Best Deep Research AI: A Benchmark Leaderboard
Hyperresearch is our editorial choice for deep research AI: it scored highest on the DRACO benchmark in our run (77.7), and it checks every cited figure against its source. Claude Research is the runner-up at 73.0 in the same run, and Parallel Ultra is third at 61.5. For teams already inside Google Workspace, Gemini Deep Research fits the apps you use, and for a quick cited answer inside your own AI agent, the Hyperresearch Answers API is the lighter choice.
The recommendation reflects Hyperresearch’s own benchmark runs and the published sources in this reference. Hyperresearch is our product. This is not a hands-on test of every tool.
Hyperresearch → Deep research AI → Benchmark leader → Checked citations
The comparison
| Tool | Job | Best for | Pricing (public) | Coverage | Verification | API |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hyperresearchours | Deep research | Sourced reports where every figure has to hold up | First Deep report free | Open web plus 90+ structured sources (SEC EDGAR, Census, BLS, FRED and more) | Every cited figure checked against its source | Yes (API and MCP) |
| Claude Research | Desk research | Mixing web research with your own Gmail, Calendar and Google Docs | Included on Pro ($20/mo) and higher plans | Open web plus connected Google Workspace and other connectors | Cites sources; no separate claim check | No dedicated Research API |
| Parallel Deep Research | Deep research API for developers | Developers who want research outputs with per-field citations and confidence | Pay per run: Ultra costs $300 per 1,000 runs; Ultra variants cost more | Open web; the Task API docs do not name structured data sources | Per-field citations, reasoning, and confidence levels in basis | Task API; Python SDK examples in docs |
| You.com Research | Deep research API and agent | Teams needing tiered per-call research with cited answers and structured output | Per 1,000 calls by effort tier: $12 lite to $1,200 frontier | Uses Search, Contents and Live News APIs as research tools | Source URLs with extracted passages for each citation | REST /v1/research, background jobs, JSON Schema output |
| Perplexity Deep Research | Deep research assistant | Users who want a fast, consumer-grade cited report inside Perplexity | Plan-based: Pro and Max tiers; Deep Research limits not published | Web search and hundreds of pages read per report | Citations listed; verification process not described | Agent API; legacy Sonar chat endpoint being retired |
| Valyu DeepResearch | Deep research API | Developers who want cited reports, office-file deliverables and per-task pricing | Per-task credits by mode, 8 to 2,500 base credits | Open web plus finance, biomedical, patent, legal and economic data | Inline citations; numerical claims checked before delivery | REST, async tasks with webhooks |
| ChatGPT deep research | Desk research | Quick multi-source briefs if your team already pays for ChatGPT | Included in ChatGPT plans: limited on Free, more on paid tiers | Mainly the open web | Cites sources; no separate claim check | Yes (OpenAI API) |
| Gemini Deep Research | Desk research | Web market scans for Google Workspace teams; reports export to Google Docs | Listed on every Gemini plan, from Free to Ultra | Google Search, plus your files through the API | Links to sources; no separate claim check | Yes (preview) |
| Grok DeepSearch | AI search and deep research assistant | Real-time X posts and broad web lookups inside a chat app | Free tier with limited DeepSearch; SuperGrok about $30 a month (estimate) | Live web search and X posts, through the app or xAI API tools | Cites sources; a 2025 independent test found broken links | xAI API Web Search tool, billed per call |
| Manus | General AI agent | Broad, multi-entity research and tasks that mix browsing, files and code | Free tier; paid plans from about $20 a month (third-party estimate) | Open web through a cloud VM with browser and code tools | No published citation check; reviewers report misattributed sources | v2 REST API; access and plan terms unclear |
| Kimi Researcher | Consumer AI deep research agent | Long, cited reports for people who already use the Kimi app | Uses Kimi membership credits; one task is about 5 to 10% of monthly credits | Open web search and browsing, plus code execution | Inline citations that jump to highlighted source text | No public API found for Deep Research |
Checked 8 November 2026. Third-party prices are estimates, not quotes. Each tool links to its sourced profile.
Start with the right question
Deep Research Leaderboard
No single official leaderboard ranks deep research agents. The most recent head-to-head table we found is Hyperresearch's own DRACO run on 10 tasks, where Hyperresearch Deep scored 77.7 and Claude Research (Opus) scored 73.0.
Explore entry ↗What Is DRACO? The Deep Research Benchmark Explained
DRACO is a deep research benchmark from Perplexity, with a Harvard co-author. It grades long, cited reports against rubrics of expert-written criteria, using an LLM judge to mark each criterion as met or unmet.
Explore entry ↗DeepResearch Bench Explained
DeepResearch Bench is a set of 100 PhD-level research tasks across 22 fields, posted to arXiv in June 2025. It scores report quality with a method called RACE and citation retrieval with a method called FACT.
