Benchmark Almanac

VHELM

Gemini 2.5 Pro Jun 2025 87.1 leads since Jun 2025 Not in model cards

Vision-language models are scored across nine aspects, including perception, reasoning, knowledge, bias, fairness, multilinguality, robustness, toxicity and safety, from many existing datasets.

Releases run from v1.0.0 to v2.1.2.

In the authors’ words

Current benchmarks for assessing vision-language models (VLMs) often focus on their perception or problem-solving capabilities and neglect other critical aspects such as fairness, multilinguality, or toxicity. Furthermore, they differ in their evaluation procedures and the scope of the evaluation, making it difficult to compare models. To address these issues, we extend the HELM framework to VLMs to present the Holistic Evaluation of Vision Language Models (VHELM). VHELM aggregates various datasets to cover one or more of the 9 aspects: visual perception, knowledge, reasoning, bias, fairness, multilinguality, robustness, toxicity, and safety. In doing so, we produce a comprehensive, multi-dimensional view of the capabilities of the VLMs across these important factors. In addition, we standardize the standard inference parameters, methods of prompting, and evaluation metrics to enable fair comparisons across models. Our framework is designed to be lightweight and automatic so that evaluation runs are cheap and fast. Our initial run evaluates 22 VLMs on 21 existing datasets to provide a holistic snapshot of the models. We uncover new key findings, such as the fact that efficiency-focused models (e.g., Claude 3 Haiku or Gemini 1.5 Flash) perform significantly worse than their full models (e.g., Claude 3 Opus or Gemini 1.5 Pro) on the bias benchmark but not when evaluated on the other aspects. For transparency, we release the raw model generations and complete results on our website (https://crfm.stanford.edu/helm/vhelm/v2.0.1). VHELM is intended to be a living benchmark, and we hope to continue adding new datasets and models over time.

Abstract of VHELM: A Holistic Evaluation of Vision Language Models (arXiv:2410.07112, CC0)
Made by Stanford CRFM Released Oct 2024 General visual questions All tasks public Last model added Jun 2025 Scores refreshed 2 Nov 2026
Level
University Undergraduates and entry-level professionals
Scored
Checked automatically A program checks the result against an answer key, unit tests or the expected final state.
Answers
Short answer A number, word or short string matched to a key.
43
Entries on its own leaderboard, 41 models we track

