Benchmark Almanac

Legora BAR

Claude Opus 5.5 106.0 leads since September 2026
Not in model cards

Models work private legal cases end to end inside Legora's agent harness, with the matter's documents and templates. An LLM judge scores outputs against rubrics written by lawyers.

Cases span 30 practice areas and seven task families. Results are shown relative to the average of the models run, 17 models in the 2026-10 edition. Legora reruns it as models and harness change.

Made by
Legora
Released
September 2026
Kind
Law
Level
Expert
Scored
Graded by a model
Answers
Agent task
Tasks
Kept private
Strongest model tested
GPT-6 Astra #3 on the capability index
Last model added
October 2026
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026
17
Models scored on its own leaderboard

Claude Opus 5.5 leads with 106.0

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.

  1. 1 Claude Opus 5.5 2026-10 106.0
  2. 2 Muse Wonder 2026-10 105.0
  3. 3 Claude Fable 5.1 2026-10 104.0
  4. 4 Gemini 3.8 Flash 2026-10 103.0
  5. 5 Mistral Large 4 2026-10 103.0
  6. 6 Kimi K3 2026-10 102.0
  7. 7 GLM-5.3 2026-10 102.0
  8. 8 Grok 4.7 2026-10 102.0
  9. 9 Claude Sonnet 5.5 2026-10 102.0
  10. 10 GPT-6.1 Sol 2026-10 102.0
  11. 11 Muse Spark 1.3 2026-10 101.0
  12. 12 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 2026-10 100.0
  13. 13 Gemini 4 Argon 2026-10 99.0
  14. 14 GPT-6 Astra 2026-10 96.0
  15. 15 GLM-5.3-Flash 2026-10 94.0
  16. 16 DeepSeek-V4-Pro 2026-10 93.0
  17. 17 GPT-6 Luna 2026-10 88.0

Source: Official Legora BAR leaderboard

#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Claude Opus 5.5 106.0 2026-10 Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
2 Muse Wonder 105.0 2026-10 Oct 2026 Official leaderboard
3 Claude Fable 5.1 104.0 2026-10 Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
4 Gemini 3.8 Flash 103.0 2026-10 Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
5 Mistral Large 4 103.0 2026-10 Oct 2026 Official leaderboard
6 Kimi K3 102.0 2026-10 Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
7 GLM-5.3 102.0 2026-10 Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
8 Grok 4.7 102.0 2026-10 Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
9 Claude Sonnet 5.5 102.0 2026-10 Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
10 GPT-6.1 Sol 102.0 2026-10 Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
11 Muse Spark 1.3 101.0 2026-10 Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
12 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 100.0 2026-10 Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
13 Gemini 4 Argon 99.0 2026-10 Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
14 GPT-6 Astra 96.0 2026-10 Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
15 GLM-5.3-Flash 94.0 2026-10 Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
16 DeepSeek-V4-Pro 93.0 2026-10 Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
17 GPT-6 Luna 88.0 2026-10 Sep 2026 Official leaderboard

Quality vs. median time per case

Both axes are relative indexes where 100 is the average of the models run; lower time is faster. The line joins the runs that no other run beats on both measures. We redrew this chart from the numbers on the official leaderboard.

