Benchmark Almanac

FeatureBench Lite

Claude Opus 4.7 78.2% leads since April 2026
Not in model cards

The public 30-task Lite leaderboard ranks passed-test percentages and reports fully resolved-task percentages separately.

The public 30-task Lite leaderboard ranks passed-test percentages and reports fully resolved-task percentages separately.

Made by
LiberCoders
Released
February 2026
Kind
Fixing real repositories
Level
Expert
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Agent task
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
GPT-5.5 #20 on the capability index
Last model added
April 2026
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

Agents powered by large language models (LLMs) are increasingly adopted in the software industry, contributing code as collaborators or even autonomous developers. As their presence grows, it becomes important to assess the current boundaries of their coding abilities. Existing agentic coding benchmarks, however, cover a limited task scope, e.g., bug fixing within a single pull request (PR), and often rely on non-executable evaluations or lack an automated approach for continually updating the evaluation coverage. To address such issues, we propose FeatureBench, a benchmark designed to evaluate agentic coding performance in end-to-end, feature-oriented software development. FeatureBench incorporates an execution-based evaluation protocol and a scalable test-driven method that automatically derives tasks from code repositories with minimal human effort. By tracing from unit tests along a dependency graph, our approach can identify feature-level coding tasks spanning multiple commits and PRs scattered across the development timeline, while ensuring the proper functioning of other features after the separation. Using this framework, we curated 200 challenging evaluation tasks and 3825 executable environments from 24 open-source repositories in the first version of our benchmark. Empirical evaluation reveals that the state-of-the-art agentic model, such as Claude 4.5 Opus, which achieves a 74.4% resolved rate on SWE-bench, succeeds on only 11.0% of tasks, opening new opportunities for advancing agentic coding. Moreover, benefiting from our automated task collection toolkit, FeatureBench can be easily scaled and updated over time to mitigate data leakage. The inherent verifiability of constructed environments also makes our method potentially valuable for agent training.

Abstract of FeatureBench: Benchmarking Agentic Coding for Complex Feature Development (arXiv:2602.10975, CC0)
18
Entries on its own leaderboard, 16 models we track

Claude Opus 4.7 leads with 78.2% among models released by April 2026

Best score per entry from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on November 12th, 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best. Names in gray aren't in our model list: fine-tunes, agent systems, products and older models. They don't count toward leaders.

The newest model with a score here came out in April 2026, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:

  1. 1 Claude Opus 4.7 Lite; 30 tasks 78.2%
  2. 2 GPT-5.5 Lite; 30 tasks 69.8%
  3. 3 Claude Opus 4.6 Lite; 30 tasks 69.5%
  4. 4 Claude Opus 4.5 Lite; 30 tasks 67.2%
  5. 5 GPT-5.4 Lite; 30 tasks 66.2%
  6. 6 GPT-5.1-Codex Lite; 30 tasks 60.2%
  7. 7 DeepSeek-V4-Pro Lite; 30 tasks 59.6%
  8. 8 Kimi-2.6 Lite; 30 tasks 49.4%
  9. 9 MiMo-V2.5-Pro Lite; 30 tasks 47.8%
  10. 10 Gemini 3 Pro Lite; 30 tasks 45.1%
  11. 11 GLM-5.1 Lite; 30 tasks 44.2%
  12. 12 MiniMax-M2.1 Lite; 30 tasks 41.9%
  13. 13 DeepSeek-V4-Flash Lite; 30 tasks 41.9%
  14. 14 GLM-4.7 Lite; 30 tasks 41.2%
  15. 15 Qwen3-Coder-480B-A35B-Instruct Lite; 30 tasks 38.3%
  16. 16 DeepSeek-V3.2 Lite; 30 tasks 35.9%
  17. 17 Qwen3.5-27B Lite; 30 tasks 34.8%
  18. 18 Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct Lite; 30 tasks 23%

Source: Official FeatureBench Lite leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 Claude Opus 4.7 78.2% Lite; 30 tasks, OpenHands Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
2 GPT-5.5 69.8% Lite; 30 tasks, OpenHands Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
3 Claude Opus 4.6 69.5% Lite; 30 tasks, OpenHands Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
4 Claude Opus 4.5 67.2% Lite; 30 tasks, OpenHands Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
5 GPT-5.4 66.2% Lite; 30 tasks, OpenHands Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
6 GPT-5.1-Codex 60.2% Lite; 30 tasks, Codex Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
7 DeepSeek-V4-Pro 59.6% Lite; 30 tasks, OpenHands Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
8 Kimi-2.6 49.4% Lite; 30 tasks, OpenHands Official leaderboard
9 MiMo-V2.5-Pro 47.8% Lite; 30 tasks, OpenHands Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
10 Gemini 3 Pro 45.1% Lite; 30 tasks, OpenHands Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
11 GLM-5.1 44.2% Lite; 30 tasks, OpenHands Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
12 MiniMax-M2.1 41.9% Lite; 30 tasks, Mini-SWE-Agent Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
13 DeepSeek-V4-Flash 41.9% Lite; 30 tasks, OpenHands Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
14 GLM-4.7 41.2% Lite; 30 tasks, Mini-SWE-Agent Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
15 Qwen3-Coder-480B-A35B-Instruct 38.3% Lite; 30 tasks, OpenHands Official leaderboard
16 DeepSeek-V3.2 35.9% Lite; 30 tasks, OpenHands Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
17 Qwen3.5-27B 34.8% Lite; 30 tasks, OpenHands Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
18 Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct 23% Lite; 30 tasks, OpenHands Jul 2025 Official leaderboard

3 models have held number one on the official leaderboard since its release in February 2026

Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.

Anthropic
Own leaderboard Not tested since Apr 2026

Source: Official FeatureBench Lite leaderboard

Scores over time

All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.

On the benchmark’s own leaderboard Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Claude Opus 4.7 Claude Opus 4.6 Claude Opus 4.5 GPT-5.1-Codex Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Claude Opus 4.7 Claude Opus 4.6

Source: Official FeatureBench Lite leaderboard

No lab model card reports it yet

We read the headline results of 522 launch posts from 52 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.

More in Coding

All 282 in Coding
  • SWE-bench Verified In use 500 human-validated GitHub issues from 12 Python repos. Agent writes a patch that must pass hidden tests. Claude Opus 4.7 83.5%
  • LiveCodeBench v6 In use Competitive programming problems collected after model cutoffs from LeetCode, AtCoder, Codeforces. Scored pass@1 on hidden tests. DeepSeek-V4-Pro 93.5%
  • SWE-bench Multilingual In use 300 GitHub-issue tasks across nine programming languages in SWE-bench format. Patch graded by repository tests. Claude Fable 5.2 96.6%
  • DeepSWE In use 113 original long-horizon engineering tasks across 91 repos and five languages, written from scratch. Hand-written verifiers accept alternative solutions. GPT-6 Astra 74.1%
  • SciCode In use Scientist-curated research coding problems split into subproblems across natural sciences. Code checked against test cases. Seed2.1 Pro 59.8%
  • Codeforces rating In use Model solves recent Codeforces contest problems. An Elo-style rating is computed from simulated contest performance. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 3,471