Proprietary

Vals Index

Updated 9/27/2026

A single measure of AI's potential economic impact — agentic model performance across finance, coding, and legal tasks, weighted by each sector's share of U.S. GDP.

As of September 27, 2026, Claude Opus 5.5 ranks first on the Vals Index v2 with 69.69%, followed by Claude Sonnet 5.5 (69.22%) and Claude Fable 5.1 (68.83%).

Vals Index
ACCURACY

Vals Index leaderboard

Rank Model Accuracy Cost / Test Input / Output Cost Input / Output Tokens Duration
1 Claude Opus 5.5 69.69% $32.77 $4 / $20 26.11B / 390.18M 1h12m
2 Claude Sonnet 5.5 69.22% $20.80 $2 / $10 35.84B / 480.47M 1h10m
3 Claude Fable 5.1 68.83% $28.92 $10 / $50 17.29B / 163.78M 1h16m
4 Claude Opus 5 67.21% $18.81 $5 / $25 12.87B / 118.97M 55m49s
5 GPT-6 Astra 66.61% $19.09 $10 / $50 3.64B / 78.43M 25m11s
6 Claude Fable 5 66.04% $28.73 $10 / $50 9.05B / 98.65M 37m51s
7 Muse Spark 1.3 Max 64.53% $3.40 $1.25 / $4.25 9.21B / 77.48M 20m30s
8 GPT-5.6 Sol 63.71% $14.21 $4 / $20 5.19B / 105.48M 32m24s
9 GPT-6 Sol 62.57% $7.56 $2 / $10 7.73B / 80.59M 26m34s
10 Gemini 3.8 Flash 62.25% $5.39 $1.5 / $7.5 10.65B / 99.72M 44m53s
11 Claude Opus 4.8 60.91% $12.67 $5 / $25 6.89B / 99.21M 36m22s
12 Muse Spark 1.3 60.31% $2.90 $1.25 / $4.25 5.98B / 62.22M 21m17s
13 Grok 4.7 60.22% $11.16 $2 / $6 5.90B / 95.28M 32m56s
14 GPT-5.6 Luna 59.88% $0.78 $0.2 / $1.2 7.72B / 172.07M 23m16s
15 Claude Sonnet 5 59.61% $11.74 $2 / $10 22.04B / 126.59M 45m46s
16 GPT-5.6 Terra 59.59% $5.18 $2 / $12 5.10B / 124.11M 28m50s
17 MiMo V2.6 Flash 59.58% $0.20 $0.14 / $0.28 9.28B / 98.37M 45m02s
18 MiMo V2.6 Pro 59.47% $0.39 $0.435 / $0.87 6.54B / 94.73M 52m20s
19 Gemini 3.7 Flash 59.31% $4.17 $1.5 / $7.5 7.71B / 78.22M 43m13s
20 Grok 4.6 59.17% $4.34 $2 / $6 3.77B / 91.96M 38m04s
21 GPT-6 Luna 58.45% $0.42 $0.1 / $0.5 8.37B / 152.36M 26m30s
22 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 57.86% $0.30 $0.3 / $1.2 7.93B / 114.24M 25m34s
23 Kimi K3 57.81% $6.47 $3 / $15 5.87B / 73.29M 1h10m
24 GPT 5.5 57.41% $6.14 $5 / $30 2.25B / 56.69M 20m51s
25 Muse Spark 1.2 57.05% $1.66 $1.25 / $4.25 3.70B / 53.12M 16m49s
26 GLM 5.3 56.97% $6.73 $1.4 / $4.4 9.83B / 153.84M 1h06m
27 Claude Opus 4.7 56.11% $12.76 $5 / $25 7.92B / 73.33M 28m26s
28 Hy4 Preview 55.40% $1.28 $0.834 / $2.501 7.90B / 138.90M 47m51s
29 Gemini 3.6 Flash 55.35% $3.03 $1.5 / $7.5 5.33B / 64.36M 22m08s
30 Muse Spark 1.1 54.75% $1.25 $1.25 / $4.25 3.08B / 49.06M 13m48s
31 DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 53.57% $0.84 $0.44 / $1.32 12.46B / 105.94M 34m55s
