The median wall clock time is 53.4 seconds per prompt, with a tenth percentile of 28.7 seconds and a ninetieth percentile of 82.7 seconds across 45 recorded executions.

How reliable is Cursor?

86.7% of recorded executions met the published pass criterion with no operator intervention. 3 were partial and 3 failed outright. Every one of those rows is published on this page.

Can I export the code from Cursor?

The code was never anywhere else. The code ownership subscore is 99.0 out of 100.

coding-agent / rank 3 of 41 / cycle 04

Cursor benchmark

The strongest edit loop we measured. It keeps a large working set in view, so the tenancy constraint from prompt 3 survived every later change without being restated. As a coding agent it produces no interface of its own, which caps the design subscore: what you get is exactly the quality of the framework and components you point it at. Everything it writes lands in your repository, so ownership is total.

Last run: 14 Aug 2026 17:40 UTCNext scheduled run: 21 Aug 2026 09:00 UTCOfficial site Cursor reviews and ratings

Composite index

78.65

of 100 | ▼ 1 versus cycle 03

At a glance

Composite index

78.65

rank 3 of 41

Rank

of 41 measured builders

Median speed

53.4 s

p10 28.7 s, p90 82.7 s

Reliability

86.7%

strict pass rate

SEO score

58.0

0 to 100, SEO and GEO axis

Three strongest axes

Code ownership99.0
Agent performance92.0
Reliability86.7

Three weakest axes

SEO and GEO58.0
Speed58.8
Design output66.0

Median per prompt

53.4 s

p10 28.7 s, p90 82.7 s

Strict pass rate

86.7%

39 pass, 3 partial, 3 fail

Executions recorded

5 runs of 9 prompts

Entry price

EUR 19.00

Cheapest plan that can finish the specification

Per axis subscores

Composite recomputed from these ten rows: 78.65. That is the arithmetic behind the index, and you can repeat it by hand.

Weight table

Per axis subscores against the roster median, and weighted contribution
Axis	Score	Median	Weight %	Contribution
Agent performance	92.0	75.0	18	16.56
Reliability	86.7	71.1	18	15.61
Scalability	82.0	70.0	13	10.66
SEO and GEO	58.0	58.0	12	6.96
API and MCP	74.0	62.0	9	6.66
Integrations	80.0	66.0	8	6.40
Design output	66.0	71.0	7	4.62
Speed	58.8	33.0	7	4.12
Value	82.0	76.0	5	4.10
Code ownership	99.0	90.0	3	2.97

Speed distribution

Every recorded prompt duration for Cursor, in seconds. The cyan tick on the whisker is the median.

min 18.0 smax 144.7 s

Spread against the cohort

p10 28.7 s / median 53.4 s / p90 82.7 s

Scale is shared with every product in the cohort, so the bars are directly comparable between pages. Ratio of p90 to median is 1.55x.

Outcome split

39 pass / 3 partial / 3 fail

SEO and GEO measurements

Taken from the public marketing page this product generated in prompt 8, fetched with JavaScript disabled.

SEO and GEO leaderboard

HTML bytes, no JS

24.0 KB

24,576 bytes of real text content with scripts blocked

LCP

1,720 ms

Throttled connection, cold cache

CLS

0.030

Cumulative layout shift on load

SEO and GEO subscore

58.0

0 to 100, worth 12 index points

Raw run data: 45 executions

One row per prompt execution. Nothing is aggregated away, nothing is hidden, including the failures.

