Generative AI · Decision models

#1 of 159 on JevBench Capability

H2O-Lightning-31B ranks #1 of 159 on JevBench Capability, the board's headline score

Decision models get a situation and typed questions and must return calibrated answers, scored on intelligence, calibration, speed and cost. A 31B model with open weights.

Capability score
84.3
latency incl. network, board estimate
0.28 s
per 1,000 decisions, board estimate
$0.044

Capability, latency and cost, side by side

CompositeCapability top 1010 · sorted by Capability · higher is better

Sort by
  1. Rank 1Composite 73.1Capability 84.3H2O-Lightning-31B v1.0.7latency 280 mscost $0.044
  2. Rank 2Composite 71.5Capability 82.1basal-omni-1.0-ultralatency 370 mscost $0.045
  3. Rank 3Composite 70.5Capability 81.8Arcbright Elf 1 31Blatency 270 mscost $0.047
  4. Rank 4Composite 71.3Capability 81.7Quyet-1.0-Largelatency 390 mscost $0.045
  5. Rank 5Capability 81.5Jeff-1.0-Largelatency 320 mscost $0.049
  6. Rank 6Capability 79.6metask-jev-rain-31B-trained service v3latency 520 mscost $0.049
  7. Rank 7Composite 71.7Capability 79.6decisio v0.8.0 on gemma-4-31B-itlatency 240 mscost $0.041
  8. Rank 8Capability 78.9metask-jev-rain-31B-trainedlatency 620 mscost $0.044
  9. Rank 9Capability 77.9Bobcat 1.3latency 290 mscost $0.047
  10. Rank 10Capability 77.6deck-31Blatency 410 mscost $0.048
  11. Composite 71.4Capability 77.1Jev 1.13.0reference · closed API · not rankedlatency 240 mscost $0.032
  12. Rank 15Composite 73.8Capability 75.0H2O-Lightning-4B v1.1latency 210 mscost $0.016
  13. Composite 70.2Capability 75.0Jev 1.14.0reference · closed API · not rankedlatency 230 mscost $0.032

Hatched: the board's Jev reference, a closed API listed but not ranked. Capability, the board's headline score, ranks the 159 inside its cost and latency caps. On the board's official Composite for open-weights systems H2O-Lightning-31B is #3 of 220. Latency includes network: for self-hosted models the board estimates it as 2 × its measured GPU time + 150 ms. Cost is the board's estimate. Benchmark Heaven, board v1.7.48.

Generative AI · Image decision models

#1 of 54 on ImageJevBench Capability

H2O-Lightning-31B ranks #1 of 54 on ImageJevBench Capability, the board's headline score

Image decision models answer typed questions about a picture and must return calibrated answers, scored on intelligence, calibration, speed and cost. An open-weights model.

Capability score
80.9
latency incl. network, board estimate
0.59 s
per 1,000 decisions, at the board's GPU rate
$0.075

Capability, latency and cost, side by side

CompositeCapability top 1010 · sorted by Capability · higher is better

Sort by
  1. Rank 1Composite 51.2Capability 80.9H2O-Lightning-31Blatency 590 mscost $0.075
  2. Rank 2Composite 75.4Capability 75.9kettei-fatlatency 420 mscost $0.011
  3. Rank 3Composite 47.9Capability 75.8Sage 1.4 + images, betalatency 560 mscost $0.079
  4. Rank 4Composite 44.6Capability 72.5Drex Maxlatency 850 mscost $0.084
  5. Rank 5Capability 72.4Jev 1.13.0 + images, previewlatency 380 mscost $0.16
  6. Rank 6Composite 41.4Capability 68.3Autoloops – Gemma 4 31B ITlatency 1190 mscost $0.083
  7. Rank 7Composite 63.7Capability 68.0Imajev-4Blatency 370 mscost $0.038
  8. Rank 8Capability 67.1imajev 9Blatency 670 mscost $0.089
  9. Rank 9Composite 63.3Capability 66.5kettei-chublatency 310 mscost $0.0073
  10. Rank 10Composite 42.5Capability 64.8Surogate Rune 26B-A4B v3latency 490 mscost $0.058

Capability, the board's headline score, ranks the 54 Jev-class systems: those inside 2 × the cost and median latency of the board's Jev reference. On the board's official Composite H2O-Lightning-31B is #5 of 63. Latency includes network: for self-hosted models the board estimates it as 2 × its measured GPU time + 150 ms. A self-hosted system's cost is its measured GPU time at the board's hourly rate. Benchmark Heaven, board v0.3.0.

