MM-BrowseComp
Browsing agents answer 400 hand-written questions whose evidence sits in web images and videos. Each question has a checklist for analysis of the reasoning path.
Accepted to EMNLP 2026. The paper evaluates 27 models.
- Made by
- ByteDance Seed and collaborators (Li et al.)
- Released
- August 2025
- Kind
- Deep research
- Level
- Expert
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Short answer
- Strongest model tested
-
Gemini 3 Pro #55 on the capability index
- Last in a launch post
- June 2026, dropped before it saturated
- Last model added
- June 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
AI agents with advanced reasoning and tool-use capabilities have demonstrated impressive performance in web browsing for deep search. However, existing benchmarks such as BrowseComp primarily focus on textual content, overlooking the prevalence of multimodal content. To bridge this gap, we introduce MM-BrowseComp, a novel benchmark comprising 400 challenging, hand-crafted questions designed to evaluate multimodal retrieval and reasoning capabilities. Unlike prior work, MM-BrowseComp incorporates visual prompts and necessitates the extraction of key evidence from web images and videos to complete questions, rendering text-only approaches insufficient. Additionally, we provide a verified checklist for each question, enabling fine-grained analysis of multimodal dependencies and reasoning paths. Our comprehensive evaluation of 27 state-of-the-art models reveals that even leading models like GPT-5-High with tools achieve only 24.25% accuracy, highlighting the suboptimal multimodal browsing capabilities, establishing MM-BrowseComp as a rigorous new standard for the field.
GPT-5 leads with 24.3% among models released by February 2026
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.
MiMo-V2-Omni leads with 52%, 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 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 16 more
- 24.3 GPT-5
- 22.8 o3
- 18.8
Gemini 3 Pro
- 18.5
Gemini 3 Flash
- 7.00 o4-mini
- 6.00 Gemini-2.5-Pro (snapshot unspecified)
- 5.75 Gemini-2.5-Flash (snapshot unspecified)
- 5.00 Qwen3-VL-235B-Thinking
- 4.75 GPT-4.1
- 4.25
MiniMax-M2.5
- 4.00 GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified)
- 3.25 GLM-5
- 2.25 Llama-4-Maverick-17B-Instruct
- 2.00 WebDancer-32B
- 1.75
Qwen2.5-VL-72B
- 1.00
Qwen2.5-VL-32B
- 0.75 GPT-4o-mini (snapshot unspecified)
- 0.0
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
- 1 GPT-5 tools on; high effort 24.3%
- 2 o3 tools on 22.8%
- 3
Gemini 3 Pro tools on 18.8%
- 4
Gemini 3 Flash tools on 18.5%
- 5 o4-mini tools off; high effort 7.00%
- 6 Gemini-2.5-Pro (snapshot unspecified) tools on 6.00%
- 7 Gemini-2.5-Flash (snapshot unspecified) tools on 5.75%
- 8 Qwen3-VL-235B-Thinking tools off 5.00%
- 9 GPT-4.1 tools off 4.75%
- 10
MiniMax-M2.5 tools off 4.25%
- 11 GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified) tools on 4.00%
- 12 GLM-5 tools off 3.25%
- 13 Llama-4-Maverick-17B-Instruct tools off 2.25%
- 14 WebDancer-32B tools on 2.00%
- 15
Qwen2.5-VL-72B tools off 1.75%
- 16
Qwen2.5-VL-32B tools off 1.00%
- 17 GPT-4o-mini (snapshot unspecified) tools off 0.75%
- 18
Qwen2.5-VL-7B tools off 0%
Source: Official MM-BrowseComp leaderboard
- 1 MiMo-V2-Omni 52%
- 2
Seed2.0 Pro 48.8%
- 3
Seed1.8 46.3%
- 4
Qwen3.7-Plus 46.3%
- 5 GPT-5 tools on; high effort 24.3%
- 6 o3 tools on 22.8%
- 7
Gemini 3 Pro tools on 18.8%
- 8
Gemini 3 Flash tools on 18.5%
- 9 GLM-4.6V 7.60%
- 10 o4-mini tools off; high effort 7.00%
- 11 GPT-4.1 tools off 4.75%
- 12
MiniMax-M2.5 tools off 4.25%
- 13 GLM-5 tools off 3.25%
- 14
Qwen2.5-VL-72B tools off 1.75%
- 15
Qwen2.5-VL-32B tools off 1.00%
- 16
Qwen2.5-VL-7B tools off 0%
Sources: Labs’ model cards and official MM-BrowseComp leaderboard
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GPT-5 | 24.3% | tools on; high effort | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 2 | o3 | 22.8% | tools on | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 3 | | 18.8% | tools on | Nov 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 4 | | 18.5% | tools on | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 5 | o4-mini | 7.00% | tools off; high effort | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | Gemini-2.5-Pro (snapshot unspecified) | 6.00% | tools on | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | Gemini-2.5-Flash (snapshot unspecified) | 5.75% | tools on | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | Qwen3-VL-235B-Thinking | 5.00% | tools off | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | GPT-4.1 | 4.75% | tools off | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 10 | | 4.25% | tools off | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 11 | GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified) | 4.00% | tools on, Agent-R1 | Official leaderboard | |