32 GLM 5.2 53.12% $4.29 $1.4 / $4.4 4.90B / 72.58M 42m07s
33 Gemini 3.5 Flash 53.08% $2.91 $1.5 / $9 5.44B / 73.42M 11m01s
34 DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 52.37% $3.28 $1.32 / $3.96 14.32B / 123.48M 58m18s
35 Qwen 3.8 Max 51.84% $4.00 $2 / $6 5.37B / 113.82M 1h31m
36 Grok 4.5 51.53% $1.96 $2 / $6 1.57B / 48.11M 13m58s
37 Claude Sonnet 4.6 50.59% $8.40 $3 / $15 9.40B / 77.93M 34m46s
38 Qwen 3.8 27B 48.48% $8.48 $0.5 / $3 7.99B / 149.10M 1h01m
39 GLM 5.3 Flash 47.22% $0.99 $0.075 / $0.25 28.47B / 149.73M 1h11m
40 Qwen 3.7 Max 44.77% $2.85 $2.5 / $7.5 1.20B / 30.09M 29m42s
41 Kimi K2.6 43.47% $1.85 $0.95 / $4 6.71B / 58.03M 39m52s
42 DeepSeek V4 42.89% $0.94 $1.32 / $3.96 4.29B / 64.45M 23m47s
43 MiniMax-M3 42.72% $2.50 $0.6 / $2.4 6.31B / 54.94M 35m15s
44 Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview (02/26) 41.90% $1.94 $2 / $12 2.60B / 24.15M 9m20s
45 MiMo V2.5 Pro 40.97% $0.15 $0.435 / $0.87 2.51B / 39.32M 22m30s
46 MiMo V2.5 39.91% $0.06 $0.14 / $0.28 2.78B / 40.36M 18m13s
47 GPT 5.4 Mini 39.63% $1.38 $0.75 / $4.5 4.80B / 178.58M 29m02s
48 Qwen 3.7 Plus 38.65% $0.44 $0.4 / $1.6 1.64B / 39.05M 21m48s
49 Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite 36.71% $0.54 $0.3 / $2.5 3.39B / 35.03M 7m41s
50 Inkling 34.10% $1.35 $1 / $4.05 3.80B / 59.53M 19m37s
51 GPT 5.4 Nano 33.00% $0.40 $0.2 / $1.25 5.55B / 55.27M 20m30s
52 Ling 3.0 Flash Fin 32.55% $0.11 $0.06 / $0.18 3.23B / 67.67M 17m53s
53 Qwen 3.6 Plus 31.98% $2.62 $0.5 / $3 2.74B / 38.74M 21m00s
54 Inkling Small 31.86% $0.28 $0.3 / $1.2 2.28B / 58.90M 22m53s
55 Gemini 3 Flash (12/25) 29.44% $0.41 $0.5 / $3 1.70B / 31.78M 5m48s
56 Nemotron 3 Ultra 27.39% N/A N/A 4.57B / 40.66M 32m28s
57 Kimi K2.5 26.30% $0.51 $0.6 / $3 2.04B / 28.86M 35m31s
58 MiniMax-M2.7 24.56% $0.88 $0.3 / $1.2 2.65B / 41.97M 15m04s
59 Grok 4.3 24.29% $0.68 $1.25 / $2.5 1.16B / 33.07M 5m38s
60 Claude Haiku 4.5 (Thinking) 22.90% $0.70 $1 / $5 2.42B / 34.17M 8m20s
61 Ling 3.0 Flash 21.70% $0.10 $0.075 / $0.22 2.52B / 49.00M 49m43s
62 Mistral Medium 3.5 17.95% $8.01 $1.5 / $7.5 2.75B / 53.38M 57m26s
63 Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) 17.55% $0.57 $2 / $6 8.03B / 21.30M 5m50s
64 Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview 15.46% $0.14 $0.25 / $1.5 675.78M / 12.04M 2m43s
65 Mercury 2.5 12.95% $0.30 $0.2 / $0.75 N/A 5m55s
66 Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 11.49% $0.09 $0.05 / $0.2 3.64B / 66.86M 22m25s