Explore entry ↗BrowseComp Explained
BrowseComp is OpenAI's benchmark of 1,266 questions that need long web searches to answer. In the original paper, OpenAI Deep Research scored 51.5 percent, far above older browsing models. Newer scores come from vendors' own runs and are not directly comparable.
Explore entry ↗How Deep Research Agents Work
Deep research agents plan a question, search and read sources, check for gaps, and then write a cited report. Most products follow that loop, but they differ in how long they run, how they split the work, and how they check citations.
Explore entry ↗Reading Deep Research Benchmark Scores
Benchmark scores are easy to misread. Small task samples, the choice of judge and grading noise can each move a score by more than the gap between two tools. Read the method before you read the rank.
Explore entry ↗Head-to-head comparisons
Hyperresearch vs Claude Research
Pick Hyperresearch Deep if the report must be accurate and sourced to official statistics and filings. Pick Claude Research if you want one assistant that also reads your Gmail, Calendar and Google Docs during the same run. In Hyperresearch's own DRACO run, Deep scored 77.7 and Claude Research (Opus) scored 73.0.
Explore entry ↗Hyperresearch vs Parallel Deep Research
Pick Hyperresearch Deep if you want a finished, checked report for a person to read. Pick Parallel if you are a developer who needs research output as an API call, with a citation and confidence level on each field. In Hyperresearch's DRACO run, Deep scored 77.7 and Parallel Ultra scored 61.5.
Explore entry ↗Hyperresearch vs Perplexity Deep Research
Pick Hyperresearch Deep when a report must be checked against official sources before you use it. Pick Perplexity Deep Research for fast, cited overviews inside a consumer app. In Hyperresearch's DRACO run, Deep scored 77.7 and Perplexity scored 57.8 on 8 of 10 tasks.
Explore entry ↗Claude Research vs ChatGPT deep research
Pick Claude Research if you want research that reads your Google Workspace files alongside the web. Pick ChatGPT deep research if you already use ChatGPT and want a long sourced report inside the same app. In Hyperresearch's DRACO run, Claude Research (Opus) scored 73.0 and ChatGPT deep research scored 55.2.
Explore entry ↗Parallel Deep Research vs You.com Research
Pick Parallel if you want a Task API that returns fields with per-field citations and confidence levels, billed per run. Pick You.com Research if you want to choose an effort tier for each call and get a Markdown answer or schema-shaped JSON with source snippets. In Hyperresearch's DRACO run, Parallel Ultra scored 61.5 on 10 of 10 tasks and You.com Research scored 60.1 on 8 of 10.
Explore entry ↗Perplexity Deep Research vs Gemini Deep Research
Pick Perplexity Deep Research for a fast cited report that can become a shareable page. Pick Gemini Deep Research if you work in Google Workspace and want to export to Google Docs or build on the Gemini API. On Hyperresearch's DRACO run, Perplexity scored 57.8 on 8 of 10 tasks and Gemini scored 54.7 on 10 of 10.
Explore entry ↗What this leaderboard ranks
A deep research AI takes a broad question, plans the search, reads many sources over several steps, and writes a cited report. This page ranks the tools that do that job by score on a shared benchmark. It also explains what those scores can and cannot tell you.
Our editorial pick is Hyperresearch Deep. It scored highest in our October 2026 DRACO run, with 77.7. It plans the question, researches it chapter by chapter, writes the report in one pass, and checks every cited figure against its source before the report ships. Hyperresearch searches the open web plus more than 90 structured sources, including SEC EDGAR, Census, BLS and FRED. The first Deep report is free.
A leaderboard is a starting point, not a verdict. The sections below explain how to read the table, where the benchmarks come from, and how to run your own check before you commit to a tool.
How to read the leaderboard
Each DRACO score is a normalized percentage of rubric criteria that a tool met on a set of tasks. A judge model scored every criterion as met or unmet, using the same judge for every tool in the run. A higher score means the tool met more criteria in that run. It does not prove the tool is always more accurate on your question.
| Rank | Tool | DRACO score | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hyperresearch Deep | 77.7 | Editorial pick |
| 2 | Claude Research (Opus) | 73.0 | Runner-up |
| 3 | Parallel Ultra | 61.5 | - |
| 4 | You.com Research | 60.1 | 8 of 10 tasks |
| 5 | Perplexity Deep Research | 57.8 | 8 of 10 tasks |
| 6 | Valyu DeepResearch Heavy | 57.2 | 8 of 10 tasks |
| 7 | ChatGPT Deep research | 55.2 | - |
| 8 | Gemini Deep Research | 54.7 | - |
The table covers one run of 10 tasks. Those limits matter as much as the ranking:
- Ten tasks is a small sample. One task that swings by 20 points moves the average by 2 points, so close scores do not show a real difference.
- Three tools scored on only 8 of the 10 tasks, so their averages rest on fewer tasks.
- The run used one judge model. A different judge can change the scores.
- The run is Hyperresearch's own. Compare it only with runs that used the same tasks and judge.
