OpenClaw Arena
Benchmark models on real tasks, rank by perf and cost
Last verified:
What is OpenClaw Arena?
OpenClaw Arena is a public benchmark platform by UniClaw for evaluating whether AI agents can complete real-world workflows, not just chat conversations. Unlike chat leaderboards that measure response preference, Arena tests full agent capabilities including reading/writing files, using browsers and terminals, installing dependencies, generating code, and delivering runnable results. Models run as actual OpenClaw subagents in fresh VMs with full tool access, and results feed into live leaderboards.
The platform features two separate leaderboards: a performance leaderboard ranking which models produce the best results, and a cost-effectiveness leaderboard ranking which models deliver the best quality per dollar. Users can submit any task and pit 2-5 models against each other. A judge OpenClaw agent runs on a fresh VM, spawns one subagent per model, and each model solves the task independently. The platform uses a grouped Plackett-Luce ranking model with 1,000-resample bootstrap confidence intervals and shows rank spread for uncertainty visualization.
OpenClaw Arena covers 11 task categories including coding and app delivery, automation, analysis and reporting, research and extraction, and document/artifact production. Representative battles include website screenshot archivers, SEC EDGAR research tasks, and manufacturing quality analysis with 50,000-row datasets. The current public snapshot spans 888 battles across coding, automation, analysis, research, and other real workflow categories with 15+ models tested.
The tool is designed for AI researchers, developers, and teams who need to evaluate AI agent performance on practical tasks before choosing models for production. It's also valuable for anyone comparing AI models beyond chat capabilities, including those building agentic workflows, automation systems, or AI-powered applications. The leaderboard is browsable without an account, and public benchmarks are completely free with UniClaw covering compute costs.
OpenClaw Arena pricing
Pricing model: Freemium
Public benchmarks on OpenClaw Arena are completely free - UniClaw covers all compute costs. The leaderboard is browsable without an account. Submitting a battle requires a free account. For deploying your own always-on OpenClaw agent (separate from Arena benchmarking), UniClaw offers 6 plans from $12/month: Lite ($12/mo, 1 vCPU, 1 GB RAM, 25 GB SSD), Core ($22/mo, 1 vCPU, 2 GB RAM, 50 GB SSD - most popular), Plus ($32/mo, 2 vCPUs, 2 GB RAM, 60 GB SSD), Pro ($42/mo, 2 vCPUs, 4 GB RAM, 80 GB SSD - best value), Turbo ($72/mo, 4 vCPUs, 8 GB RAM, 160 GB SSD), and Max ($132/mo, 8 vCPUs, 16 GB RAM, 320 GB SSD). Every plan includes dedicated cloud machine, 40+ pre-installed skills, 24/7 uptime, encrypted secure access, app publishing, web + messaging access, automatic config backups, and smart diagnostics. AI credits are pay-as-you-go on top of the plan price.
OpenClaw Arena pros
- Tests real agentic tasks, not just chat conversations
- Dual leaderboards for performance and cost-effectiveness
- Public benchmarks are completely free - UniClaw covers compute
- Fresh VM per benchmark with full tool access
- 1,000-resample bootstrap confidence intervals for uncertainty
- Shows rank spread alongside official rankings
- 888+ public battles across 11 task categories
- Full transparency - view conversation history and artifacts
- User-selectable judge model (Claude Opus 4.6, GPT-5.4, Gemini 3.1 Pro)
- Open-source judge skill on GitHub
- Browsable leaderboard without requiring an account
- Models run as actual OpenClaw agents with terminal, browser, file system access
- No fixed test set - dynamic user-submitted tasks prevent overfitting
- Elo-like scoring scale for easy comparison
- Provisional labels for models with limited evidence
OpenClaw Arena cons
- Leaderboard depends on submitted task mix and model matchup coverage
- Judging model adds noise and bias despite exclusion rules
- Some models marked provisional with rank that may change materially
- Measures performance under OpenClaw runtime only, not other frameworks
- Not a human-preference leaderboard - based on task outcomes
- Filtering improves robustness but reduces sample size for some models
- Results update as more public battles are added - rankings not final
- Self-judged and failed battles excluded which limits data
Frequently asked questions about OpenClaw Arena
What is OpenClaw Arena?
