ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Muse Wonder vs Claude Haiku 5.5

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

  1. Meta

    Muse Wonder

    Released Oct 12, 2026New

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

    Anthropic

    Claude Haiku 5.5

    Released Oct 7, 2026New

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

  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 WonderMuse Wonder: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Claude Haiku 5.5: Text, Images, PDFs
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
How the score is built
MeasureWeightMuse WonderClaude Haiku 5.5
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%9189
Price25%780
Inputs & features15%10080
Context window10%6160
Overall100%68/10083/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Muse Wonder vs Claude Haiku 5.5 specifications side by side
SpecificationMuse WonderMetaClaude Haiku 5.5Anthropic
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)161.7 (best)160.4
ECI rank#13 of 165 (best)#14 of 165
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions—89.7%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics82.1% (best)75.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics99.4% (best)98.9%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—23.8%
Price per million tokens
Input$4.00$0.10 (best)
Output$20.00$0.50 (best)
Cached input$0.20$0.01 (best)
Blended (3:1)$8.00$0.20 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateOver 100K: $0.50 / $2.50
Price sourceOfficial Meta APIOfficial Anthropic API
Limits
Context window1,048,576 tokens (best)1,000,000 tokens
Max output131,072 tokens (best)128,000 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsYesYes
AudioYesNo
VideoYesNo
ReasoningYesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh · maxYeslow · medium · high · xhigh · max
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
API model IDmuse-wonder-1.0claude-haiku-5-5
API providers933 (best)
ReleasedOct 12, 2026Oct 7, 2026
Knowledge cutoff—Jun 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.

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

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Muse Wonder or Claude Haiku 5.5?

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, Muse Wonder or Claude Haiku 5.5?

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 Muse Wonder and Claude Haiku 5.5 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: Muse Wonder up to 131,072, Claude Haiku 5.5 up to 128,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

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

Are any of these open source?

No. Muse Wonder and Claude Haiku 5.5 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