The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Laguna S 2.1

Claude Haiku 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 49.9 to 39.7. Laguna S 2.1 is 1.6x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · Poolside · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Haiku 5.5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 49.9 to 39.7, ranking #20 overall.

In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Haiku 5.5 wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, Laguna S 2.1 is roughly 1.6x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Laguna S 2.1 also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Claude Haiku 5.5

  • overall performance matters — it scores 49.9 and ranks #20 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes coding and agents — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

Choose Laguna S 2.1

  • cost matters — it's about 1.6x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Haiku 5.5
Anthropic
Laguna S 2.1
Poolside
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
49.9
#20
39.7
#73
Reasoning
47.5
#25
39.7
#71
Coding
39.2
#15
29.1
#69
Agents
33.8
#33
23.3
#75
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 2
0 of 2
Input price
$0.10 / M
$0.10 / M
Output price
$0.50 / M
$0.20 / M
Context window
1,000,000
1,048,576

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Claude Haiku 5.5
Laguna S 2.1
Tool use
20.3#66
15.3#107
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

36 reported for Claude Haiku 5.5 · 6 for Laguna S 2.1

2 shared

Claude Haiku 5.5 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (SWE-bench Multilingual, SWE-Bench Pro), while Laguna S 2.1 is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Haiku 5.5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Fri Oct 23 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Laguna S 2.1 costs less

For input processing, Claude Haiku 5.5 ($0.10/1M tokens) costs the same as Laguna S 2.1 ($0.10/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Haiku 5.5 ($0.50/1M tokens) is 2.5x more expensive than Laguna S 2.1 ($0.20/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Haiku 5.5 is more expensive than Laguna S 2.1.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Fri Oct 23 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Haiku 5.5
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.50
Best providerAnthropic
Poolside
Laguna S 2.1
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.20
Best providerPoolside
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Laguna S 2.1 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Claude Haiku 5.5's 1,000,000 tokens. Only Claude Haiku 5.5 specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude Haiku 5.5
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Poolside
Laguna S 2.1
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output- tokens
Fri Oct 23 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Haiku 5.5 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Laguna S 2.1 does not.

Claude Haiku 5.5 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Haiku 5.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Laguna S 2.1

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Haiku 5.5 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Laguna S 2.1 uses OpenMDW License v1.1.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude Haiku 5.5

Proprietary

Closed source

Laguna S 2.1

OpenMDW License v1.1

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Haiku 5.5 was released on 2026-10-07, while Laguna S 2.1 was released on 2026-07-21.

Claude Haiku 5.5 is 3 months newer than Laguna S 2.1.

Claude Haiku 5.5

Oct 7, 2026

1 weeks ago

2mo newer
Laguna S 2.1

Jul 21, 2026

3 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Haiku 5.5 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while Laguna S 2.1's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Claude Haiku 5.5's training data extends to 2026-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Laguna S 2.1's cutoff date.

Claude Haiku 5.5

Jun 2026

Laguna S 2.1

—

Provider Availability

Claude Haiku 5.5 is available from Anthropic. Laguna S 2.1 is available from Poolside.

Claude Haiku 5.5

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.50/1M

Laguna S 2.1

poolside logo
Poolside
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.20/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Haiku 5.5 and Laguna S 2.1 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Haiku 5.5
✓ Preferred
Laguna S 2.1
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Laguna S 2.1.

Which is better, Claude Haiku 5.5 or Laguna S 2.1?

Claude Haiku 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 49.9 to 39.7. Claude Haiku 5.5 is made by Anthropic and Laguna S 2.1 is made by Poolside. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Haiku 5.5 compare to Laguna S 2.1 in benchmarks?

Claude Haiku 5.5 scores Global-MMLU: 87.8%, MILU: 87.6%, BenchCAD (with Python tool): 87.0%, Chartography: 86.2%, SWE-bench Multilingual: 83.7%. Laguna S 2.1 scores SWE-bench Multilingual: 78.5%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 70.2%, SWE-Bench Pro: 59.4%, Toolathlon: 49.7%, SWE Atlas - Codebase QnA: 46.2%.

Is Claude Haiku 5.5 cheaper than Laguna S 2.1?

Both models cost $0.10 per million input tokens.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Haiku 5.5 and Laguna S 2.1?

Claude Haiku 5.5 supports 1.0M tokens and Laguna S 2.1 supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Haiku 5.5 and Laguna S 2.1?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (49.9 vs 39.7), context window (1.0M vs 1.0M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs OpenMDW License v1.1). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Haiku 5.5 and Laguna S 2.1?

Claude Haiku 5.5 is developed by Anthropic and Laguna S 2.1 is developed by Poolside.

Related comparisons