Claude Fable 5.1 vs Wonder Full in finance

Every finance benchmark where both have a score. Data refreshed 2 Nov 2026.

Shared benchmarks
2
Claude Fable 5.1 only
2
Wonder Full only
2

Shared benchmarks, side by side

Each benchmark is drawn on its own scale. Bars are not comparable across rows.

  • Claude Fable 5.1
  • Wonder Full

  • Excel Modeling Benchmark (EMB) accuracy % (v1.1), higher is better

    Claude Fable 5.1:76.7 (better)
    Wonder Full:75

  • Tax Agent Bench accuracy % (all-pass x citation factor), higher is better

    Claude Fable 5.1:49.2 (better)
    Wonder Full:43
Benchmark
Claude Fable 5.1
Wonder Full

6 benchmarks, 2 scored for both. Bold marks the better score where both have one.

Excel Modeling Benchmark (EMB)accuracy % (v1.1), higher is better
76.7
Vals.ai leaderboard (Official board, 29 Oct 2026)
75
Vals.ai leaderboard (Official board, 29 Oct 2026)
Tax Agent Benchaccuracy % (all-pass x citation factor), higher is better
49.2
Vals.ai leaderboard (Official board, 29 Oct 2026)
43
Vals.ai leaderboard (Official board, 29 Oct 2026)
Ramp Accounting Benchmean reward % (criteria, mean of 3 attempts), higher is better
49.7
Ramp Labs Accounting Bench (Official board, 2 Sept 2026)
Not scored
Finance Agent BenchmarkPartial Credit accuracy % (v2.1), higher is better
Not scored
67.6
Vals.ai leaderboard (Official board, 29 Oct 2026)
Vals Finance Indexindex accuracy %, higher is better
Not scored
64.5
Vals.ai leaderboard (Official board, 29 Oct 2026)
MortgageTaxaccuracy %, higher is better
70.8
Vals.ai MortgageTax leaderboard (Official board, 1 Sept 2026)
Not scored

Scores from different benchmarks use different scales and are not added up. Settings can differ between sources; see each leaderboard for details.