Benchmark Almanac

TheAgentCompany

Deepseek-V3.2 (snapshot unspecified) 42.9% tops its leaderboard Claude Sonnet 4 33.1% leads the models we track
MiniMax-M2 36% leads since October 2025
Dropped

Agents do work tasks in a simulated software company, using a browser, code, and chat with simulated coworkers. Scored by full and partial checkpoint completion.

Released
December 2024
Kind
Simulated companies
Level
University
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Agent task
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
Claude Sonnet 4 #112 on the capability index
Last in a launch post
October 2025, dropped before it saturated
Last model added
October 2025
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

We interact with computers on an everyday basis, be it in everyday life or work, and many aspects of work can be done entirely with access to a computer and the Internet. At the same time, thanks to improvements in large language models (LLMs), there has also been a rapid development in AI agents that interact with and affect change in their surrounding environments. But how performant are AI agents at accelerating or even autonomously performing work-related tasks? The answer to this question has important implications both for industry looking to adopt AI into their workflows and for economic policy to understand the effects that adoption of AI may have on the labor market. To measure the progress of these LLM agents' performance on performing real-world professional tasks, in this paper we introduce TheAgentCompany, an extensible benchmark for evaluating AI agents that interact with the world in similar ways to those of a digital worker: by browsing the Web, writing code, running programs, and communicating with other coworkers. We build a self-contained environment with internal web sites and data that mimics a small software company environment, and create a variety of tasks that may be performed by workers in such a company. We test baseline agents powered by both closed API-based and open-weights language models (LMs), and find that the most competitive agent can complete 30% of tasks autonomously. This paints a nuanced picture on task automation with LM agents–in a setting simulating a real workplace, a good portion of simpler tasks could be solved autonomously, but more difficult long-horizon tasks are still beyond the reach of current systems. We release code, data, environment, and experiments on https://the-agent-company.com.

Abstract of TheAgentCompany: Benchmarking LLM Agents on Consequential Real World Tasks (arXiv:2412.14161, CC0)
16
Entries on its own leaderboard, 7 models we track
1
Launch post lists it, from 1 lab

Deepseek-V3.2 (snapshot unspecified) tops the leaderboard with 42.9%

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 Claude Sonnet 4, at 33.1%.

MiniMax-M2 leads with 36%, 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 May 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-V3.2 (snapshot unspecified) 42.9%
  2. 2 Gemini 2.5 Flash (snapshot unspecified) 41.1%
  3. 3 Claude Sonnet 4 33.1%
  4. 4 Claude 3.7 Sonnet 30.9%
  5. 5 Gemini 2.5 Pro (snapshot unspecified) 30.3%
  6. 6 Claude 3.5 Sonnet (snapshot unspecified) 24%
  7. 7 Gemini 2.0 Flash (snapshot unspecified) 11.4%
  8. 8 GPT 4o (snapshot unspecified) 8.60%
  9. 9 Llama 3.1-405B 7.40%
  10. 10 Llama 3.3 70B 6.90%
  11. 11 Qwen2.5-72B 5.70%
  12. 12 GPT 4o/o3-mini 4.00%
  13. 13 Gemini 1.5 Pro (snapshot unspecified) 3.40%
  14. 14 Llama 3.1-70B 1.70%
  15. 15 amazon nova pro v1:0 1.70%
  16. 16 Qwen2-72B 1.10%

