Benchmark Almanac

VLA-Arena

Prime 73.1% tops its leaderboard MolmoAct 2 72.1% leads the models we track
Not in model cards

VLAs fine-tuned on level-0 tabletop tasks, tested on 170 tasks in 11 suites at harder unseen levels L1/L2. Success rate.

L0 (the fine-tuning level and page default) median 0.73. L2 best 0.56 and median 0.14, so compare on L1/L2. Benchmark team fine-tuned most entries. Five came from outside users.

Made by
PKU-Alignment
Released
September 2025
Kind
Simulated robots
Level
Everyday
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Agent task
Tasks
All public
Last model added
May 2026
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

While Vision-Language-Action models (VLAs) are rapidly advancing toward generalist robot policies, quantitatively characterizing their capability boundaries and failure modes remains challenging. To address this, we introduce VLA-Arena, a comprehensive benchmark. It features a novel structured task design framework to quantify difficulty across three orthogonal axes: (1) Task Structure, (2) Language Command, and (3) Visual Observation. This allows us to systematically design tasks with fine-grained difficulty levels, enabling a precise measurement of model capability frontiers. For task structure, VLA-Arena comprises 11 task suites organized into four dimensions: Safety, Distractor, Extrapolation, and Long Horizon, totaling 170 tasks. Each suite spans three difficulty levels (L0-L2), with fine-tuning restricted to L0 to rigorously assess generalization. Orthogonal to this, language (W0-W4) and visual (V0-V4) perturbations can be applied to any task as diagnostic probes to distinguish robust grounding from superficial pattern matching. Our extensive evaluation of state-of-the-art VLAs reveals critical limitations: memorization over generalization, superficial visual perception, and a neglect of safety constraints. Additionally, model rank reversals across L0-L2 validate that each level provides non-redundant insights. To foster research addressing these model limitations and ensure reproducibility, we provide the complete VLA-Arena framework, including an end-to-end toolchain from task definition to automated evaluation and the VLA-Arena-S/M/L datasets for fine-tuning. Our benchmark, datasets, models, and leaderboard are publicly available at https://vla-arena.github.io.

Abstract of VLA-Arena: An Open-Source Framework for Benchmarking Vision-Language-Action Models (arXiv:2512.22539, CC0)
28
Entries on its own leaderboard, 8 models we track

Prime tops the leaderboard with 73.1%

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. 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 MolmoAct 2, at 72.1%.

The newest model with a score here came out in May 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 Prime 73.1%
  2. 2 MolmoAct 2 72.1%
  3. 3 StellaVLA 68.1%
  4. 4 ACoT-VLA 66.1%
  5. 5 DM0.5 62.3%
  6. 6 LingBot-VLA 2.0 54.5%
  7. 7 GR00T N1.7 52.5%
  8. 8 X-Policy 51.2%
  9. 9 LingBot-VLA 50.9%
  10. 10 LangForce 49%
  11. 11 π0 full fine-tune 44.6%
  12. 12 π0-FAST full fine-tune 44.4%
  13. 13 π0.5 full fine-tune 44.3%
  14. 14 Evo-Depth 41.1%
  15. 15 OpenVLA-OFT 39.9%
  16. 16 OpenVLA 39.3%
  17. 17 Motus 38.9%
  18. 18 UniVLA 38.7%
  19. 19 Qwen3-VL-Fast 38.2%
  20. 20 Qwen3-VL-GR00T 37.4%
  21. 21 Qwen2.5-VL-GR00T 37%
  22. 22 Qwen3-VL-PI 34.1%
  23. 23 Qwen3-VL-OFT 33.4%
  24. 24 Qwen2.5-VL-PI 32.2%
  25. 25 Qwen2.5-VL-OFT 29.9%
  26. 26 GR00T N1.6 27.8%
  27. 27 DreamZero 23.7%
  28. 28 SmolVLA 16.3%

Source: Official VLA-Arena leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 Prime 73.1% Official leaderboard
2 MolmoAct 2 72.1% May 2026 Official leaderboard
3 StellaVLA 68.1% Official leaderboard
4 ACoT-VLA 66.1% Official leaderboard
5 DM0.5 62.3% Official leaderboard
6 LingBot-VLA 2.0 54.5% Official leaderboard
7 GR00T N1.7 52.5% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
8 X-Policy 51.2% Official leaderboard
9 LingBot-VLA 50.9% Official leaderboard
10 LangForce 49% Official leaderboard
11 π0 44.6% full fine-tune Oct 2024 Official leaderboard
12 π0-FAST 44.4% full fine-tune Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
13 π0.5 44.3% full fine-tune Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
14 Evo-Depth 41.1% Official leaderboard
15 OpenVLA-OFT 39.9% Feb 2025 Official leaderboard
16 OpenVLA 39.3% Jun 2024 Official leaderboard
17 Motus 38.9% Official leaderboard
18 UniVLA 38.7% Official leaderboard
19 Qwen3-VL-Fast 38.2% Official leaderboard
20 Qwen3-VL-GR00T 37.4% Official leaderboard
21 Qwen2.5-VL-GR00T 37% Official leaderboard
22 Qwen3-VL-PI 34.1% Official leaderboard
23 Qwen3-VL-OFT 33.4% Official leaderboard
24 Qwen2.5-VL-PI 32.2% Official leaderboard
25 Qwen2.5-VL-OFT 29.9% Official leaderboard
26 GR00T N1.6 27.8% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
27 DreamZero 23.7% Official leaderboard
28 SmolVLA 16.3% Official leaderboard

3 models have held number one on the official leaderboard since its release in September 2025

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

Physical Intelligence NVIDIA Ai2
Own leaderboard Not tested since May 2026
MolmoAct 2 72.1%

Source: Official VLA-Arena 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% 2024 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) MolmoAct 2 GR00T N1.7 π0 OpenVLA 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2024 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) MolmoAct 2 GR00T N1.7

Source: Official VLA-Arena 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 Robotics

All 103 in Robotics
  • ERQA In use 400 multiple-choice visual questions from robot and egocentric footage on spatial, trajectory, action and state reasoning. Accuracy. Gemini Robotics ER 2 78.5%
  • RoboDojo In use Generalist manipulation policies run 42 Isaac Sim tasks and 18 remote real-robot tasks. Scored by task score and success rate. GPT-6 Astra 29%
  • RoboLab In use Zero-shot DROID Franka policies in Isaac Lab on 120 tabletop tasks at three instruction levels, 10 episodes each. Success rate. FLUX 3 Action 42.9%
  • Progress classification (Google DeepMind) In use Models assign each frame of a robot video to one of five task-progress bands from 0 to 100 percent. Scored by accuracy. Gemini Robotics ER 2 57.4%
  • Human proximity (Google DeepMind robotics) In use Models judge from robot camera views whether a human is within 1 meter, a spatial awareness check for safe robot behavior. Scored by accuracy. Gemini Robotics ER 2 93%
  • Moment finding (Google DeepMind) In use Models find the moment in a robot video when an event happens. Scored by accuracy and mean absolute time distance in seconds. Gemini Robotics ER 2 91.3%