Benchmarks and accuracy
Three public benchmarks come up most often. They measure different things, so do not treat them as one score.
- DRACO was built by researchers at Perplexity and Harvard. Its 100 tasks come from anonymized deep research requests across 10 domains. Each task has an expert rubric of about 40 criteria, and a judge marks each one met or unmet. See the DRACO paper on arXiv.
- DeepResearch Bench has 100 PhD-level tasks in 22 fields, half in Chinese and half in English. Its RACE score grades report quality, and its FACT score grades citation accuracy. See the DeepResearch Bench paper.
- BrowseComp was released by OpenAI in April 2025. It has 1,266 questions about hard-to-find facts with short, easy-to-check answers. It tests persistent search, not report writing. See the OpenAI BrowseComp page.
Two cautions apply. The DRACO paper uses all 100 tasks and reports different scores for some of the same tools, including Perplexity Deep Research at 70.5 with Opus 4.6. Those figures are not comparable with the 10-task run above. The DeepResearch Bench maintainers have also changed their judge model, so older RACE scores may not match newer ones.
Hyperresearch's Answers product is a separate service. In Hyperresearch's own runs it scored 89% on BrowseComp, against 73% for Parallel (Pro) and 58% for OpenAI web search. Those are search results, not full deep research reports, so read them as a measure of search, not of report writing.
Choosing a deep research AI
Pick by the job first. A leaderboard shows which tool does well on a shared task set. It does not tell you which tool fits your team, budget, data or workflow. Start with three questions: what the report is for, which sources it must cite, and whether you need the tool through an API.
If you need a report you can check, Hyperresearch Deep and Claude Research are the top two in our run. If your work already lives in Google Workspace, Gemini Deep Research can build its plan inside those apps, and you can edit the plan before research starts. For a quick, cited answer inside your own AI agent, an answer API is usually a better fit than a full report.
Whatever you shortlist, run the same brief through each one. The pilot in the next section takes an afternoon and tells you more than any single score.
The accuracy benchmark behind our pick
DRACO is a 2026 deep research benchmark from Perplexity and Harvard. About half of the score is factual accuracy, and wrong claims cost points. Every system got the same 10 tasks and the same judge.
| System | DRACO score (10 tasks) |
|---|---|
| Hyperresearch Deep ours | 77.7 |
| Claude Research (Opus) | 73.0 |
| Parallel Ultra | 61.5 |
| You.com Research | 60.1 (8 of 10 tasks) |
| Perplexity Deep Research | 57.8 (8 of 10 tasks) |
| Valyu DeepResearch Heavy | 57.2 (8 of 10 tasks) |
| ChatGPT Deep research | 55.2 |
| Gemini Deep Research | 54.7 |
Run and published by Hyperresearch, October 2026, with GPT-5.2 as judge. Ten tasks is a small sample, and we make one of the systems. Full method and per-task scores.
Questions & answers
What is the best deep research AI?
Hyperresearch is our editorial pick. It scored 77.7 on the DRACO benchmark in our October 2026 run, the highest score in that table, and it checks every cited figure against its source before a report ships. Claude Research came second at 73.0, and Parallel Ultra came third at 61.5. The right tool depends on your job, so run the pilot on this site before you decide.
What does the DRACO score mean?
DRACO is a benchmark from Perplexity and Harvard researchers. Each task has an expert rubric of about 40 criteria, and a judge marks each criterion met or unmet. A DRACO score is the normalized share of criteria a tool met. Our own run used 10 tasks, so treat those scores as a rough guide rather than a precise rank.
Can I trust a benchmark run by a vendor?
Read the method before you trust the number. Check how many tasks were used, which judge scored them, and whether other tools ran on the same tasks. Hyperresearch's DRACO run used 10 tasks and one judge, so it is useful but small. The full 100-task DRACO paper is a stronger test, and it shows different scores for some tools.
How long does a deep research report take?
It depends on the tool, how broad the question is, and how busy the service is. Deep research runs usually take several minutes, and broad questions can take longer. Google does not publish exact times for Gemini Deep Research. Check each tool's help page for current figures, and plan for a wait rather than a live answer.
Is there a free option?
Yes, with limits. The first Deep report from Hyperresearch is free, which makes it the easiest way to test a full run. Gemini Deep Research and ChatGPT deep research also offer access, but their limits depend on the plan and change over time. Read each vendor's help page for current limits. We do not list prices for other tools here.
Are there open-source deep research agents?
Yes. LangChain's open_deep_research repository is MIT licensed and built on LangGraph. It can use many model providers and search tools. You run it yourself, and its quality depends on the models and search tools you choose. LangChain reports its own DeepResearch Bench score, so treat that figure as self-reported.
Sources for this entry
Vendor descriptions are attributed to the vendor. Prices change; confirm with each vendor.
Continue this reading path
Cite this entry
https://bestdeepresearchai.com/