ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Muse Wonder

Claude Haiku 5.5 comes out ahead, 83 to 68 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Anthropic

    Claude Haiku 5.5

    Released Oct 7, 2026

    83/100
    • ECI160.4
    • Price$0.10 / $0.50
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Claude Haiku 5.5

  2. Meta

    Muse Wonder

    Released Oct 12, 2026

    68/100
    • ECI161.7
    • Price$4.00 / $20.00
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Muse Wonder

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Claude Haiku 5.5 is our pick

Claude Haiku 5.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 83/100 against Muse Wonder (68). It leads on price. Muse Wonder wins on capability and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityMuse WonderCapabilities Index (ECI): Muse Wonder 161.7 · Claude Haiku 5.5 160.4
  • Lowest priceClaude Haiku 5.5Claude Haiku 5.5 $0.20 · Muse Wonder $8.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextMuse WonderMuse Wonder 1,048,576 · Claude Haiku 5.5 1,000,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsMuse WonderClaude Haiku 5.5: Text, Images, PDFs · Muse Wonder: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
How the score is built
MeasureWeightClaude Haiku 5.5Muse Wonder
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%8991
Price25%807
Inputs & features15%80100
Context window10%6061
Overall100%83/10068/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Muse Wonder specifications side by side
SpecificationClaude Haiku 5.5AnthropicMuse WonderMeta
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)160.4161.7 (best)
ECI rank#14 of 165#13 of 165 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions89.7%—
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics75.1%82.1% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics98.9%99.4% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions23.8%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.10 (best)$4.00
Output$0.50 (best)$20.00
Cached input$0.01 (best)$0.20
Blended (3:1)$0.20 (best)$8.00
Long-context rateOver 100K: $0.50 / $2.50Same rate
Price sourceOfficial Anthropic APIOfficial Meta API
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)
Max output128,000 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsYesYes
AudioNoYes
VideoNoYes
ReasoningYeslow · medium · high · xhigh · maxYesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh · max
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
API model IDclaude-haiku-5-5muse-wonder-1.0
API providers33 (best)9
ReleasedOct 7, 2026Oct 12, 2026
Knowledge cutoffJun 2026—
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Claude Haiku 5.5$2.00
  • Muse Wonder$80.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Claude Haiku 5.5 or Muse Wonder?

Claude Haiku 5.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 83/100 against Muse Wonder (68). It leads on price. Muse Wonder wins on capability and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 5.5 or Muse Wonder?

Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.50 output per million tokens (official Anthropic API price). Muse Wonder costs $4.00 input / $20.00 output per million tokens (official Meta API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.20 per million tokens for Claude Haiku 5.5 versus $8.00 for Muse Wonder (40× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Muse Wonder scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Muse Wonder 161.7 (#13 of 165) and Claude Haiku 5.5 160.4 (#14 of 165). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (159.2–164.6 vs 157.3–163.8), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — Muse Wonder 82.1%, Claude Haiku 5.5 75.1%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Muse Wonder 99.4%, Claude Haiku 5.5 98.9%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Claude Haiku 5.5 and Muse Wonder yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Muse Wonder leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Muse Wonder has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for Claude Haiku 5.5. Maximum output per response: Claude Haiku 5.5 up to 128,000, Muse Wonder up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Claude Haiku 5.5 accepts text, images and PDFs; Muse Wonder accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Muse Wonder handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

No. Claude Haiku 5.5 and Muse Wonder are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.

Which is newer?

Muse Wonder is the newest, released Oct 12, 2026. Claude Haiku 5.5 came out Oct 7, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Haiku 5.5 Jun 2026.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons