WebArena
Agents complete 812 realistic tasks on self-hosted shopping, forum, GitLab, CMS and map websites. Functional graders check the outcome.
WebArena-Verified is a separate audited version with its own id.
- Made by
- Carnegie Mellon University
- Released
- July 2023
- Kind
- Web browsing
- Level
- Everyday
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Agent task
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
- Claude Opus 4.6 #37 on the capability index
- Last in a launch post
- October 2026, dropped before it saturated
- Last model added
- October 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
With advances in generative AI, there is now potential for autonomous agents to manage daily tasks via natural language commands. However, current agents are primarily created and tested in simplified synthetic environments, leading to a disconnect with real-world scenarios. In this paper, we build an environment for language-guided agents that is highly realistic and reproducible. Specifically, we focus on agents that perform tasks on the web, and create an environment with fully functional websites from four common domains: e-commerce, social forum discussions, collaborative software development, and content management. Our environment is enriched with tools (e.g., a map) and external knowledge bases (e.g., user manuals) to encourage human-like task-solving. Building upon our environment, we release a set of benchmark tasks focusing on evaluating the functional correctness of task completions. The tasks in our benchmark are diverse, long-horizon, and designed to emulate tasks that humans routinely perform on the internet. We experiment with several baseline agents, integrating recent techniques such as reasoning before acting. The results demonstrate that solving complex tasks is challenging: our best GPT-4-based agent only achieves an end-to-end task success rate of 14.41%, significantly lower than the human performance of 78.24%. These results highlight the need for further development of robust agents, that current state-of-the-art large language models are far from perfect performance in these real-life tasks, and that WebArena can be used to measure such progress.
Claude Opus 4.6 leads with 68%
Best score per model as labs report them in their own cards. Labs pick their own settings, so these compare less cleanly than independent runs.
DeepSeek-V3.2 leads with 74.3% across all independent runs
Best score per model across the official leaderboard, Epoch AI’s own runs and any board Epoch AI copied. Each bar and row names its source.
DeepSeek-V3.2 leads with 74.3%, 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.
- 1 Claude Opus 4.6 68%
- 2 Claude Sonnet 4.6 65.6%
- 3 ChatGPT agent 65.4%
- 4 Claude Opus 4.5 65.3%
- 5 Kimi K2.5 58.9%
- 6 OpenAI Computer-Using Agent (CUA) 58.1%
- 7
Nemotron 3.5 Bolt 74B-A9B 50.9%
- 8
Qwen3-Coder-480B-A35B 49.9%
Source: Labs’ model cards
- 1
DeepSeek-V3.2 74.3%
- 2 GPT-4 Jun 2023, when "not achievable" hint is not provided 14.9%
- 3 GPT-4o May 2024, when "not achievable" hint is provided 13.1%
- 4
Gemini 1.0 Pro 7.12%
Source: Official WebArena leaderboard
- 1
DeepSeek-V3.2 74.3%
- 2 Claude Opus 4.6 68%
- 3 Claude Sonnet 4.6 65.6%
- 4 ChatGPT agent 65.4%
- 5 Claude Opus 4.5 65.3%
- 6 Kimi K2.5 58.9%
- 7 OpenAI Computer-Using Agent (CUA) 58.1%
- 8
Nemotron 3.5 Bolt 74B-A9B 50.9%
- 9
Qwen3-Coder-480B-A35B 49.9%
- 10 GPT-4 Jun 2023, when "not achievable" hint is not provided 14.9%
- 11 GPT-4o May 2024, when "not achievable" hint is provided 13.1%
- 12
Gemini 1.0 Pro 7.12%
Sources: Official WebArena leaderboard and labs’ model cards
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Claude Opus 4.6 | 68% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | 65.6% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | ChatGPT agent | 65.4% | Jul 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 4 | Claude Opus 4.5 | 65.3% | Nov 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 5 | Kimi K2.5 | 58.9% | Jan 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 6 | OpenAI Computer-Using Agent (CUA) | 58.1% | Jan 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 7 | | 50.9% | Oct 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 8 | | 49.9% | Jul 2025 | Lab model card |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 74.3% | WebTactix | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 2 | GPT-4 Jun 2023 | 14.9% | when "not achievable" hint is not provided, GPT | Jun 2023 | Official leaderboard |
| 3 | GPT-4o May 2024 | 13.1% | when "not achievable" hint is provided, GPT | May 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 4 | | 7.12% | Dec 2023 | Official leaderboard |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 74.3% | WebTactix | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 2 | Claude Opus 4.6 | 68% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | 65.6% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 4 | ChatGPT agent | 65.4% | Jul 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 5 | Claude Opus 4.5 | 65.3% | Nov 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 6 | Kimi K2.5 | 58.9% | Jan 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 7 | OpenAI Computer-Using Agent (CUA) | 58.1% | Jan 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 8 | | 50.9% | Oct 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 9 | | 49.9% | Jul 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 10 | GPT-4 Jun 2023 | 14.9% | when "not achievable" hint is not provided, GPT | Jun 2023 | Official leaderboard |
| 11 | GPT-4o May 2024 | 13.1% | when "not achievable" hint is provided, GPT | May 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 12 | | 7.12% | Dec 2023 | Official leaderboard |
The benchmark's own leaderboard has 47 entries, 4 of them models we track. Switch the scores above to rank them together.
3 models have held number one in labs’ own numbers since its release in July 2023 2 models have held number one across all independent runs since its release in July 2023 4 models have held number one with claims included since its release in July 2023
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 WebArena 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 WebArena leaderboard and labs’ model cards
Labs headline it less often now, last in October 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 15, 2026 | 50.9 | WebArena (vision) | |
| Jul 22, 2025 | 49.9 | WebArena | |
| Jul 17, 2025 | ChatGPT agent | 65.4 | WebArena (Agentic Browser Use) |
| Jan 23, 2025 | OpenAI Computer-Using Agent (CUA) | 58.1 | WebArena (browser use) |
5 system cards report it, from 3 labs
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 15, 2026 | | 50.9 | WebArena (vision), 812 public tasks, internal harness, screenshots, released 24GB checkpoint (Table 7 and Section 8). BF16 50.25 | Capabilities |
| Feb 17, 2026 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 system card | 65.6 | WebArena, single policy model, general prompts, Average@5 (Table 2.18.1.A) | Capabilities |
| Feb 5, 2026 | Claude Opus 4.6 system card | 68 | WebArena, single policy model, general prompts, Average@5 (Table 2.20.A); pass@5 74.0 in Table 2.20.B | Capabilities |
| Jan 30, 2026 | Kimi K2.5 technical report | 58.9 | WebArena, evaluation scripts corrected, GPT-4o fuzzy-match judge (Table 4) | Capabilities |
| Nov 24, 2025 | Claude Opus 4.5 system card | 65.3 | WebArena, single policy model, general prompts, Computer Use API with browser tools, avg of 5 runs (Table 2.22.A; pass@4 72.4% in Table 2.22.B) | Capabilities |
More 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%