Source: Official TheAgentCompany leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 Deepseek-V3.2 (snapshot unspecified) 42.9% TTE-MatrixAgent Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
2 Gemini 2.5 Flash (snapshot unspecified) 41.1% MUSE Oct 2025 Official leaderboard
3 Claude Sonnet 4 33.1% OpenHands-Versa May 2025 Official leaderboard
4 Claude 3.7 Sonnet 30.9% OpenHands-Versa Feb 2025 Official leaderboard
5 Gemini 2.5 Pro (snapshot unspecified) 30.3% OpenHands May 2025 Official leaderboard
6 Claude 3.5 Sonnet (snapshot unspecified) 24% OpenHands Dec 2024 Official leaderboard
7 Gemini 2.0 Flash (snapshot unspecified) 11.4% OpenHands Dec 2024 Official leaderboard
8 GPT 4o (snapshot unspecified) 8.60% OpenHands Dec 2024 Official leaderboard
9 Llama 3.1-405B 7.40% OpenHands Jul 2024 Official leaderboard
10 Llama 3.3 70B 6.90% OpenHands Dec 2024 Official leaderboard
11 Qwen2.5-72B 5.70% OpenHands Sep 2024 Official leaderboard
12 GPT 4o/o3-mini 4.00% OWL RolePlay May 2025 Official leaderboard
13 Gemini 1.5 Pro (snapshot unspecified) 3.40% OpenHands Dec 2024 Official leaderboard
14 Llama 3.1-70B 1.70% OpenHands Jul 2024 Official leaderboard
15 amazon nova pro v1:0 1.70% OpenHands Dec 2024 Official leaderboard
16 Qwen2-72B 1.10% OpenHands Jun 2024 Official leaderboard
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 MiniMax-M2 36% Oct 2025 Lab model card
2 Claude Sonnet 4 33.1% OpenHands-Versa May 2025 Official leaderboard
3 Claude 3.7 Sonnet 30.9% OpenHands-Versa Feb 2025 Official leaderboard
4 Llama 3.1-405B 7.40% OpenHands Jul 2024 Official leaderboard
5 Llama 3.3 70B 6.90% OpenHands Dec 2024 Official leaderboard
6 Qwen2.5-72B 5.70% OpenHands Sep 2024 Official leaderboard
7 Llama 3.1-70B 1.70% OpenHands Jul 2024 Official leaderboard
8 Qwen2-72B 1.10% OpenHands Jun 2024 Official leaderboard

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

The best score, 33.1%, costs $1.63 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.

Qwen Meta Anthropic Cost frontier One model at each effort level
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% $0.10 $0.20 $0.50 $1.00 $2.00 $5.00 $10 Cost per task, log scale Claude Sonnet 4 Llama 3.3 70B Llama 3.1-70B Qwen2-72B 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% $0.10 $1.00 $10 Cost per task, log scale Claude Sonnet 4 Llama 3.3 70B

Source: Official TheAgentCompany leaderboard

ModelEffortHarnessScoreCost per taskOutput tokens
Claude Sonnet 4 OpenHands-Versa 33.1% $1.63
Claude 3.7 Sonnet OpenHands-Versa 30.9% $3.70
Claude 3.7 Sonnet OpenHands 26.3% $4.05
Llama 3.1-405B OpenHands 7.40% $3.21
Llama 3.3 70B OpenHands 6.90% $0.93
Qwen2.5-72B OpenHands 5.70% $1.53
Llama 3.1-70B OpenHands 1.70% $0.83
Qwen2-72B OpenHands 1.10% $0.28

3 models have held number one on the official leaderboard since its release in December 2024 4 models have held number one with claims included since its release in December 2024

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

Meta Anthropic
Own leaderboard Not tested since May 2025

Source: Official TheAgentCompany 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 Reported by the lab in its model card Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2024 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) MiniMax-M2 Claude Sonnet 4 Llama 3.1-405B Qwen2-72B 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2024 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) MiniMax-M2 Llama 3.1-405B

Sources: Official TheAgentCompany leaderboard and labs’ model cards

No launch post has listed it since October 2025

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.

MiniMax
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
Oct 27, 2025 MiniMax-M2 36 AgentCompany

More in Economic work

All 97 in Economic work
  • JobBench In use 130 tasks from 35 occupations workers most want delegated. Agent works through messy reference files, graded by fact-anchored binary rubrics. GLM-5.3 61.4%
  • 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%