Motivation

As AI capabilities rapidly advance, understanding their potential to transform economic sectors has become critical for organizations making deployment decisions. Unlike existing aggregated metrics that treat all capabilities equally, the Vals Index is designed to reflect the potential impact of AI models on the U.S. economy. We accomplish this by computing a weighted average of model performance across key sectors, where each sector’s weight is proportional to its share of U.S. GDP.

Vals AI has developed a comprehensive suite of benchmarks measuring AI models’ ability to perform real-world tasks across finance, coding, and legal work — benchmarks that no other party has full access to. The Vals Index aggregates five private and two public benchmarks to provide high signal into the real-world tradeoffs between capability, latency, and cost of deploying AI systems.


Results

Industry Average Accuracy Comparison

Key Takeaways

AI models are advancing rapidly in their ability to handle complex, real-world tasks across critical economic sectors. The results demonstrate that frontier models are becoming increasingly capable at automating work in finance, coding, and legal services — domains that collectively represent a substantial portion of economic activity.

Claude Opus 5.5 leads the Vals Index at 69.69% — and leads Terminal-Bench — just 0.47 points ahead of Claude Sonnet 5.5 at 69.22%, which takes the top spot on both Vibe Code Bench and Code Migration at under two-thirds of its cost per test ($20.80 vs $32.77). Claude Fable 5.1 follows at 68.83%, then Claude Opus 5 at 67.21%, GPT-6 Astra at 66.61%, and Claude Fable 5 at 66.04%. Muse Spark 1.3 Max follows in seventh at 64.53%, ahead of GPT-5.6 Sol at 63.71%. GPT-5.6 Luna reaches 59.88% at $0.77 per test, 6.2 points behind fifth-place Fable 5 at less than a twentieth of its cost.


Methodology

Benchmark Selection, Economic Weighting, and Formula

The Vals Index aggregates performance across three sectors — Finance, Coding, and Legal — each weighted in proportion to its share of U.S. GDP, using Bureau of Economic Analysis value-added-by-industry data (as published on FRED). While this represents a vast oversimplification of how AI might impact the economy, it provides a useful proxy for measuring the potential economic significance of model capabilities:

Finance: Finance & Insurance, ~8.0% of U.S. GDP

Coding: Information sector (the closest GDP proxy for software work), ~5.6% of U.S. GDP

Legal: Legal services, ~1.2% of U.S. GDP

  • Legal Research Bench: Case and statute research with citation-backed answers
  • HLAB: Harvey’s Legal Agent Benchmark, long-horizon legal work product creation

Each sector is the average of its benchmarks, and the sectors are combined with the following formula:

Finance = AVG(FinanceAgentV2, EMB)
Coding = AVG(TBench, VibeCodeBench, CodeMigration)
Legal = AVG(LegalResearch, HLAB)
Vals_Index = (8.0 * Finance + 5.6 * Coding + 1.2 * Legal) / 14.8

Component Scores

Each benchmark column on the index is that benchmark’s own published standalone score — the same number, under the same methodology. The exception is Code Migration: there, the index scores a fixed subset of the published run: 50 of the 120 CLI migration tasks, plus all 10 COBOL tasks, weighted 75% CLI and 25% COBOL to match the standalone benchmark’s balance. This subset was chosen by Monte Carlo search, scored against the full 120-task leaderboard. The chosen subset reproduces the full 120-task result to Spearman 0.99 and 0.8 points of mean absolute accuracy error, with no model moving more than three ranks; on models held out of the selection, mean absolute error is 1.1 points.


Updates

8/13/2026

Released Vals Index v2:

  • Added EMB in place of CorpFin. A private benchmark for building complex financial models in Excel.
  • Added Code Migration to the coding bucket. A private benchmark involving porting projects to a set of four languages, including COBOL modernization.
  • Added Legal Research Bench to the returning Legal sector. A private benchmark involving answering legal questions grounded in case law.
  • Added HLAB to the returning Legal sector. Harvey’s Legal Agent Benchmark, long-horizon legal work product creation.
  • Removed SWE-Bench Verified from the coding bucket. SWE-Bench has become saturated. Coding now averages Terminal-Bench 2.1, Vibe Code Bench, and Code Migration equally.

5/27/2026

  • Updated the coding bucket to Terminal-Bench 2.1. The Vals Index now evaluates coding performance with Terminal-Bench 2.1 while keeping the same 0.25 coding weight.

5/13/2026

  • Swapped Finance Agent to Finance Agent v2. Finance now uses the Finance Agent v2 index subset, averaging three runs per model.

5/4/2026

  • Added Vibe Code Bench to the coding bucket. Coding is now a weighted average of three benchmarks (SWE-Bench Verified 0.25, Terminal-Bench 2.0 0.25, Vibe Code Bench 0.5), giving end-to-end app-building tasks half of the coding signal. VCB is evaluated on a 22-task subset selected for coverage across UI, data, and workflow patterns.
  • Removed the Law sector (CaseLaw). The CaseLaw benchmark had become saturated, and was no longer providing useful differentiation between models. Consequently, it was removed from the index. The denominator was rebalanced from 3.7 → 3.4 to reflect the dropped 0.3 law weight, and the Industry Average chart no longer displays a Law column.