Model Comparison
Muse Wonder vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro
Too close to call: the best configurations, Muse Wonder (max) and MiMo-V2.6-Pro (thinking on), are 58 Elo apart, and their 95% ranges overlap. Among 80 models, each ranked by its best configuration, Muse Wonder is #16 and MiMo-V2.6-Pro is #22. Cost per script: $0.309 for Muse Wonder (max) and $0.017 for MiMo-V2.6-Pro (thinking on).
Last updated , from board data generated at 20:08 UTC.
Picks and Verdict
PickMuse Wonder
Muse Wonder (max)
Pick Muse Wonder (max) when you need a fact-dense draft fast, since it leads MiMo by 5.9 points on substance and finishes in 2.0 minutes against 6.2.
PickMiMo-V2.6-Pro
MiMo-V2.6-Pro (thinking on)
Pick MiMo-V2.6-Pro (thinking on) for everyday drafts at $0.017 a script, since the board can't separate it from Muse's best at about an eighteenth of the price.
Muse Wonder (max) sits 58 Elo above MiMo-V2.6-Pro (thinking on), but their 95% ranges overlap, so the board can't separate the #16 model of 80 from the #22 model. Price and time pull in opposite directions. MiMo costs $0.017 a script and Muse about 18 times that, $0.309, but Muse is back in 2.0 minutes where MiMo takes 6.2. Muse wins seven of the ten scripts, and its edge is content: 5.9 more points of substance and a better hook. MiMo lands the length 8.4 points better and edges Muse on tone and craft, the two metrics I'd least like to fix by hand. Below max, Muse falls out of the race. Muse Wonder (high) costs about nine times MiMo's price and sits 283 Elo under it with separate ranges, because its Length Adherence falls to 41.1, and Muse Wonder (adaptive), where the model picks its own level, sits 343 under. When I'm not in a hurry, MiMo at under two cents is what I'd run for everyday drafts. Muse at max is for the day I need a fact-dense script in two minutes.
How to Read the Writing Score, Writing Elo and 95% Ranges
Writing Score and Writing Elo. The Writing Score (0 to 100) is the weighted average of the nine metric scores: seven from the judges, Length Adherence from code and the Slop Score half from each. The Writing Elo is a rating from pairwise comparisons: on each script, each configuration's average across its drafts is compared with every other configuration's, and gaps within the draft-to-draft variation count as draws. Elo rewards winning often, so the two can put configurations in a different order.
Elo ranges. Each 95% range shows how far a configuration's Elo could move if the drafts had come out slightly differently. It comes from resampling every configuration's recorded draft scores on each reference script and ranking again. Comparing two separate ranges does not test the Elo gap between them: ranges far apart are strong evidence for the order, and overlapping ranges do not mean a tie. The reference scripts stay fixed, so the ranges say nothing about new scripts. The methodology page has the full description.
All Thinking Levels of Both Models
Every ranked configuration of Muse Wonder and MiMo-V2.6-Pro, scored on the same 10 scripts by the same four judges.
- Each row is one configuration: the model at one thinking level. The dot is its Writing Elo, a rating from pairwise comparisons of the scores on each script, and the bar is its 95% range: how far that Elo could move if the drafts had come out slightly differently.
- When two bars overlap, the board cannot order those two configurations. Bars far apart are strong evidence for the order.
- The table under the chart lists the same configurations in the same order and adds the Writing Score (the 0 to 100 consensus of the judges and code), cost, time and configuration rank (the place among all configurations on the board).
Shaded rows are the configurations chosen for the metric comparison below.
| Configuration | Writing Elo | 95% Range | Writing Score | Cost / Script | Time / Script | Reasoning Tokens | Configuration Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Muse Wonder (max) | 2005 | 1959 to 2044 | 80.6 | $0.309 | 2.0 min | 9,601 | #31 |
| MiMo-V2.6-Pro (thinking on) | 1947 | 1891 to 1990 | 80.2 | $0.017 | 6.2 min | 10,176 | #41 |
| Muse Wonder (high) | 1664 | 1600 to 1724 | 76.7 | $0.149 | 0.9 min | 1,385 | #58 |
| Muse Wonder (adaptive) | 1604 | 1550 to 1661 | 76.2 | $0.139 | 0.8 min | 766 | #70 |
Cost is one script at the API list price of the route used, uncached and without judging. Time is the average for one accepted script, retries included.