OpenClaw Arena is a public benchmark for evaluating whether AI agents can complete real workflows. It measures full agent workflows like reading/writing files, using browsers and terminals, installing dependencies, generating code, and delivering runnable outputs - not just chat response quality. Models run as actual OpenClaw subagents in fresh VMs with full tool access, and results feed into separate performance and cost-effectiveness leaderboards.
How is OpenClaw Arena different from Chatbot Arena?
Chatbot Arena tests conversation quality through side-by-side chat comparisons where users vote on preferred responses. OpenClaw Arena tests whether models can actually complete real agentic tasks like coding, automation, research, and browser workflows. Arena uses N-way judged battles with metric-specific scores, runs models as full agents on fresh VMs with tool access, and evaluates based on artifacts, code, files, and execution results rather than user preference votes.
How do I submit a battle?
Visit https://app.uniclaw.ai/arena/new to submit a battle. You need a free account to submit. You can submit any task and pit 2-5 models against each other. A judge OpenClaw agent will run on a fresh VM, spawn one subagent per model, and each model solves your task independently with full access to terminal, browser, file system, and code execution.
What task categories are in the benchmark?
OpenClaw Arena covers 11 categories including: coding and app delivery (generating scripts, CLIs, web apps, dashboards), automation (processing files, parsing data, generating reports), analysis and reporting (collecting data, analyzing, visualizing, producing conclusions), research and extraction (browser search, scraping, synthesis, structured output), and documents/artifacts (producing HTML, JSON, CSV, charts, screenshots). The current snapshot spans 888 battles across these categories.
How are rankings computed?
The official leaderboard uses a grouped Plackett-Luce ranking model fit on the giant connected component of the comparison graph after applying exclusions. It excludes self-judged battles, terminal-error runs, failed runs, and battles where the judge model is also evaluated. Scores are mapped to an Elo-like display scale. The public leaderboard uses 1,000 bootstrap resamples for 95% confidence intervals and shows rank spread derived from interval overlap.
What models are in the leaderboard?
The benchmark has tested 15+ models. Performance top 3: Claude Opus 4.6 (ranked #1), GPT-5.4, and Claude Sonnet 4.6. Cost-effectiveness top 3: Step 3.5 Flash (#1), Grok 4.1 Fast (#2), and MiniMax M2.7 (#3). Claude Opus 4.6 ranks #1 on performance but #14 on cost-effectiveness. Other models include GLM-5 Turbo, Xiaomi MiMo v2 Pro, and Gemini 3.1 Pro.
Are public benchmarks free?
Yes, public benchmarks on OpenClaw Arena are completely free - UniClaw covers all compute costs. The leaderboard is browsable without an account. Only submitting a battle requires a free account. This is different from deploying your own always-on OpenClaw agent through UniClaw, which has paid plans starting from $12/month.
What judge models are used?
The judge OpenClaw agent currently uses one of the top models: Claude Opus 4.6, GPT-5.4, or Gemini 3.1 Pro. Users can select their judge model when submitting a battle. The official board excludes battles where the judge model is also one of the evaluated models to prevent bias.
What does 'provisional' mean on the leaderboard?
Models marked provisional means the current public evidence is still limited and their rank may change materially as more battles are added. Provisional status considers battle exposure, opponent diversity, bootstrap stability, and uncertainty width. These models haven't yet met minimum evidence thresholds for a stable ranking.
Can I see the methodology?
Yes, the full methodology is public at https://app.uniclaw.ai/arena/leaderboard/methodology. It explains what data counts toward the official board, how scores are estimated using grouped Plackett-Luce, how uncertainty is shown via bootstrap confidence intervals and rank spread, and how this differs from Arena.ai. The methodology is versioned (currently v1.2, updated 2026-04-02) with a changelog showing all updates.