reasoning benchmark
BFCL v2 evaluates large language models on function calling using 2,251 question-function-answer pairs, including enterprise and OSS-contributed functions and multilingual prompts.
Updated Sep 5, 2026
Higher score ranks better on this benchmark.
Rank | Model | Score | Percentile | Participants | Evidence | Evaluated |
|---|
| Rank01 | ModelME | Score77.30% | Percentile100.00% | Participants5 | EvidenceC | Evaluated |
| Rank02 | ModelNV | Score74.10% | Percentile75.00% | Participants5 | EvidenceC | Evaluated |
| Rank03 | ModelNV | Score73.70% | Percentile50.00% | Participants5 | EvidenceC | Evaluated |
| Rank04 | ModelME | Score67.00% | Percentile25.00% | Participants5 | EvidenceC | Evaluated |
| Rank05 | ModelNV | Score63.60% | Percentile0.00% | Participants5 | EvidenceC | Evaluated |
The leading models and scores on this benchmark.
A closer view of the leading scores on this benchmark.
The first five results on this benchmark, with official price and output speed added where the model identity can be matched.
What BFCL v2 measures and how its scores work.
BFCL v2 is a benchmark for evaluating large language models' function calling capabilities across Python, Java, and JavaScript.
It measures AST accuracy, executable accuracy, irrelevance detection, and relevance detection, with the metric reported as Score in ratio units.
Scores are shown in ratio. This benchmark is not independently verified and has an evidence level of B.
LLM Stats. Benchmark scores retain their original unit. Overall score eligibility is shown separately.
Common questions about BFCL v2.
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct is currently ranked first with 77.30%.
The current leaders are Llama 3.3 70B Instruct (77.30%), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 (74.10%), and Llama-3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1 (73.70%).
No matched official input price is currently available.
The fastest matched records are Llama 3.3 70B Instruct (2,220.00 tok/s via Cerebras) and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct (171.50 tok/s via DeepInfra).
No. This benchmark measures one defined capability or task. The overall LLMBoard score uses a separate aggregation across eligible benchmark evidence.
It measures AST accuracy, executable accuracy, irrelevance detection, and relevance detection, with the metric reported as Score in ratio units.
Yes. Higher values rank better for this benchmark.
5 model results are currently shown.
No. This benchmark is shown for reference but does not contribute to the overall score.
Ranking basisThis bfcl v2 AI model leaderboard uses descending score in the benchmark original unit. The leaderboard ranking keeps matched price and speed data separate from benchmark evidence.
Selection summary
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct currently leads BFCL v2 with 77.30%. It is the top model on this specific benchmark, while the best LLM for the broader task should also be checked against other benchmarks, price, and runtime.
Use this leaderboard with the supporting benchmark results and coverage details above. A leaderboard position summarizes the selected ranking signal; it does not replace workload-specific testing.