Benchmark Almanac

SWT-bench

GPT-5 mini 56.2% leads since Aug 2025 Fading

Agents write tests that reproduce real GitHub issues from SWE-bench repositories. Scored by the share of tests that fail before and pass after the fix.

Reported on Lite and Verified splits, so check which one a card uses.

In the authors’ words

Rigorous software testing is crucial for developing and maintaining high-quality code, making automated test generation a promising avenue for both improving software quality and boosting the effectiveness of code generation methods. However, while code generation with Large Language Models (LLMs) is an extraordinarily active research area, test generation remains relatively unexplored. We address this gap and investigate the capability of LLM-based Code Agents to formalize user issues into test cases. To this end, we propose a novel benchmark based on popular GitHub repositories, containing real-world issues, ground-truth bug-fixes, and golden tests. We find that LLMs generally perform surprisingly well at generating relevant test cases, with Code Agents designed for code repair exceeding the performance of systems designed specifically for test generation. Further, as test generation is a similar but more structured task than code generation, it allows for a more fine-grained analysis using issue reproduction rate and coverage changes, providing a dual metric for analyzing systems designed for code repair. Finally, we find that generated tests are an effective filter for proposed code fixes, doubling the precision of SWE-Agent. We release all data and code at https://github.com/logic-star-ai/SWT-Bench

Abstract of SWT-Bench: Testing and Validating Real-World Bug-Fixes with Code Agents (arXiv:2406.12952, CC0)
Made by ETH Zurich and LogicStar.ai Released Jun 2024 Fixing real repositories All tasks public Last in a launch post Dec 2025 , dropped before it saturated Last model added Dec 2025 Scores refreshed 2 Nov 2026
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.
11
Entries on its own leaderboard, 9 models we track
1
Launch post lists it, from 1 lab

GPT-5 mini leads with 56.2% among models released by Aug 2025

Best score per entry from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on 2 Nov 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 Aug 2025, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:

  1. 1 GPT-5 mini 56.2%
  2. 2 Claude 3.7 Sonnet 52.5%
  3. 3 v20250405-dev 39.9%
  4. 4 GPT-4o Mar 2025 38%
  5. 5 Claude Sonnet 3.5 28.3%
  6. 6 GPT-4 Jun 2023 18.5%
  7. 7 Mistral Large 2 Jul 2024 16.3%
  8. 8 Claude 3.5 Sonnet 12.3%
  9. 9 GPT-4o mini 9.80%
  10. 10 Claude 3 Haiku 2.50%
  11. 11 Mixtral 8x22B 0.70%
#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 GPT-5 mini 56.2% ReProAgent Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
2 Claude 3.7 Sonnet 52.5% e-Otter++ Feb 2025 Official leaderboard
3 v20250405-dev 39.9% Amazon Q Developer Agent Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
4 GPT-4o Mar 2025 38% AssertFlip Mar 2025 Official leaderboard
5 Claude Sonnet 3.5 28.3% OpenHands, CI setup Feb 2025 Official leaderboard
6 GPT-4 Jun 2023 18.5% SWE-Agent+ Jun 2023 Official leaderboard
7 Mistral Large 2 Jul 2024 16.3% SWE-Agent Jul 2024 Official leaderboard
8 Claude 3.5 Sonnet 12.3% SWE-Agent Jun 2024 Official leaderboard
9 GPT-4o mini 9.80% SWE-Agent Jul 2024 Official leaderboard
10 Claude 3 Haiku 2.50% SWE-Agent Mar 2024 Official leaderboard
11 Mixtral 8x22B 0.70% SWE-Agent Apr 2024 Official leaderboard

Labs report scores for 1 model in their cards. We plot every source in the charts below.

3 models have held number one since its release in Jun 2024

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

OpenAI Anthropic
Own leaderboard Not tested since Aug 2025
GPT-5 mini 56.2%

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 Reported by the lab in its model card Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2023 2024 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) MiniMax-M2.1 GPT-5 mini GPT-4 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2023 2024 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) MiniMax-M2.1 GPT-5 mini

Labs headline it less often now, last in Dec 2025

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.

MiniMax
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
23 Dec 2025 MiniMax-M2.1 69.3 SWT-bench

More in Coding

All 243 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