Gemini 2.5 Pro leads with 87.1 among models released by Jun 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 Jun 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 Gemini 2.5 Pro Jun 2025 87.1
  2. 2 o3 high 81.0
  3. 3 Qwen2.5-VL-72B 78.0
  4. 4 o4-mini high 76.0
  5. 5 GPT-4.5 72.8
  6. 6 Gemini 2.0 Pro 72.4
  7. 7 o1 71.6
  8. 8 Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct 71.0
  9. 9 GPT-4.1 69.5
  10. 10 Gemini 2.0 Flash Feb 2025 68.1
  11. 11 GPT-4.1 mini 65.6
  12. 12 GPT-4o May 2024 65.3
  13. 13 GPT-4o Nov 2024 62.7
  14. 14 Qwen2.5-VL-7B 60.9
  15. 15 GPT-4o Aug 2024 59.8
  16. 16 Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite 59.7
  17. 17 Gemini 1.5 Pro Sep 2024 59.6
  18. 18 Qwen2.5-VL-32B 58.6
  19. 19 palmyra-vision-003 54.5
  20. 20 Qwen2-VL-7B-Instruct 53.4
  21. 21 Llama 4 Maverick 52.4
  22. 22 Gemini 1.5 Flash Sep 2024 51.9
  23. 23 GPT-4 Turbo Apr 2024 51.5
  24. 24 Gemini 1.5 Pro May 2024, BLOCK_NONE safety 50.4
  25. 25 Claude 3.5 Sonnet (October 2024) 49.7
  26. 26 Claude 3.5 Sonnet 48.2
  27. 27 GPT-4o mini 46.5
  28. 28 GPT-4 Turbo Nov 2023 46.1
  29. 29 Gemini 1.5 Flash May 2024, BLOCK_NONE safety 45.3
  30. 30 Qwen2.5-VL-3B 40.7
  31. 31 Llama 4 Scout 38.0
  32. 32 Gemini 1.0 Pro Vision 32.1
  33. 33 Claude 3 Opus 31.9
  34. 34 Claude 3 Sonnet 29.8
  35. 35 Pixtral 12B 29.6
  36. 36 GPT-4.1 nano 29.1
  37. 37 Claude 3 Haiku 27.1
  38. 38 Idefics2-8B 21.5
  39. 39 PaliGemma-3B-mix-448 20.6
  40. 40 paligemma-3b-mix-224 19.6
  41. 41 IDEFICS-80B-Instruct 9.06
  42. 42 Qwen-VL-Chat 4.73
  43. 43 IDEFICS-9B-Instruct 4.51
#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 Gemini 2.5 Pro Jun 2025 87.1 Jun 2025 Official leaderboard
2 o3 81.0 high Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
3 Qwen2.5-VL-72B 78.0 Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
4 o4-mini 76.0 high Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
5 GPT-4.5 72.8 Feb 2025 Official leaderboard
6 Gemini 2.0 Pro 72.4 Feb 2025 Official leaderboard
7 o1 71.6 Dec 2024 Official leaderboard
8 Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct 71.0 Aug 2024 Official leaderboard
9 GPT-4.1 69.5 Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
10 Gemini 2.0 Flash Feb 2025 68.1 Feb 2025 Official leaderboard
11 GPT-4.1 mini 65.6 Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
12 GPT-4o May 2024 65.3 May 2024 Official leaderboard
13 GPT-4o Nov 2024 62.7 Nov 2024 Official leaderboard
14 Qwen2.5-VL-7B 60.9 Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
15 GPT-4o Aug 2024 59.8 Aug 2024 Official leaderboard
16 Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite 59.7 Feb 2025 Official leaderboard
17 Gemini 1.5 Pro Sep 2024 59.6 Sep 2024 Official leaderboard
18 Qwen2.5-VL-32B 58.6 Mar 2025 Official leaderboard
19 palmyra-vision-003 54.5 Official leaderboard
20 Qwen2-VL-7B-Instruct 53.4 Aug 2024 Official leaderboard
21 Llama 4 Maverick 52.4 Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
22 Gemini 1.5 Flash Sep 2024 51.9 Aug 2024 Official leaderboard
23 GPT-4 Turbo Apr 2024 51.5 Apr 2024 Official leaderboard
24 Gemini 1.5 Pro May 2024 50.4 BLOCK_NONE safety May 2024 Official leaderboard
25 Claude 3.5 Sonnet (October 2024) 49.7 Oct 2024 Official leaderboard
26 Claude 3.5 Sonnet 48.2 Jun 2024 Official leaderboard
27 GPT-4o mini 46.5 Jul 2024 Official leaderboard
28 GPT-4 Turbo Nov 2023 46.1 Nov 2023 Official leaderboard
29 Gemini 1.5 Flash May 2024 45.3 BLOCK_NONE safety May 2024 Official leaderboard
30 Qwen2.5-VL-3B 40.7 Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
31 Llama 4 Scout 38.0 Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
32 Gemini 1.0 Pro Vision 32.1 Jan 2024 Official leaderboard
33 Claude 3 Opus 31.9 Feb 2024 Official leaderboard
34 Claude 3 Sonnet 29.8 Feb 2024 Official leaderboard
35 Pixtral 12B 29.6 Sep 2024 Official leaderboard
36 GPT-4.1 nano 29.1 Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
37 Claude 3 Haiku 27.1 Mar 2024 Official leaderboard
38 Idefics2-8B 21.5 Apr 2024 Official leaderboard
39 PaliGemma-3B-mix-448 20.6 May 2024 Official leaderboard
40 paligemma-3b-mix-224 19.6 Official leaderboard
41 IDEFICS-80B-Instruct 9.06 Jul 2023 Official leaderboard
42 Qwen-VL-Chat 4.73 Aug 2023 Official leaderboard
43 IDEFICS-9B-Instruct 4.51 Jul 2023 Official leaderboard

5 models have held number one since its release in Oct 2024

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

Other labs OpenAI Qwen Google DeepMind
Own leaderboard Not tested since Jun 2025

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
0.00 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 2024 2025 0.00 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 2024 2025

No lab model card reports it yet

We read the headline results of 479 launch posts from 51 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.

More in Vision

All 234 in Vision
  • MMMU In use 11.5K college-level multimodal questions across 30 subjects. Multiple-choice and open accuracy. GPT-5.1 85.4%
  • MMMU-Pro In use Harder MMMU: college-level multimodal questions with more options and vision-only inputs to remove text shortcuts. Kimi K3.1 Pro 84.1%
  • CharXiv In use Chart understanding on real arXiv figures. Reasoning questions require synthesizing information from complex charts. Claude Fable 5 93.5%
  • MATH-Vision (MathVision) In use 3,040 competition math problems with visual context. Answer accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 97.7%
  • ChartQA In use Models answer human-written and generated questions about chart images that need visual and arithmetic reasoning. Scored by relaxed accuracy with a 5 percent numeric tolerance. Command A Vision 90.9%
  • DocVQA In use Models answer 50,000 questions about 12,000 scanned document images by reading their text and layout. Scoring is ANLS, a string similarity to reference answers. Seed1.5-VL 96.9%