Menu
farexio
Tech

Will Anthropic Have the Best Coding AI Model at the End of 2026?

Resolution: Updated:
56%

market consensus

chance the market gives this event — not your chance of being right

Yes — The event happens
56%
No — The event does not happen
44%

Trade via Binance Wallet

Choose an active contract in Binance Wallet

Open the catalogue and choose an event

The quote on this page comes from Kalshi. Binance Wallet has a separate catalogue of active markets: open it, choose an event, then select YES or NO. You will see the exact wording and price before confirming.

In short

The market leans toward Yes but treats the outcome as well short of certain. Anthropic's Claude models have a track record of topping agentic coding benchmarks, but the market's own price has swung wildly since it opened barely a day ago, which signals real uncertainty about what the field looks like by 31 December 2026. A single frontier release from OpenAI, Google, xAI or Moonshot AI before then could flip the picture.

How the contract works

A contract on this question settles at $1 if Anthropic holds the top spot on LiveBench.ai's Coding Average ranking on 31 December 2026, and at $0 if it does not. The price at any moment reflects what buyers and sellers currently think the chance of that is; a contract trading at 0.30, for example, would imply the market sees the outcome as roughly a three-in-ten chance, not that it is likely or unlikely in any stronger sense. Anthropic's related contract is one of five parallel yes/no questions covering the same LiveBench ranking, one for each of Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, xAI and Moonshot AI. A position taken now does not have to be held to settlement; it can typically be sold at whatever price the market shows at the time.
What the market thinks happens
$100
Yes56%

The event happens

Costs now
$0.56
If you put in $100
$179
No44%

The event does not happen

Costs now
$0.44
If you put in $100
$227

Probability

0%25%50%75%100%12:0017:3623:1204:4810:2416:00
ConsensusKalshi

How the price has moved

The market opened on 29 July 2026 at 42% and, within about a day, traded across an extreme range, touching as high as 99% before settling near the current consensus of 56%, with a further 1.0 percentage point gain in the most recent 24 hours. That range is far wider than would be expected from a mature market and points to thin liquidity on a newly listed contract rather than a genuine reassessment of Anthropic's chances; the move follows no single publicly reported trigger. With only 143 price observations and $234,994 in total volume recorded so far, the current level should be read as an early and still-forming estimate.

Context

LiveBench.ai is an independent benchmark that scores large language models across categories including a 'Coding Average', and it refreshes its question sets periodically to reduce the risk that labs train directly on the test. This market asks whether Anthropic will hold the top spot in that coding ranking on 31 December 2026. Separate, parallel contracts ask the same question for OpenAI, Google, xAI and Moonshot AI, so the four markets together describe how traders expect the coding leaderboard to look at year-end. The coding benchmark race has become one of the most closely watched proxies for AI leadership because coding ability underpins agentic software tools, enterprise developer products and revenue for each lab. Anthropic has built its commercial identity heavily around coding and agentic tasks with its Claude line; OpenAI, Google's Gemini team, xAI's Grok team and China's Moonshot AI (maker of the Kimi models) all compete directly on the same tasks. Rankings on sites like LiveBench have changed hands repeatedly over the past two years as each lab has released updated models.

Analysis

This market is unusually young. It was first recorded on 29 July 2026 at 42%, and within roughly a day it has traded across a full range from 42% up to 99%, before settling near its current consensus of 56% with a further gain of 1.0 percentage point in the last 24 hours. A swing that wide, on a market with only 143 price observations and $234,994 in total volume, is the signature of thin, early trading rather than a settled view: a small number of trades can move the price sharply when there is little depth on either side. Traders should read the 56% consensus as a snapshot of an opinion still forming, not a stable read on Anthropic's chances. The underlying question turns on a genuinely competitive race. LiveBench.ai's coding leaderboard has changed hands between labs multiple times as each has shipped new models, and the site periodically rotates in new problems specifically to prevent any one lab's ranking from becoming stale or gamed. That means the ranking on 31 December 2026 will depend heavily on what each lab ships between now and then, not simply on where things stand today. Anthropic has repeatedly placed models at or near the top of coding-specific benchmarks, which is the strongest argument for the Yes side, but OpenAI, Google and xAI each have the resources and release cadence to contest that lead, and Moonshot AI has shown that open-weight labs can also compete at the top end of coding tasks. The existence of four parallel markets, one for each competing lab, is itself informative: it shows traders are pricing this as a genuinely contested multi-way race rather than a two-horse contest, and it means Anthropic's 56% should be read alongside, not in isolation from, the probabilities assigned to OpenAI, Google, xAI and Moonshot AI on the same ranking.

What moves the probability

  • Anthropic's release cadence

    Anthropic's ability to keep a Claude model at the top of LiveBench's coding average depends on how often and how strongly it ships updates between now and 31 December 2026. A track record of leading coding-specific benchmarks is the main reason the market sits above even odds. Any gap in Anthropic's release schedule while a rival ships gives the No side an opening.

  • Competing lab releases

    OpenAI, Google and xAI each have the scale to release a frontier coding-focused model before year-end, and any one of them topping LiveBench would flip this market toward No. This is the single largest source of downside risk to the Yes price.