| 12 | GLM-5 | 3.25% | tools off | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 13 | Llama-4-Maverick-17B-Instruct | 2.25% | tools off | Official leaderboard | |
| 14 | WebDancer-32B | 2.00% | tools on, WebDancer | Official leaderboard | |
| 15 | | 1.75% | tools off | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 16 | | 1.00% | tools off | Mar 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 17 | GPT-4o-mini (snapshot unspecified) | 0.75% | tools off | Official leaderboard | |
| 18 | | 0% | tools off | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MiMo-V2-Omni | 52% | Mar 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | | 48.8% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | | 46.3% | Dec 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 4 | | 46.3% | Jun 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 5 | GPT-5 | 24.3% | tools on; high effort | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | o3 | 22.8% | tools on | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | | 18.8% | tools on | Nov 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 8 | | 18.5% | tools on | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 9 | GLM-4.6V | 7.60% | Dec 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 10 | o4-mini | 7.00% | tools off; high effort | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 11 | GPT-4.1 | 4.75% | tools off | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 12 | | 4.25% | tools off | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 13 | GLM-5 | 3.25% | tools off | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 14 | | 1.75% | tools off | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 15 | | 1.00% | tools off | Mar 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 16 | | 0% | tools off | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
Labs report scores for 5 models in their cards. Switch the scores above to rank them together.
More effort adds a median 17 points
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.
Source: Official MM-BrowseComp leaderboard
| Model | Effort | Harness | Score | Cost per task | Output tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-5 | tools on; high effort | 24.3% | |||
| o3 | tools on | 22.8% | |||
| | tools on | 18.8% | |||
| | tools on | 18.5% | |||
| | tools off | 10% | |||
| GPT-5 | tools off; high effort | 7.75% | |||
| o4-mini | tools off; high effort | 7.00% | |||
| | tools off | 6.25% | |||
| o4-mini | tools off | 5.75% | |||
| GPT-4.1 | tools off | 4.75% | |||
| | tools off | 4.25% | |||
| GLM-5 | tools off | 3.25% | |||
| | tools off | 1.75% | |||
| | tools on | Agent-R1 | 1.75% | ||
| | tools on | OWL | 1.75% | ||
| | tools on | DeerFlow | 1.75% | ||
| | tools on | WebDancer | 1.00% | ||
| | tools off | 1.00% | |||
| | tools off | 0% |
2 models have held number one on the official leaderboard since its release in August 2025 5 models have held number one with claims included since its release in August 2025
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 MM-BrowseComp 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 MM-BrowseComp leaderboard and labs’ model cards
Labs headline it less often now, last in June 2026
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 1, 2026 | 46.3 | MMBC (with search) | |
| Mar 18, 2026 | MiMo-V2-Omni | 52 | MM-BrowserComp |
| Feb 14, 2026 | 48.8 | MM-BrowseComp | |
| Dec 18, 2025 | 46.3 | MM-BrowseComp | |
| Dec 8, 2025 | GLM-4.6V | 7.6 | MMBrowseComp |
2 system cards report it, from 1 lab
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 21, 2026 | | 46.3 | MM-BrowseComp (Table 4) | Capabilities |
| Feb 14, 2026 | | 48.8 | MM-BrowseComp (Table 11) | Capabilities |
More in Tool use
- AutomationBench In use Agent completes end-to-end business workflows inside a simulated company exposing dozens of REST APIs. Graded on resulting state.
Gemini 4 Carbon 53.9%
- MCP Atlas In use Multi-step workflows over real MCP servers. Scores tool-use competency on realistic tasks.
Gemini 4 Argon 90.7%
- BFCL V4 In use Models call functions and tools, including multi-turn agentic tasks with web search and memory. Checked against expected calls and outcomes.
Qwen3.7-Max 75%
- τ³-bench Banking In use Agents act as banking customer-service reps over many turns with a simulated user, following policy. Pass^1 on the final database state.
Qwen 3.8 Max 55.1%
- Toolathlon-Verified In use 108 long-horizon tasks across 32 apps through about 600 MCP tools. Execution-based checkers inspect final environment state. GLM-5.3-Flash 78.4%
- DeepSearchQA In use Questions that need multi-step search and synthesis. Final answers graded against references. Kimi K3 95%