Enterprise Environments

SnorkelFinance 2.0

Scores how agents gather evidence, perform financial analysis, follow compliance constraints, and complete required state updates in a simulated environment.

overview

SnorkelFinance 2.0 evolves the original SnorkelFinance benchmark from report-grounded financial QA into an environment-based evaluation of operational financial analysis. It retains the previous version’s emphasis on tool-calling, expert-verified financial reasoning, and correct calculations while extending the task to simulated investment banking and private equity workflows with incomplete requests, cross-source evidence, compliance constraints, and state changes.

The 200-task release is a representative frontier subset of the broader environment. Agents must resolve what a request refers to, select and interrogate the relevant data, perform valuation, diligence, risk, or transaction analysis, state assumptions, and complete any required update. The benchmark scores the workflow end to end, including whether the conclusion is correct, supported, safe, and reflected in the expected environment state.

At a glance

200

frontier tasks

93.5%

semantic-output tasks

69.5%

tasks with expected state changes

53.5%

tasks with 20K+ context

Leaderboard

Rank Model Pass@1 Pass@5 Cost / Trial Cost / Task
1 Grok 4.6
25.1%
37.4%
$3.46 $17.29
2 GLM 5.3
21.2%
42.3%
$0.88 $4.42
3 Fable 5.1
19.6%
34.2%
$5.83 $29.16
4 Kimi K3
17.3%
40.9%
$1.78 $8.9
5 Claude Opus 5
16.5%
33.5%
$3.2 $16
6 Qwen 3.8 Max
14.1%
32.5%
$1.71 $8.57
7 GPT-6 Astra
11.6%
19.3%
$10.6 $53.02
8 Muse Spark 1.3
10%
24%
$0.98 $4.91
9 DeepSeek V4 Pro
9.5%
26.5%
$1.25 $6.25
10 Gemini Flash 3.8
5.4%
16%
$1.11 $5.53
11 Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B
4.3%
13.6%
$0.42 $2.09
icon bulb

Want to evaluate your model against SnorkelFinance 2.0? Talk to our team

Frontier performance

Loading chart data...

Methodology

Evaluator

Exact outputs and required state changes are verified programmatically. Semantic analyses are scored against task rubrics, with additional checks for evidence use, compliance, process, and efficiency. Plausible but unsupported or noncompliant answers fail.
timeout
Rollouts are bounded by the fixed execution budget in the release configuration. The time and step limits should be published with results so model comparisons remain reproducible.
integration

Agents operate inside a Docker and OpenEnv environment with structured financial data, reference materials, MCP tools, stateful sessions, seeded failure behavior, and full trace logging. The setup requires evidence gathering and tool use within the environment.

scoring note

Scenario rubrics provide the primary score, with instance-level rubrics for selected complex tasks. Five calibration rollouts per task support difficulty measurement. Report task success with financial, state, safety, process, and efficiency diagnostics.

Behind the benchmark

Financial analysis in a deal team rarely begins with a complete question or a single source of truth. An agent may need to resolve the company or transaction, reconcile market and deal data, test assumptions, check restrictions, and communicate a conclusion that others can act on. SnorkelFinance 2.0 makes these dependencies part of the measured workflow, including the state changes required to complete the task.

Version 2.0 preserves V1’s expert-verified, tool-using financial reasoning and expands it from report-grounded QA into operational investment banking and private equity workflows. Experts define and review the workflows, data, rubrics, and verifiers. The evaluation now surfaces evidence traceability, analytical judgment, compliance-aware tool use, user interaction, and correct execution in a stateful deal environment.

More benchmarks

Agentic Coding

Agentic Coding 2.0

Evaluating whether coding agents can plan, execute, verify, and recover across complex terminal-native engineering tasks.

By pass@1
1
Image
GPT-6 Astra
47.6%
2
Image
Fable 5.1
39.6%
3
Image
Opus 5
38.9%
Software Engineering

SWE-bench CLI

Tests whether an AI coding agent can diagnose and deliver a validated, multi-file change in a real open-source repository, navigating code, tests, dependencies, and tooling through the command line.

By pass@1
1
Image
Fable 5.1
14.5%
2
Image
Opus 5
14.0%
3
Image
GPT-6 Astra
12.4%
Enterprise Environments

SnorkelUnderwrite 2.0

Measures an agent’s ability to turn incomplete, distributed insurance evidence into an auditable underwriting decision while respecting authority and policy constraints.

