Claude Fable 5.2 vs Claude Haiku 5.5
Claude Fable 5.2 leads the LLM Stats Score 61.3 to 49.1. Claude Haiku 5.5 is 80.0x cheaper per token.
Anthropic · Anthropic · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Claude Fable 5.2 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 61.3 to 49.1, ranking #1 overall.
In the 22 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Fable 5.2 wins 21; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, Claude Haiku 5.5 is roughly 80.0x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.
Choose Claude Fable 5.2
- overall performance matters — it scores 61.3 and ranks #1 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 21 of 22 exact shared results
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Nov 2026
Choose Claude Haiku 5.5
- cost matters — it's about 80.0x cheaper per token
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
29 reported for Claude Fable 5.2 · 36 for Claude Haiku 5.5
Claude Fable 5.2 outperforms in 21 benchmarks (AA-Briefcase v1.1, Chartography, Chartography (no tools), FrontierSWE V2, GDPval-AA 2.1, Global-MMLU, HealthBench Professional, HealthBench Professional (raw), Humanity's Last Exam (with tools), MILU, OfficeQA, OfficeQA Pro, OSWorld 2.1 (partial), OSWorld 2.1 (strict), PhysicianBench, Program Bench, SWE-bench Multilingual, SWE-Bench Multimodal, SWE-Bench Pro, Terminal-Bench 4.0, Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1), while Claude Haiku 5.5 is better at 1 benchmark (HealthBench).
Claude Fable 5.2 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Claude Fable 5.2 ($8.00/1M tokens) is 80.0x more expensive than Claude Haiku 5.5 ($0.10/1M tokens).
For output processing, Claude Fable 5.2 ($40.00/1M tokens) is 80.0x more expensive than Claude Haiku 5.5 ($0.50/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Claude Fable 5.2 is more expensive than Claude Haiku 5.5.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Both models have the same input context window of 1,000,000 tokens. Both models can generate responses up to 128,000 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both Claude Fable 5.2 and Claude Haiku 5.5 support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Claude Fable 5.2
Claude Haiku 5.5
License
Usage and distribution terms
Both models are licensed under proprietary licenses.
Both models have usage restrictions defined by their respective organizations.
Proprietary
Closed source
Proprietary
Closed source
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Claude Fable 5.2 was released on 2026-11-09, while Claude Haiku 5.5 was released on 2026-10-07.
Claude Fable 5.2 is 1 month newer than Claude Haiku 5.5.
Nov 9, 2026
0 days ago
1mo newerOct 7, 2026
1 months ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Both models have the same knowledge cutoff date of 2026-06-01.
They should have similar awareness of historical events and information up to this date.
Jun 2026
Jun 2026
Provider Availability
Claude Fable 5.2 is available from Anthropic. Claude Haiku 5.5 is available from Anthropic.
Claude Fable 5.2
Claude Haiku 5.5
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Claude Fable 5.2 and Claude Haiku 5.5 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Claude Fable 5.2 vs Claude Haiku 5.5.