80 90 100 110 120 0100200300400 Median time per case vs average (index), lower is better Quality vs average (index) DeepSeek-V4-Pro (2026-10): Quality vs average 93 index, median time per case vs average 56 index Kimi K3 (2026-10): Quality vs average 102 index, median time per case vs average 82 index GLM-5.3 (2026-10): Quality vs average 102 index, median time per case vs average 83 index GLM-5.3-Flash (2026-10): Quality vs average 94 index, median time per case vs average 93 index Claude Fable 5.1 (2026-10): Quality vs average 104 index, median time per case vs average 79 index Gemini 3.8 Flash (2026-10): Quality vs average 103 index, median time per case vs average 83 index Muse Spark 1.3 (2026-10): Quality vs average 101 index, median time per case vs average 34 index GPT-6 Astra (2026-10): Quality vs average 96 index, median time per case vs average 100 index DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (2026-10): Quality vs average 100 index, median time per case vs average 48 index Grok 4.7 (2026-10): Quality vs average 102 index, median time per case vs average 92 index GPT-6 Luna (2026-10): Quality vs average 88 index, median time per case vs average 101 index Claude Sonnet 5.5 (2026-10): Quality vs average 102 index, median time per case vs average 164 index GPT-6.1 Sol (2026-10): Quality vs average 102 index, median time per case vs average 78 index Gemini 4 Argon (2026-10): Quality vs average 99 index, median time per case vs average 121 index Mistral Large 4 (2026-10): Quality vs average 103 index, median time per case vs average 330 index Claude Opus 5.5 (2026-10): Quality vs average 106 index, median time per case vs average 123 index Muse Wonder (2026-10): Quality vs average 105 index, median time per case vs average 32 index Claude Opus 5.5 (2026-10)Muse Wonder (2026-10) 80 90 100 110 120 0100200300400 Median time per case vs average (index), lower is better Quality vs average (index) DeepSeek-V4-Pro (2026-10): Quality vs average 93 index, median time per case vs average 56 index Kimi K3 (2026-10): Quality vs average 102 index, median time per case vs average 82 index GLM-5.3 (2026-10): Quality vs average 102 index, median time per case vs average 83 index GLM-5.3-Flash (2026-10): Quality vs average 94 index, median time per case vs average 93 index Claude Fable 5.1 (2026-10): Quality vs average 104 index, median time per case vs average 79 index Gemini 3.8 Flash (2026-10): Quality vs average 103 index, median time per case vs average 83 index Muse Spark 1.3 (2026-10): Quality vs average 101 index, median time per case vs average 34 index GPT-6 Astra (2026-10): Quality vs average 96 index, median time per case vs average 100 index DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (2026-10): Quality vs average 100 index, median time per case vs average 48 index Grok 4.7 (2026-10): Quality vs average 102 index, median time per case vs average 92 index GPT-6 Luna (2026-10): Quality vs average 88 index, median time per case vs average 101 index Claude Sonnet 5.5 (2026-10): Quality vs average 102 index, median time per case vs average 164 index GPT-6.1 Sol (2026-10): Quality vs average 102 index, median time per case vs average 78 index Gemini 4 Argon (2026-10): Quality vs average 99 index, median time per case vs average 121 index Mistral Large 4 (2026-10): Quality vs average 103 index, median time per case vs average 330 index Claude Opus 5.5 (2026-10): Quality vs average 106 index, median time per case vs average 123 index Muse Wonder (2026-10): Quality vs average 105 index, median time per case vs average 32 index Claude Opus 5.5 (2026-10)Muse Wonder (2026-10)
ModelSettingQuality vs averageMedian time per case vs average
Claude Opus 5.5 2026-10 106 index 123 index
Muse Wonder 2026-10 105 index 32 index
Claude Fable 5.1 2026-10 104 index 79 index
Gemini 3.8 Flash 2026-10 103 index 83 index
Mistral Large 4 2026-10 103 index 330 index
GPT-6.1 Sol 2026-10 102 index 78 index
Kimi K3 2026-10 102 index 82 index
GLM-5.3 2026-10 102 index 83 index
Grok 4.7 2026-10 102 index 92 index
Claude Sonnet 5.5 2026-10 102 index 164 index
Muse Spark 1.3 2026-10 101 index 34 index
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 2026-10 100 index 48 index
Gemini 4 Argon 2026-10 99 index 121 index
GPT-6 Astra 2026-10 96 index 100 index
GLM-5.3-Flash 2026-10 94 index 93 index
DeepSeek-V4-Pro 2026-10 93 index 56 index
GPT-6 Luna 2026-10 88 index 101 index

2 models have held number one on the official leaderboard since its release in September 2026

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

Anthropic
Own leaderboard 2 leaders

Source: Official Legora BAR leaderboard

Scores over time

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
85.0 90.0 95.0 100.0 105.0 110.0 2026 85.0 90.0 95.0 100.0 105.0 110.0 2026

Source: Official Legora BAR 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 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%