Computed Findings Across Thinking Levels
Each finding is computed from the configurations above. Where two 95% ranges overlap, the board cannot order those two configurations.
- Best Configurations Head to Head. Muse Wonder (max) at Elo 2005 (range 1959 to 2044) and MiMo-V2.6-Pro (thinking on) at Elo 1947 (range 1891 to 1990) have overlapping 95% ranges, so the board cannot separate the two best configurations.
- Cheapest Configuration Overlapping the Top One. MiMo-V2.6-Pro (thinking on), at $0.017 per script, is the cheapest configuration whose 95% range overlaps that of Muse Wonder (max), at $0.309 per script: 1891 to 1990 against 1959 to 2044, so the board cannot separate them. Muse Wonder (max) costs about 18 times as much per script.
- Cheapest Muse Wonder Configuration Above MiMo-V2.6-Pro's Best. The cheapest Muse Wonder configuration with a higher Writing Elo than MiMo-V2.6-Pro (thinking on), at Elo 1947 and $0.017 per script, is Muse Wonder (max), at Elo 2005 and $0.309 per script. Their 95% ranges overlap, so the board cannot separate them. It costs about 18 times as much per script.
- Lowest to Highest Thinking Level. Muse Wonder moves +341 Elo from high to max, at about 2.1 times the cost per script.
Two Chosen Configurations Compared
Pick one configuration of each model to compare their metric scores, consistency across drafts and per-script scores. Each menu starts on the model's best configuration.
Scores by Metric
Muse Wonder (max) scores higher on six of the nine metrics and MiMo-V2.6-Pro (thinking on) on three. Weighted by each metric's share of the Writing Score, Substance, Accuracy & Value does the most to put Muse Wonder (max) ahead, with a 5.9-point lead on that metric. The weight beside each metric is its share of the Writing Score.
Consistency Across Drafts
| Muse Wonder (max) | MiMo-V2.6-Pro (thinking on) | |
|---|---|---|
| Score spread across drafts (±) | 1.91 | 1.87 |
| Lowest script score | 78.2 Script 10 | 78.0 Script 4 |
| Highest script score | 82.2 Script 5 | 82.5 Script 9 |
| Range across scripts | 4.0 | 4.5 |
Spread is how much the Writing Score moves between a configuration's drafts, and lower is steadier. Green marks the better number in each row.
Scores by Script
Writing Score on each reference script. Gap is Muse Wonder (max) minus MiMo-V2.6-Pro (thinking on), and the higher score is in bold.
| Script | Muse Wonder (max) | MiMo-V2.6-Pro (thinking on) | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Script 1 opinion / warning explainer | 81.3 | 79.3 | +2.0 |
| Script 2 news-analysis / skeptical explainer | 81.7 | 79.9 | +1.8 |
| Script 3 personal roadmap / opinion | 81.3 | 79.7 | +1.6 |
| Script 4 short explainer | 79.5 | 78.0 | +1.5 |
| Script 5 news-analysis / opinion explainer | 82.2 | 81.5 | +0.7 |
| Script 6 founder announcement / personal origin story | 81.3 | 81.1 | +0.2 |
| Script 7 personal technical walkthrough / agentic workflow case study | 78.5 | 80.3 | -1.8 |
| Script 8 product release announcement / personal observation | 82.1 | 80.7 | +1.4 |
| Script 9 career guide / hiring analysis | 79.9 | 82.5 | -2.6 |
| Script 10 engineering process walkthrough / presentation adaptation | 78.2 | 79.4 | -1.2 |
Scorecards and Thinking Pages
Each configuration name in the table above opens its own scorecard.
Compare With Another Model
Pick a second model. A pair with its own written match-up opens that page, and any other pair opens in the comparison tool.
Nearby Match-Ups by Best Writing Elo
Every configuration wrote five drafts for each of the same 10 briefs, from the same prompt. Generation was closed-book, with the prompt as the only source and no web search or other tools. Each judge scores every draft once: Claude Opus 5.5 at medium effort through the Claude Code subscription, GPT-6.1 Sol at medium reasoning through the Codex CLI, GLM 5.3 Flash through OpenRouter, and Jev 1.13, a typed judge from TypeSafe that answers each metric as a multiple-choice question. The channel's finished script is their reference for the voice, and it gets no score on the board itself.
← All comparisons