JSON

Raw per run measurements
Run	Prompt	Prompt target	Started	Duration (s)	Outcome	Note
R01	P01	Tenant and user model	11 Aug 2026 08:00 UTC	18.0	pass
R01	P02	Authentication and session	11 Aug 2026 08:02 UTC	41.7	pass
R01	P03	Projects CRUD with tenancy	11 Aug 2026 08:04 UTC	40.8	pass	Tenancy constraint from prompt 2 was still enforced after the refactor, with no restatement of the rule.
R01	P04	Public REST API with keys	11 Aug 2026 08:07 UTC	84.7	pass
R01	P05	Outbound webhooks with signatures	11 Aug 2026 08:11 UTC	62.5	pass
R01	P06	Background jobs	11 Aug 2026 08:14 UTC	72.6	pass
R01	P07	Admin panel	11 Aug 2026 08:17 UTC	65.1	pass
R01	P08	Public marketing surface	11 Aug 2026 08:20 UTC	80.4	pass
R01	P09	Hardening pass	11 Aug 2026 08:23 UTC	51.9	pass
R02	P01	Tenant and user model	12 Aug 2026 08:00 UTC	42.1	pass
R02	P02	Authentication and session	12 Aug 2026 08:02 UTC	71.4	pass
R02	P03	Projects CRUD with tenancy	12 Aug 2026 08:05 UTC	53.4	pass	Tenancy constraint from prompt 2 was still enforced after the refactor, with no restatement of the rule.
R02	P04	Public REST API with keys	12 Aug 2026 08:08 UTC	46.2	pass
R02	P05	Outbound webhooks with signatures	12 Aug 2026 08:11 UTC	65.7	pass
R02	P06	Background jobs	12 Aug 2026 08:14 UTC	65.1	pass
R02	P07	Admin panel	12 Aug 2026 08:17 UTC	51.6	fail	Build did not start after deploy. Recorded as a fail with the log preserved.
R02	P08	Public marketing surface	12 Aug 2026 08:20 UTC	84.2	pass
R02	P09	Hardening pass	12 Aug 2026 08:23 UTC	43.8	pass
R03	P01	Tenant and user model	13 Aug 2026 08:00 UTC	19.0	pass
R03	P02	Authentication and session	13 Aug 2026 08:02 UTC	57.8	pass
R03	P03	Projects CRUD with tenancy	13 Aug 2026 08:05 UTC	62.5	pass	Tenancy constraint from prompt 2 was still enforced after the refactor, with no restatement of the rule.
R03	P04	Public REST API with keys	13 Aug 2026 08:08 UTC	109.7	pass
R03	P05	Outbound webhooks with signatures	13 Aug 2026 08:12 UTC	61.4	pass
R03	P06	Background jobs	13 Aug 2026 08:15 UTC	48.0	pass
R03	P07	Admin panel	13 Aug 2026 08:17 UTC	79.8	partial	Required one clarifying instruction before the criterion was met.
R03	P08	Public marketing surface	13 Aug 2026 08:21 UTC	70.4	pass
R03	P09	Hardening pass	13 Aug 2026 08:24 UTC	51.0	pass
R04	P01	Tenant and user model	14 Aug 2026 08:00 UTC	23.0	pass
R04	P02	Authentication and session	14 Aug 2026 08:02 UTC	117.2	fail	Deployed URL returned 500 on every request.
R04	P03	Projects CRUD with tenancy	14 Aug 2026 08:06 UTC	49.7	pass	Tenancy constraint from prompt 2 was still enforced after the refactor, with no restatement of the rule.
R04	P04	Public REST API with keys	14 Aug 2026 08:09 UTC	144.7	pass
R04	P05	Outbound webhooks with signatures	14 Aug 2026 08:13 UTC	76.8	pass
R04	P06	Background jobs	14 Aug 2026 08:16 UTC	62.9	pass
R04	P07	Admin panel	14 Aug 2026 08:19 UTC	33.5	pass
R04	P08	Public marketing surface	14 Aug 2026 08:22 UTC	51.9	pass
R04	P09	Hardening pass	14 Aug 2026 08:25 UTC	24.1	partial	Required one clarifying instruction before the criterion was met.
R05	P01	Tenant and user model	15 Aug 2026 08:00 UTC	37.0	pass
R05	P02	Authentication and session	15 Aug 2026 08:02 UTC	33.8	pass
R05	P03	Projects CRUD with tenancy	15 Aug 2026 08:05 UTC	31.4	pass	Tenancy constraint from prompt 2 was still enforced after the refactor, with no restatement of the rule.
R05	P04	Public REST API with keys	15 Aug 2026 08:07 UTC	42.4	pass
R05	P05	Outbound webhooks with signatures	15 Aug 2026 08:10 UTC	53.4	partial	Validation added on the write path only. Read path left unguarded.
R05	P06	Background jobs	15 Aug 2026 08:13 UTC	64.2	pass
R05	P07	Admin panel	15 Aug 2026 08:16 UTC	76.4	fail	Agent looped on the same edit for the full timeout window of 20 minutes.
R05	P08	Public marketing surface	15 Aug 2026 08:19 UTC	26.9	pass
R05	P09	Hardening pass	15 Aug 2026 08:22 UTC	41.2	pass

Pricing

Free tier with limited agent requests. Paid plans from EUR 19 per month, with usage based pricing above the allowance.

Entry price: EUR 19.00
Value subscore: 82.0
Index points per euro: 4.14

Capabilities as measured

stack: Your repository, any framework
deploy: Not included, it writes the deploy config
database: Whatever you already run
auth: It wires the library you choose
background jobs: Implemented in your stack, queue of your choice
webhooks: Written properly when the criterion names signing
rest api: Written to your conventions
mcp server: Yes, client and server
export code: The code was never anywhere else
custom domain: Your hosting decides
ssr: Your framework decides

Screenshot

Cursor landing page, captured by the lab on 14 Aug 2026 at 1440 by 900. Stored locally, never hotlinked.

Cursor landing page, captured by the lab at 1440 by 900

Cursor, captured 14 Aug 2026.

Sources and fetch dates

Every claim on this page traces to one of these.

Sources with fetch dates
Source	URL	Fetched
Cursor pricing page	https://cursor.com/pricing	14 Aug 2026
Cursor product site	https://cursor.com	14 Aug 2026
LLM Tier run harness output	https://www.llm-tier.com/api/runs.json	14 Aug 2026

Rich results carry this composite as 3.9 on a 0 to 5 scale because that is the only scale the format accepts. The number on this page, 0 to 100, is the real one.

Cursor head to head

cursor vs claude-code cursor vs zed cursor vs kiro augment-code vs cursor trae vs cursor

Reader index

Voted by readers with an account, one score per person per axis. Published beside the lab index, never inside it.

Score it or read the notes

Reader index

82.93

Lab index

78.65

6 readers, 55 axis scores, last change 15 Aug 2026. Readers rate Cursor 4.3 points above the measurement.

Reader mean against the measured lab subscore for each axis
Axis	Weight	Lab	Readers	Votes
Agent performance	18%	92.0	99.2	6
Reliability	18%	86.7	89.0	6
Scalability	13%	82.0	85.7	6
SEO and GEO	12%	58.0	63.8	5
API and MCP	9%	74.0	77.5	6
Integrations	8%	80.0	83.8	6
Design output	7%	66.0	70.0	3
Speed	7%	58.8	62.5	6
Value	5%	82.0	86.2	5
Code ownership	3%	99.0	100.0	6

The reader index is a weighted mean of reader submitted axis scores using the published index weights, renormalised over the axes readers have scored. It is never blended into the lab index. How this works.

Open rating mean

n/a

0 published open ratings, submitted without an account

Lab index

78.65

Measured, not voted

Gap to the measurement

n/a

Positive means open raters put it above the measurement

What agent performance looked like in practice

Across 45 recorded executions this product met the published pass criterion cleanly 39 times, partially 3 times and failed 3 times. The rows above carry the reviewer note for every non clean outcome, which is the only way to tell a product that fails loudly from one that fails quietly.