BenchmarkSeptember 15, 20267 min read

Best AI Model for Financial Analysis: 17 Models Benchmarked

We ran 17 frontier models through the same 55 private-markets finance tasks — capital-call notices, trial balances, fund statements, dashboards — inside a production system, and graded every run. GPT-5.6 Sol and GPT-5.5 tied at the top on tasks completed. Neither is the one we would pick on cost.

The short answer

Most tasks completed
GPT-5.6 Sol and GPT-5.5
42 of 55 tasks (76.4%)
Best value
GPT-5.6 Luna
$0.12 per correct answer, 67.3% of tasks completed
Fastest
GPT-5.4
39s per task
Most expensive
GPT-5.6 Sol
$2.76 per task — 35× the cheapest, for 9.1 points more tasks completed

No model completed all 55 tasks. The field runs from 76.4% down to 16.4%, so the question is less which model is best than which is good enough for the work in front of you — and what you are prepared to pay per correct answer.

All 17 models, ranked

Ranked by how many of the 55 tasks each completed correctly. Cost per correct answer divides the bill by the tasks that came back right, which is what you actually pay when a failed task has to be redone.

ModelProviderCompletedCompletion rateCost / taskCost / correct answerSpeed
GPT-5.6 SolAzure Foundry42/5576.4%$2.76$3.6190s
GPT-5.5Azure Foundry42/5576.4%$1.18$1.54113s
Claude Opus 4.6Bedrock41/5574.5%$2.27$3.04110s
GPT-5.6 TerraAzure Foundry40/5572.7%$1.00$1.3774s
DeepSeek V4.1 FlashFireworks38/5569.1%$0.18$0.26209s
GPT-5.6 LunaAzure Foundry37/5567.3%$0.08$0.12291s
Claude Opus 4.8Bedrock37/5567.3%$1.52$2.2668s
Kimi K3 (FW)Azure Foundry37/5567.3%$0.31$0.46118s
Claude Sonnet 5Bedrock36/5565.5%$0.86$1.3269s
DeepSeek V4 ProAzure Foundry36/5565.5%$0.55$0.83109s
Claude Sonnet 4.6Bedrock36/5565.5%$0.99$1.5183s
Claude Opus 5Bedrock35/5563.6%$1.64$2.5876s
DeepSeek V4 FlashAzure Foundry35/5563.6%$0.09$0.14155s
GLM 5.3 (FW)Azure Foundry35/5563.6%$0.30$0.47342s
GPT-5.4Azure Foundry29/5552.7%$0.71$1.3539s
Claude Haiku 4.5Bedrock25/5545.5%$0.26$0.5749s
Cohere Command A+Azure Foundry9/5516.4%$1.31$7.98150s

Run of September 15, 2026. Free to download and reuse with attribution — CSV or JSON, CC BY 4.0.

The best model depends on the task

The overall figure hides the thing that matters most in practice: models that look alike in aggregate diverge sharply by the kind of work. Five different models lead the seven categories.

Kind of workBest modelIts scoreField average
Document IngestionGPT-5.6 Sol5/642.2%
Metric LookupsGPT-5.6 Sol12/1288.7%
Financial StatementsDeepSeek V4.1 Flash5/743.7%
Error Detection & RepairClaude Sonnet 56/760.5%
Dashboards & WidgetsGPT-5.6 Terra8/884.6%
ChartsGPT-5.6 Luna3/466.2%
Multi-Step RequestsGPT-5.54/654.9%

Questions people ask

Which AI model is most accurate for private-markets financial analysis?

GPT-5.6 Sol and GPT-5.5 tied at the top, each completing 42 of 55 tasks (76.4%). No model passed everything. Run-to-run variation is about ±1.8 tasks, so any gap of two tasks or fewer should be read as a tie rather than a ranking.

Is ChatGPT accurate enough for fund reporting?

Not on its own. The best model tested completed 76.4% of tasks correctly, which means roughly one task in four came back wrong. The failures are rarely obvious — models loaded rows they were told to exclude, or produced figures that look plausible and surface later as unexplained variances. A model is a capable component inside a system that checks its work; it is not a substitute for one.

What does it cost to run an AI agent on a financial task?

Between $0.08 and $2.76 per task across the models tested — a 35× spread. Cost per correct answer is the more useful number, because a failed task has to be redone: that ranges from $0.12 (GPT-5.6 Luna) to $7.98 (Cohere Command A+).

Which AI model gives the best value for financial analysis?

GPT-5.6 Luna, at $0.12 per correct answer. It completed 37 of 55 tasks — 9.1 percentage points behind the leaders, at roughly 35× less per task.

Do more expensive models perform better on financial work?

Barely. GPT-5.6 Sol costs 35× more per task than GPT-5.6 Luna and completes 9.1 percentage points more of the tasks. Price is a poor predictor of how much work a model gets right; the task type matters far more than the price tier.

Which model is best at reading capital-call notices and trial balances?

GPT-5.6 Sol led document ingestion with 5 of 6, and no model passed all six. Ingestion was the hardest category in the benchmark — the field averaged 42.2% — because it requires following instructions exactly across multi-step workflows, not just reading a document.

How were these models tested?

17 models, one environment, one grader — the environment is ours, none of the models are. Every model ran the same 55 tasks inside a production private-markets system, using the same documents, the same tools and the same database, with 935 graded runs in total. Grading is deterministic where a task has one right answer and rubric-based where it does not.

How the test was run

Every model received the same 55 tasks, the same source documents, the same tool definitions and the same database, inside a production private-markets system — not a synthetic test set. 935 graded runs in total. Where a task has a single right answer, grading is deterministic; where it does not, it is scored against a written rubric.

17 models, one environment, one grader. The environment is ours; none of the models are. The models were reached through Azure Foundry, AWS Bedrock and Fireworks on published list pricing.

Run-to-run variation is about ±1.8 tasks at 95% confidence, so a two-task gap is a tie, not a ranking. Latency is end-to-end task time including tool calls, database writes and approval rounds — not raw model inference speed.