Leaderboards we link to but do not republish. Licence or terms-of-service constraints prevent ingestion; we surface what each one measures and link out so you can read the source directly. Where part of a publisher's output reaches us under an open licence by another route, the card names those boards and links to their report cards.
CursorBench
Code
What it measures
Cursor's own benchmark: ambiguous multi-file tasks taken from real Cursor sessions, scored per model with cost, tokens and steps; 68 configurations, updated through October 2026.
When to consult it
Seeing how models behave inside one specific coding agent — bearing in mind the vendor chose the tasks and runs the harness.
Scale SEAL leaderboards
Mixed
What it measures
Scale AI's private, expert-written evaluations (SEAL) across coding, agents, multilingual and safety, with results kept on their site.
When to consult it
A second opinion from private test sets the labs cannot have trained on.
SWE-bench Pro (Scale)
SWE
What it measures
Scale's harder successor to SWE-bench Verified: 1,865 tasks from copyleft repositories, 731 public ones scored with ± intervals; no result file to ingest yet.
When to consult it
Checking a coding agent against tasks chosen to resist contamination.
METR time horizons
Agent
What it measures
METR's time-horizon estimate: the length of task, in human minutes, a model completes with 50% success, with intervals; only raw runs are published, the fit is theirs.
When to consult it
A measure of autonomy that no accuracy benchmark gives you.
Vals.ai benchmarks
Mixed
What it measures
Vals.ai's 30 independent benchmarks across legal, finance, healthcare, coding and math, each with accuracy, cost and latency.
When to consult it
Domain-specific checks (law, finance, medicine) the general boards do not cover.
Aider polyglot leaderboard
Code
What it measures
Aider's code-editing benchmark over 225 Exercism exercises in six languages, with the cost of each run; last updated November 2025.
When to consult it
Historical reference for editing-format reliability; the board has gone quiet.
Artificial Analysis
Mixed
What it measures
Inference speed, latency, throughput, cost, and a composite quality index for hosted LLM endpoints.
When to consult it
Picking which API to call for a latency- or cost-sensitive workload.
LLM Stats
Mixed
What it measures
Cross-benchmark aggregator (50+ benchmarks incl. GPQA, MMLU-Pro, AIME, MATH, HumanEval, MMMU) with pricing, context window, and provider availability per model. Their ToS permits redistribution with attribution — we're not blocked by license, just haven't wired up their API yet.
When to consult it
Comparing pricing and feature support across providers in one view, or checking a benchmark axis (math, vision, general knowledge) we don't ingest directly yet.
BenchLM
Mixed
What it measures
A cross-benchmark "bench-align" index over agentic, coding, reasoning, knowledge and instruction-following.
When to consult it
A quick cross-check on our own rankings. Read the per-category numbers rather than the headline index — a third of its models are scored by estimation, not measurement.