Predictive AI · Time-series forecasting

#1 of 32 on fev-bench

TimeH2O-v1 ranks #1 of 32 on the fev-bench leaderboard, by win rate

Zero-shot forecasting on real time series across many domains and frequencies, scored by probabilistic accuracy against a seasonal-naive baseline. 108.8M parameters.

win rate
91.9%
skill score
50.8%
parameters
108.8M

Win rate · top 8 of 32

higher is better

  1. #1TimeH2O-v191.9%
  2. #2Timestral-209M89.6%
  3. #3t0-gamma88.1%
  4. #4TimesFM-382.7%
  5. #5Chronos-276.8%
  6. #6t0-beta74.5%
  7. #7TiRex-273.5%
  8. #8Toto-2.0-2.5B73.0%

Default leaderboard view. With the closed-API models included it is #2 of 36. TimeH2O-v1 has a non-commercial licence.

Agentic AI · Social forecasting

#1 of 24 on Social Simulation Arena

H2O AI Super Agent ranks #1 of 24 on Social Simulation Arena's Season 0 pairwise win rate

Entrants forecast the next public release of poll, sentiment and attention series. Forecasts are locked before the answer exists and scored against the published number.

pairwise win rate
67.29
questions answered
43
H2O AI Super Agent
#1
H2O AI Marina
#3

Pairwise win rate · top 8 of 24

higher is better

  1. #1H2O AI Super Agent67.29
  2. #2Apodex-FutureFlow66.60
  3. #3H2O AI Marina62.20
  4. #4Vac57.08
  5. #5Claude Sonnet 5 · web+sfc56.89
  6. #6Crowd (baseline)54.95
  7. #7worldVac54.11
  8. #8Gemini 3.1 Pro · web52.12

The site's default view: Season 0 pairwise win rate, 43 questions locked from 30 Sep 2026, one row per method. By arena score over every resolved number question Super Agent is #3 of 25 and Marina #4; by arena score on the Season 0 main board Super Agent is #5 of 26 and Marina #7. Entrants answer different numbers of questions.

Agentic AI · Future prediction

25 FutureX medals, 8 of them first places

H2O AI Super Agent ranks #1 of 24 on FutureX's weekly board for 2026 Oct. Week 2

Agents predict real-world events before they resolve, with a new board every week, scored once the answers are known.

latest weekly board
#1 of 24
first places
8
weekly boards with a medal, of 43 entered
18

Overall score, weekly board · top 8 of 24

higher is better

#ModelFrameworkOrganizationScore
1sonnet-5.5 - v2H2O AI Super Agent v1.82h2o.ai52.16
2sonnet-5.5 - 3xH2O AI Super Agent v1.82h2o.ai46.60
3GLM 5.2arce #1Indiv. AI Researcher46.05
4grok-4.7+sonnet-5.5 - v4H2O AI Super Agent v1.82h2o.ai45.56
5sonnet-5-5H2O AI Super Agent v1.82h2o.ai45.49
6grok-4.7+sonnet-5.5 - v1H2O AI Super Agent v1.82h2o.ai45.49
7GLM 5.2arce #2Indiv. AI Researcher45.00
8blue-fishblue-fishGoogle DeepMind43.88

Best of 8 H2O submissions. The agent runs on third-party base LLMs; medals count every H2O entry.

Predictive AI · Tabular foundation models

#5 of 13 on TALENT · #7 of 39 on TabArena

TabH2O ranks #5 of 13 on TALENT and #7 of 39 on TabArena

Two public benchmark suites of tabular classification and regression datasets, comparing tabular foundation models, AutoML and tuned gradient boosting.

TALENT
#5 of 13
TabArena
#7 of 39

Try it now

Run TabH2O on your own table in the browser, then get an API key for the REST endpoint.

Open the playground

TALENT · average rank across datasets · top 8 of 13

lower is better

  1. #1TabICL v2 (fine-tuned)3.48
  2. #2EXAONE-Tabular3.85
  3. #3TabPFN v3.04.23
  4. #4TabICL v24.40
  5. #5TabH2O v1.15.28
  6. #6TabPFN v2.65.89
  7. #7TabPFN v2.56.23
  8. #8AutoGluon8.07

TabArena · average rank across datasets · top 8 of 39

lower is better

  1. #1TabFM ensemble (official results)1.76
  2. #2TabFM (official results)3.31
  3. #3EXAONE-Tabular4.96
  4. #4TabPFN v3.06.37
  5. #5TabICL v2 (fine-tuned)7.18
  6. #6TabPFN v2.67.51
  7. #7TabH2O v1.18.39
  8. #8TabICL v28.76