, 2026 | 65.4 | JobBench | |
| Oct 15, 2026 | 61.8 | JobBench | |
| Oct 12, 2026 | 70.5 | JobBench | |
| Oct 12, 2026 | 75.3 | JobBench | |
| Sep 22, 2026 | MiMo-V2.6 Pro | 62 | JobBench |
| Sep 20, 2026 | 59 | JobBench | |
| Sep 2, 2026 | 64 | Professional job tasks, JobBench | |
| Sep 2, 2026 | 64.9 | JobBench (Professional tool use) | |
| Aug 28, 2026 | 61.7 | JobBench | |
| Aug 26, 2026 | 55.7 | Professional job tasks JobBench | |
| Aug 14, 2026 | 33.4 | Professional job tasks JobBench | |
| Aug 3, 2026 | 53.4 | JobBench | |
| Jul 16, 2026 | Kimi K3 | 54.3 | JobBench |
| Jul 9, 2026 | 54.7 | JobBench (Professional tool use) |
5 system cards report it, from 3 labs
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.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 12, 2026 | | 70.5 | JobBench mean reward, Muse Wonder (max) (capabilities table image, page 3) | Capabilities |
| Oct 12, 2026 | | 75.3 | JobBench mean reward, Muse Wonder Full (max) (capabilities table image, page 3) | Capabilities |
| Sep 22, 2026 | MiMo-V2.6 Pro technical report | 62 | JobBench (Table 3) | Capabilities |
| Jul 27, 2026 | Kimi K3 technical report | 54.3 | JobBench, cited from the official leaderboard (Table 2) | Capabilities |
| Jul 9, 2026 | | 54.7 | JobBench, OpenCode harness, Grok 4.3 judge (Figure 44) | Capabilities |
3 lab claims next to the leaderboard
Each score a lab reported for its own model, beside the same model's best score on the leaderboard. Gaps mostly come from different harnesses, effort levels and task subsets. 2 of them match, which usually means one side copied the other. Every benchmark.
| Model | Lab says | Board says | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| | 53.4% JobBench | 52.7% Leaderboard, OpenCode | +0.7 pts |
| | 54.7% JobBench (Professional tool use) | 54.7% Leaderboard, OpenCode | Same |
| Kimi K3 | 54.3% JobBench | 54.3% Leaderboard, OpenCode | Same |
More in Economic work
- GDPval In use Real work tasks from 44 occupations with reference files. Experts blindly compare model deliverables with expert work. Metric is win-or-tie rate.
Seed2.1 Pro 87.9%
- GDPval-AA v2.1 In use Agents with shell and web access complete 220 GDPval gold tasks from 44 occupations. Blind pairwise comparisons give Elo ratings. Claude Opus 5.5 1,846
- AA-Briefcase v1.1 In use Version 1.1 of Artificial Analysis's multi-hour office work evaluation, with Elo ratings fitted by Crowd-BT. Claude Opus 5.5 1,822
- CoWorkBench In use Agent completes long-horizon productivity tasks across computer science, finance, law and medicine. Qwen in-house scoring (method unpublished). Claude Fable 5 75.9%
- OfficeQA In use Grounded reasoning over a large corpus of U.S. Treasury Bulletin documents: locate tables and compute precise numeric answers. Claude Opus 4.7 86.3%
- SpreadsheetBench In use Real spreadsheet manipulation questions from Excel forums. Output workbook is checked cell-by-cell against reference solutions.
MiniMax-M3 89.3%