  • Moonshot AI and open-weight competition

    Moonshot AI's Kimi models represent a lower-cost entrant that has already shown it can compete on coding tasks, and its own market on this same LiveBench ranking suggests traders take that threat seriously. This pulls some probability away from Anthropic even if it does not directly lift OpenAI or Google.

  • LiveBench's rotating question sets

    LiveBench periodically refreshes its coding problems to limit contamination, which means rankings can shift for reasons unrelated to a genuine capability gap. This adds a layer of measurement noise that keeps the market from converging quickly.

  • Market immaturity

    With only 143 observations and roughly a day of trading history, the price itself is not yet a reliable signal. The 42%-to-99% range recorded so far reflects thin liquidity more than a settled consensus, and the price should be expected to keep moving as volume builds.

The case for

  • Anthropic's Claude models have repeatedly ranked at or near the top of coding-specific benchmarks over the past two years, which is the strongest evidence supporting a Yes outcome.
  • For Yes to resolve, Anthropic needs to either maintain its current position or regain the top LiveBench Coding Average spot specifically on 31 December 2026, when the market checks the ranking.
  • Anthropic's commercial focus on developer and agentic coding tools gives it a direct incentive to prioritize coding performance in every model release between now and year-end.

The case against

  • OpenAI, Google or xAI could release a frontier model before 31 December 2026 that overtakes Claude on LiveBench's coding average, any of which would resolve this market No.
  • Moonshot AI's Kimi models have already demonstrated competitive coding performance, and a further release from that lab could take the top spot at lower cost than the US labs.
  • The market's own history, a swing from 42% to as high as 99% within roughly a day of trading, shows that current pricing is unstable and could look very different by the time more volume and information accumulate.

Ways to participate

Choose a market and open your position

The price above shows Kalshi's market estimate. To act through Binance Wallet, open its current event catalogue or choose one of the related contracts with a direct route below.

Choose an event in Binance Wallet

You will review the selected contract's exact wording and current price before confirming. Availability depends on the event and region.

  1. 1Open the Binance Wallet catalogue
  2. 2Choose an event
  3. 3Select YES or NO

Related events with a direct route

Choose a nearby theme, read its analysis and open the matching contract on the named venue.

Venues (1)

Probability

  • Anthropic56%
  • OpenAI31%
  • xAI6%
  • Google3%
  • Moonshot AI2%

Resolution rules

Determined by
LiveBench.ai
Resolution date

This market resolves using LiveBench.ai's published ranking of models by 'Coding Average' as it stands on 31 December 2026. If Anthropic holds the top-ranked position on that date, the contract resolves Yes; if any other lab is ranked first, it resolves No. Kalshi is the venue trading this specific contract, and the same LiveBench.ai ranking is used to settle the parallel OpenAI, Google, xAI and Moonshot AI contracts on the same date.

Calculation methodology →

Local context

English-language tech and finance readers track the AI coding race closely because it functions as a running scoreboard for which company is actually ahead in practical AI capability, not just marketing claims, and Anthropic, OpenAI, Google and xAI are all tied to companies and investors that this audience already follows. Enterprise software budgets, developer tooling adoption and cloud spending increasingly hinge on which lab's models are seen as best at coding, so a shift in this ranking has knock-on relevance for the broader AI infrastructure trade that this audience watches.

What to watch

Watch for any new Claude model release from Anthropic, and for competing frontier releases from OpenAI, Google's Gemini team, xAI or Moonshot AI, each of which could move the LiveBench Coding Average ranking. LiveBench.ai periodically rotates its coding problem sets, which can shift rankings independent of any new model launch, so changes to that methodology are also worth tracking. The definitive check happens on 31 December 2026, when the site's ranking as it stands that day determines settlement for this contract and its four parallel counterparts.

Common questions

What exactly settles this market and when?
It settles based on which lab holds the top spot in LiveBench.ai's Coding Average ranking on 31 December 2026. If Anthropic is ranked first on that date, the Anthropic contract resolves Yes; otherwise it resolves No.
What does the current market price actually mean?
The price is the market's live estimate of the probability that Anthropic will hold the top LiveBench coding spot at year-end. It is not a prediction from LiveBench itself, and it will keep changing as new model releases and trading activity come in.
What happens if LiveBench changes its methodology or the ranking is unclear on 31 December 2026?
The settlement rules point specifically to LiveBench.ai's Coding Average ranking as it stands on that date, so any methodology change LiveBench makes before then becomes part of what is being measured. Venues typically wait for a clear, published ranking before settling if there is any ambiguity.
Why do four other labs have separate markets on the same question?
OpenAI, Google, xAI and Moonshot AI each have their own yes/no contract asking whether they will hold the top LiveBench coding spot at year-end, using the same resolution source and date. Because only one lab can be ranked first, these markets are competing for the same outcome rather than being independent of each other.
Why has the price swung so much since the market opened?
The market has only existed since 29 July 2026 and has recorded just 143 price observations, so early trades can move the price sharply in either direction. A range from 42% to 99% within roughly a day reflects a thin, early market rather than a major change in the underlying likelihood.
Has Anthropic led coding benchmarks before?
Anthropic's Claude models have repeatedly ranked highly on coding-focused benchmarks in the past, which is part of why the market currently sits above an even chance. Past ranking position is not a guarantee of the year-end result, since rivals can and do release competing models.

Related events