Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Muse Wonder
Claude Haiku 5.5 and Muse Wonder are closely matched at 50.1 and 47.9 on the LLM Stats Score. Claude Haiku 5.5 is 40.0x cheaper per token.
Anthropic · Meta · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Claude Haiku 5.5 and Muse Wonder are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 50.1 and 47.9.
In the 4 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Haiku 5.5 wins 3; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, Claude Haiku 5.5 is roughly 40.0x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Muse Wonder 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
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 3 of 4 exact shared results
- cost matters — it's about 40.0x cheaper per token
Choose Muse Wonder
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
36 reported for Claude Haiku 5.5 · 16 for Muse Wonder
Claude Haiku 5.5 outperforms in 3 benchmarks (HealthBench Professional, OSWorld 2.1 (strict), Program Bench), while Muse Wonder is better at 1 benchmark (OSWorld 2.1 (partial)).
Claude Haiku 5.5 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Claude Haiku 5.5 ($0.10/1M tokens) is 40.0x cheaper than Muse Wonder ($4.00/1M tokens).
For output processing, Claude Haiku 5.5 ($0.50/1M tokens) is 40.0x cheaper than Muse Wonder ($20.00/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Muse Wonder 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
Muse Wonder 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).
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both Claude Haiku 5.5 and Muse Wonder support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Claude Haiku 5.5
Muse Wonder
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 Haiku 5.5 was released on 2026-10-07, while Muse Wonder was released on 2026-10-12.
Muse Wonder is 0 month newer than Claude Haiku 5.5.
Oct 7, 2026
5 days ago
Oct 12, 2026
0 days ago
5d newerKnowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Claude Haiku 5.5 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while Muse Wonder'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 Muse Wonder's cutoff date.
Jun 2026
—
Provider Availability
Claude Haiku 5.5 is available from Anthropic. Muse Wonder is available from Meta Model API.
Claude Haiku 5.5
Muse Wonder
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Claude Haiku 5.5 and Muse Wonder side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Muse Wonder.