‹ PublicAI Index
The LLM benchmark aggregator.
Nova Pro
Amazon
Strongest in Factual grounding (#10 of 101), weakest in Human preference (#227 of 342). Above par in 5 of 11 scopes. Among the models it meets almost everywhere, it finishes behind Claude Sonnet 5 and Inkling and ahead of Grok 4.1 Fast and GLM-4.6.
§ 1 · Profile
What it is good at
Bars run from 50 — the average of the models each source lists — so right of the line is above par. The middle column is the gap to whoever leads that scope.
Safety53−8.5#104/3372/3
Factual grounding62.3−8.3#10/1011/1
Harm refusal56.7−4.9#39/3001/2
Jailbreak resistance55.8−9.1#105/2721/1
Toxicity avoidance53−6#153/2721/1
Fairness45.5−24.5#183/3001/2
Secure code40.9−25.6#213/2741/1
Agents44.8−23.3#186/2681/5
Tool use40.7−33.3#64/811/1
Human preference46.4−21.1#227/3421/1
Human preference46.4−21.1#227/3421/1
§ 2 · Head to head
What it beats, and what beats it
The same models turn up scope after scope. Counted once: where both were placed, who finished higher. Bars run right for Nova Pro, left for the other.
§ 3 · Sources
Where the numbers come from
4 publications, 9 figures. Every one links to the page it was read from.
LMArena Text 1290
BFCL v4 24.97%
Enkrypt · Jailbreak risk 7.9%Enkrypt · Harmful content risk 17.8%Enkrypt · CBRN risk 5.5%Enkrypt · Toxicity risk 4.2%Enkrypt · Bias risk 84.8%Enkrypt · Insecure code risk 52%
Vectara · Factual consistency 94.9%
Badge
[](https://publicai.io/model-index/m/nova-pro)