By pass@1
1
Image
GLM 5.3
30.4%
2
Image
DeepSeek V4 Pro
28.5%
3
Image
Kimi K3
27.9%
Enterprise Environments

SnorkelManufacturing

Measures how well AI agents can turn fragmented plant-floor, engineering, and supplier evidence into safe, technically defensible decisions and actions.

By pass@1
1
Image
Grok 4.6
16.4%
2
Image
GLM 5.3
11.9%
3
Image
Fable 5.1
11.3%
Enterprise Environments

SnorkelRevOps

Tests whether AI agents can reconcile revenue systems, enforce hard commercial controls, and carry a decision through to the correct business state.

By pass@1
1
Image
Grok 4.6
15.8%
2
Image
Fable 5.1
14.0%
3
Image
Kimi K3
13.1%
Enterprise Environments

SnorkelLegal

Evaluates AI agents on whether they can advance a legal matter while preserving the chain from controlling evidence to procedure, authority, and action.

By pass@1
1
Image
Grok 4.6
40.7%
2
Image
GLM 5.3
37.8%
3
Image
Muse Spark 1.3
36.5%
Knowledge Work

WorkplaceAgents

Evaluates AI agents on economically valuable professional work and verifiable workplace deliverables.

By pass@1
1
Image
Muse Spark 1.3
17.7%
2
Image
Grok 4.6
17.1%
3
Image
Fable 5.1
15.8%
Agentic Coding

Terminal-Bench 4.0

A benchmark to measure and evolve with the frontier of agent work: real terminal environments, real software engineering tasks, and a rolling task set that is revised as agents catch up to it.

By Resolution Rate
1
Image
GPT-6 Astra
58.2%
2
Image
Fable 5.1
57.9%
3
Image
Opus 5
53.9%
Scientific & Research Workflows

Terminal-Bench-Science

A benchmark for evaluating AI agents on workflows from researchers’ own work. Scientists, not model developers or vendors, set the bar for scientific capability in AI.

By Resolution Rate
1
Image
Fable 5.1
40.0%
2
Image
Opus 5
30.0%
3
Image
GPT-5.6 Sol
22.4%
Agentic Coding

Terminal-Bench 3.0

The next frontier benchmark for agent work. A harder, more domain-diverse successor to Terminal-Bench 2.1 — built in the open, task by task, under continuous adversarial review.

By Resolution Rate
1
Image
Opus 5
42.7%
2
Image
GPT-5.6 Sol
34.6%
3
Image
Fable 5
34.1%
Computer Use

OSWorld 2.0

Long-horizon professional workflows with verifiable outcomes across 55 sub-industries. 147 public tasks of a 1,500+ task corpus, sourced and validated by 300+ industry experts.

By binary accuracy (500 steps)
1
Image
Opus 5 · max
44.33%
2
Image
Opus 5 · xhigh
36.89%
3
Image
Opus 5 · high
33.33%
Software Engineering

Senior SWE-Bench

Evaluating coding agents on senior-level engineering work.

Tasteful Solve Rate
1
Image
Fable 5.1
34.7%
2
Image
Fable 5
34.7%
3
Image
Opus 5
34.7%
Knowledge Work

Agents’ Last Exam

Evaluating AI agents on long-horizon, economically valuable professional workflows with verifiable outcomes.

By Binary Accuracy
1
Image
GPT-6 Astra
34.2
2
Image
Muse Spark 1.3
32.2%
3
Image
Opus 5
31.6%
Software Engineering

SlopCode Bench

Measures code quality degradation in AI-assisted codebases. Tracks checkpoint solve rates, erosion (code bloat), and verbosity under realistic repo conditions.

Top Models by Iso Solve
1
Image
GPT-5.5
28.06%
2
Image
GPT-5.3-Codex
26.02%
3
Image
GPT-5.4
23.47%
Capability/Efficiency

Continual Learning Bench

Evaluates whether AI systems improve from prior experience across sequential, stateful tasks, measuring real in-context learning, not just raw capability.

Top Systems (Agg. Reward)
1
Image
Sonnet 4.6 · ICL
+0.196
2
Image
GPT-5.4 · ICL
+0.189
3
Image
Sonnet 4.6 · Claude Code
+0.185
of

For models that need to be right. Not just good enough.