Benchmark Almanac

SaaS-Bench

Claude Opus 5 31.1% leads since July 2026
In use

106 long-horizon GUI workflows across 23 locally deployed real SaaS apps. Scored from app databases with weighted checkpoints and full-resolution rate.

The best agent fully completed under 4% of tasks at launch. Release v1.1 on October 2nd, 2026 kept the 106 tasks, fixed verifiers and task text, and added native agent harnesses. The v1.1 board reports Resolved Score.

Released
May 2026
Kind
Web browsing
Level
University
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Agent task
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
Claude Opus 5 #10 on the capability index
Last in a launch post
July 2026
Last model added
August 2026
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

Computer-Using Agents (CUAs) are rapidly extending large language models (LLMs) beyond text-based reasoning toward action execution in more complex environments, such as web browsers and graphical user interfaces (GUIs). However, existing web and GUI agent benchmarks often rely on simplified settings, isolated tasks, or short-horizon interactions, making it difficult to assess capabilities of agents in realistic professional workflows. Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) environments are a natural choice for CUA evaluation, as they host a large share of modern digital work and naturally involve dynamic system states, cross-application coordination, domain-specific knowledge, and long-horizon dependencies. To this end, we introduce SaaS-Bench, a benchmark built on 23 deployable SaaS systems across six professional domains, containing 106 tasks grounded in realistic work scenarios. These tasks require long-horizon execution, cover both text-only and multimodal settings, and are evaluated with weighted verification checkpoints that measure strict task completion and partial progress. Experiments show that representative LLM-based agents struggle on SaaS-Bench, with even the strongest model completing fewer than 4% of tasks end-to-end, exposing limitations in planning, state tracking, cross-application context maintenance, and error recovery. Code are available at https://github.com/UniPat-AI/SaaS-Bench for reproduction.

Abstract of SaaS-Bench: Can Computer-Use Agents Leverage Real-World SaaS to Solve Professional Workflows? (arXiv:2605.15777, CC0)
5
Entries on its own leaderboard, 4 models we track
1
Launch post lists it, from 1 lab
1
System card reports it, from 1 lab

Claude Opus 5 leads with 31.1% among models released by August 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.

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:

  1. 1 Claude Opus 5 31.1%
  2. 2 GPT-5.6 Sol 29.2%
  3. 3 Pine Computer 27.4%
  4. 4 Kimi K3 24.5%
  5. 5 Qwen 3.8 Max 23.6%

Source: Official SaaS-Bench leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 Claude Opus 5 31.1% Claude Code Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
2 GPT-5.6 Sol 29.2% Codex Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
3 Pine Computer 27.4% Pine Computer Runtime (PCR) Official leaderboard
4 Kimi K3 24.5% Kimi-CLI Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
5 Qwen 3.8 Max 23.6% Qwen Code Aug 2026 Official leaderboard

The best score, 31.1%, costs $27 a task

Runs on the cost frontier score higher than any run that's cheaper. The costs are the leaderboard's own estimates, so compare them only within this benchmark.

OpenAI Moonshot AI Anthropic Qwen Cost frontier One model at each effort level
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% $1.00 $2.00 $5.00 $10 $20 $50 $100 Cost per task, log scale Claude Opus 5 GPT-5.6 Sol Kimi K3 Qwen 3.8 Max Qwen 3.8 Max 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% $1.00 $10 $100 Cost per task, log scale Claude Opus 5 Kimi K3

Source: Official SaaS-Bench leaderboard

ModelEffortHarnessScoreCost per taskOutput tokens
Claude Opus 5 Claude Code 31.1% $27
GPT-5.6 Sol Codex 29.2% $21
Kimi K3 Kimi-CLI 24.5% $9.40
Qwen 3.8 Max Qwen Code 23.6% $5.10
Claude Opus 5 Browser-Use (Open-Source) 21.7% $20
GPT-5.6 Sol Browser-Use (Open-Source) 17.9% $15
Kimi K3 Browser-Use (Open-Source) 17% $6.80
Qwen 3.8 Max Browser-Use (Open-Source) 8.50% $2.50

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

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

OpenAI Anthropic
Own leaderboard Not tested since Aug 2026

Source: Official SaaS-Bench 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 Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Near the ceiling (85%) Claude Opus 5 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Near the ceiling (85%) Claude Opus 5

Source: Official SaaS-Bench leaderboard

One lab 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.

Moonshot AI
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
Jul 16, 2026 Kimi K3 SaaS-Bench

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
Jul 27, 2026 Kimi K3 technical report SaaS-Bench (Table 2) Capabilities

More in Computer and browser use

All 69 in Computer and browser use
  • BrowseComp In use Hard-to-find facts that need persistent web browsing. Short verifiable answers graded for exact correctness. Claude Fable 5 93.3%
  • ScreenSpot-Pro In use GUI grounding on high-resolution professional-software screenshots. The model must locate the target UI element. GPT-6 Astra 92.7%
  • AndroidWorld In use Agents complete 116 tasks across 20 real Android apps in an emulator. Each task checks the device's system state to judge success. GPT-6 Astra 100%
  • OSWorld 2.1 In use Agents complete 108 long-horizon workflows across 31 self-hosted websites and desktop apps, averaging 318 tool calls. Scored by binary completion and checkpoint partial credit. Claude Opus 5.5 81.8%
  • WebArena-Verified In use Agents complete 812 audited WebArena tasks on self-hosted websites. Deterministic evaluators check the agent's answer and captured network traces. Muse Spark 1.1 69%
  • MobileWorld In use Agents complete 201 tasks across 20 mobile apps, including tasks that need user clarification or MCP tools. Backend checks verify success. GPT-5 55.3%