SWE-Marathon
20 realistic multi-hour software tasks (library reproductions, product clones, ML work). Verifiers combine hidden tests, parity and integrity checks.
No configuration exceeds 30% pass@1. Reward hacking seen in 13.8% of rollouts. Labs ran H20-recalibrated branches. v1.0 scores (k=5) sit on an archive board pinned to v1.0-official, and v1.1 replaced it in July 2026.
In the authors’ words
AI agents are increasingly expected to complete long-horizon workflows that require sustained progress over hours, millions of tokens, and complex environments. Yet current agent benchmarks largely evaluate short-form tasks, such as single pull requests, small tickets, or 5-10 minute exercises, limiting our ability to measure agents' capabilities in planning, long-context understanding, and memory use. We introduce SWE-Marathon, a benchmark of 20 long-horizon tasks spanning software engineering and adjacent technical domains. Each task consists of a unique executable environment, a human-written reference solution, and a multi-layer verification suite. Logged agent attempts average 27.2M total tokens, making SWE-Marathon substantially longer-horizon than existing SWE and command-line agent benchmarks. Current frontier coding agents solve fewer than 30% of tasks. Failures often arise from poor self-verification, self-reported infeasibility, and premature termination. We also observe reward-hacking behavior in 13.8% of rollouts, where agents attempt to exploit the environment or verifier to bypass the intended workflow. SWE-Marathon includes adversarial review of test suites and execution environments, as well as multi-layer checks designed to prevent shortcut solutions. We release SWE-Marathon, evaluation code, and agent trajectories at https://swe-marathon.org/.
- Level
- Expert Specialists with years of training, often over hours of work
- Scored
- Checked automatically A program checks the result against an answer key, unit tests or the expected final state.
- Answers
- Code A program or patch run against tests.
Grok 4.5 leads with 29% among models released by Jul 2026
Best score per model from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on 2 Nov 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best. Every run is in the next chart.
The newest model with a score here came out in Jul 2026, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-6.1 Terra
- GPT-6.1 Sol
- and 13 more
- 1 Grok 4.5 29%
- 2 Claude Opus 4.8 26%
- 3 Claude Fable 5 24%
- 4 Claude Opus 4.7 16%
- 5 GLM-5.2 13%
- 6 GPT-5.5 12%
- 7
Gemini 3.5 Flash 7.00%
- 8
Gemini 3.1 Pro 4.00%
- 9
DeepSeek-V4-Pro 4.00%
- 10 GLM-5.1 1.00%
- 11
MiniMax-M2.7 0%
- 12 Kimi K2.6 0%
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Grok 4.5 | 29% | Grok Build | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 2 | Claude Opus 4.8 | 26% | Claude Code | May 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 3 | Claude Fable 5 | 24% | Claude Code | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 4 | Claude Opus 4.7 | 16% | Claude Code | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 5 | GLM-5.2 | 13% | Claude Code | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | GPT-5.5 | 12% | Codex CLI | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | | 7.00% | Gemini CLI | May 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 8 | | 4.00% | Terminus 2 | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 9 | | 4.00% | Terminus 2 | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 10 | GLM-5.1 | 1.00% | Terminus 2 | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 11 | | 0% | Terminus 2 | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 12 | Kimi K2.6 | 0% | Kimi Code CLI | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
Labs report scores for 11 models in their cards. We plot every source in the charts below.
Of runs with a cost, the best scores 26% for $42 a task
Runs on the cost frontier score higher than any run that's cheaper. The costs are the leaderboard's own estimates, so compare them only within this benchmark.
| Model | Effort | Harness | Score | Cost per task | Output tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grok 4.5 | Grok Build | 29% | |||
| Claude Opus 4.8 | Claude Code | 26% | $42 | ||
| Claude Fable 5 | Claude Code | 24% | $29 | ||
| Claude Opus 4.7 | Claude Code | 16% | $37 | ||
| GLM-5.2 | Claude Code | 13% | $50 | ||
| GPT-5.5 | Codex CLI | 12% | $11 | ||
| Claude Opus 4.7 | Terminus 2 | 11% | $19 | ||
| | Gemini CLI | 7.00% | $6.65 | ||
| GPT-5.5 | Terminus 2 | 6.00% | $43 | ||
| | Terminus 2 | 4.00% | $3.65 | ||
| | Terminus 2 | 4.00% | $11 | ||
| | Gemini CLI | 2.00% | $5.40 | ||
| GLM-5.1 | Terminus 2 | 1.00% | $43 | ||
| | Terminus 2 | 0% | $1.63 | ||
| Kimi K2.6 | Kimi Code CLI | 0% | $5.31 | ||
| Kimi K2.6 | Terminus 2 | 0% | $5.76 |
2 models have held number one since its release in Jun 2026
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release. We draw one row each for the benchmark’s own leaderboard and what labs claim in their cards.
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
6 labs put it in a launch post in the last six months
Launch posts from every lab that has listed it, one tick per post. Tall colored ticks include it, and short gray ones leave it out.
| Date | Launch post | Score | As the post writes it |
|---|---|---|---|
| 24 Oct 2026 | Kimi K3.1 Pro | 51.7 | SWE Marathon v1.1 (Claude Code) |
| 12 Oct 2026 | 53.1 | SWE-Marathon (version not stated) | |
| 12 Oct 2026 | 57.5 | SWE-Marathon (xhigh) (version not stated) | |
| 20 Sep 2026 | 72.7 | SWE-Marathon v1.1 (Partial Score) | |
| 28 Aug 2026 | 31.9 | SWE-Marathon | |
| 14 Aug 2026 | GLM-5.3 | 42.5 | SWE-Marathon (v1.1) |
| 16 Jul 2026 | Kimi K3 | 42 | SWE-Marathon |
| 16 Jul 2026 | Grok 4.5 | 29 | SWE Marathon resolution rate (pass@1) |
| 16 Jun 2026 | GLM-5.2 | 13 | SWE-Marathon |
6 system cards report it, from 3 labs
Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12 Oct 2026 | | 53.1 | SWE-Marathon pass@1 from Abundant AI, Muse Wonder (max) (capabilities table image, page 3) | Capabilities |
| 12 Oct 2026 | | 57.5 | SWE-Marathon pass@1 from Abundant AI, Muse Wonder Full (max) (capabilities table image, page 3). Reported at xhigh effort | Capabilities |
| 21 Sep 2026 | Grok 4.7 model card | 46 | SWE-Marathon v1.1, resolution rate, high, run by Abundant AI (2.5) | Capabilities |
| 12 Aug 2026 | Grok 4.6 model card | 31.9 | SWE-Marathon v1.1, resolution rate, high, Grok Build harness, run by Abundant AI (2.5) | Capabilities |
| 27 Jul 2026 | Kimi K3 technical report | 42 | SWE-Marathon, H20-calibrated branch of the official tasks as of 2026-07-09 (Table 2) | Capabilities |
| 14 Jul 2026 | Grok 4.5 model card | 29 | SWE-Marathon, full task set, resolution rate, high (2.6) | Capabilities |
Versions
We switch the top row to each new version when it comes out. Open it for one row per version. An old version stays in play while people still test it, so whoever first takes it past 85% gets credit for closing it out.
More 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%
- SWE-bench Multilingual In use 300 GitHub-issue tasks across nine programming languages in SWE-bench format. Patch graded by repository tests. Claude Opus 5.5 93.9%
- 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%
- 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