Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Numa 1 in finance
Every finance benchmark where both have a score (Google and Moneda). Data refreshed 2 Nov 2026.
- Shared benchmarks
- 1
- Gemini 2.5 Pro only
- 5
- Numa 1 only
- 6
Shared benchmarks, side by side
Each benchmark is drawn on its own scale. Bars are not comparable across rows.
- Gemini 2.5 Pro
- Numa 1
FinSearchComp Global subset average accuracy %, higher is better
Gemini 2.5 Pro:42.6Numa 1:59.4 (better)
Benchmark
Gemini 2.5 Pro
Numa 1
14 benchmarks, 1 scored for both. Bold marks the better score where both have one.
FinSearchCompGlobal subset average accuracy %, higher is better
FinanceQAaccuracy (total, 0-1), higher is better
Not scored
Advanced Financial Reasoning at Scale (CFA Level III evaluation)overall % (mean of MCQ and essay), higher is better
Not scored
Reasoning Models Ace the CFA Exams (CFA mock-exam evaluation)Level I accuracy %, higher is better
Not scored
Reasoning Models Ace the CFA Exams (CFA mock-exam evaluation)Level III constructed-response score %, higher is better
Not scored
FAITHoverall accuracy %, higher is better
Not scored
FinanceBench% correct, no filing given (150-question sample), higher is better
Not scored
FinDeepResearchoverall accuracy score (0-100), higher is better
Not scored
FinSearchCompGreater China subset average accuracy %, higher is better
Not scored
K-FinHallubinary detection F1, higher is better
Not scored
Moneda CiteBenchFactual share of linked claims %, higher is better
Not scored
Moneda FilingsBench% correct (private split), higher is better
Not scored
Moneda PortfolioBenchPortfolio tasks, % correct, higher is better
Not scored
Finance Agent BenchmarkPartial credit % on the 27 public questions (run by Moneda; not comparable, unranked), higher is better
Not scored
Scores from different benchmarks use different scales and are not added up. Settings can differ between sources; see each leaderboard for details.