Zed logo

Coding agents / rank 8 of 17 / cycle 04

Zed benchmark

The fastest median in the index, and the reason is architectural rather than clever prompting: the editor is fast, the diff review is instant and almost no time is lost to interface latency. Correctness sits in the middle of the agent group, so the right read is that it costs the least time per attempt rather than that it is the best at any single attempt.

Last run: 15 Aug 2026 09:11 UTCNext scheduled run: n/aOfficial siteZed reviews and ratings

Composite index

71.13

of 100 | withheld vs. cycle 03

Delta not shown for cycle 04: the roster was re-based from one merged ranking into two class boards, so cycle 03 and cycle 04 ranks are not on the same scale. Resumes cycle 05.

At a glance

Composite index

71.13

rank 8 of 17

Rank

#8

of 17 on the coding agents board

Median turn latency

31.4 s per prompt

4.7 min across the full nine prompt spec, derived

Reliability

71.1%

strict pass rate

SEO score

55.0

0 to 100, SEO and GEO axis

Three strongest axes

  • Turn latency score100.0
  • Value82.0
  • Agent performance77.0

Three weakest axes

  • SEO and GEO55.0
  • Design output64.0
  • Integrations64.0

Median turn latency

31.4 s per prompt

p10 19.8 s, p90 54.5 s

Strict pass rate

71.1%

32 pass, 5 partial, 8 fail

Executions recorded

45

5 runs of 9 prompts

Entry price

USD 10 / month

Vendor's own unit and billing period. Never a currency conversion

Per axis subscores

Composite recomputed from these 9 rows: 71.13. That is the arithmetic behind the index, and you can repeat it by hand. Rounding rule: half up at two decimals, applied uniformly to all 37 published products. Code ownership has no row here: it is not scored on this board.

Per axis subscores against the roster median, and weighted contribution
AxisSubscore 0 to 100, tick is the roster medianScoreMedianWeight %Contribution
Reliability71.175.618.5613.20
Agent performance77.080.018.5514.28
Scalability70.074.013.49.38
SEO and GEO55.056.012.376.80
API and MCP66.070.09.286.12
Integrations64.070.08.255.28
Design output64.062.07.224.62
Turn latency score100.039.97.227.22
Value82.080.05.154.22

Turn latency distribution

Every recorded prompt duration for Zed, in seconds. Median wall clock time for one prompt, not for a whole build. The cyan tick on the whisker is the median.

min 18.0 smax 152.9 s

Spread against the cohort

p10 19.8 s / median 31.4 s / p90 54.5 s

Scale is shared with every product in the cohort, so the bars are directly comparable between pages. Ratio of p90 to median is 1.74x.

Outcome split

32 pass / 5 partial / 8 fail

SEO and GEO measurements

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

HTML bytes, no JS

19.0 KB

19,456 bytes of real text content with scripts blocked

LCP

1,780 ms

Throttled connection, cold cache

CLS

0.040

Cumulative layout shift on load

SEO and GEO subscore

55.0

0 to 100, worth 12.37 index points on this board

Raw run data: 45 executions

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

Raw per run measurements
RunPromptPrompt targetStartedDuration (s)OutcomeNote
R01P01Tenant and user model11 Aug 2026 08:00 UTC23.6pass
R01P02Authentication and session11 Aug 2026 08:02 UTC47.4failDeployed URL returned 500 on every request.
R01P03Projects CRUD with tenancy11 Aug 2026 08:05 UTC58.0pass
R01P04Public REST API with keys11 Aug 2026 08:08 UTC53.5failBuild did not start after deploy. Recorded as a fail with the log preserved.
R01P05Outbound webhooks with signatures11 Aug 2026 08:11 UTC31.4partialRequired one clarifying instruction before the criterion was met.
R01P06Background jobs11 Aug 2026 08:13 UTC88.5pass
R01P07Admin panel11 Aug 2026 08:17 UTC23.2partialDelivered the main path, missed the boundary case named in the pass criteria.
R01P08Public marketing surface11 Aug 2026 08:19 UTC27.4pass
R01P09Hardening pass11 Aug 2026 08:21 UTC35.0pass
R02P01Tenant and user model12 Aug 2026 08:00 UTC21.3pass
R02P02Authentication and session12 Aug 2026 08:02 UTC35.3pass
R02P03Projects CRUD with tenancy12 Aug 2026 08:04 UTC36.1pass
R02P04Public REST API with keys12 Aug 2026 08:07 UTC55.1pass
R02P05Outbound webhooks with signatures12 Aug 2026 08:10 UTC30.9pass
R02P06Background jobs12 Aug 2026 08:12 UTC26.5pass
R02P07Admin panel12 Aug 2026 08:15 UTC26.8pass
R02P08Public marketing surface12 Aug 2026 08:17 UTC47.4pass
R02P09Hardening pass12 Aug 2026 08:20 UTC24.8pass
R03P01Tenant and user model13 Aug 2026 08:00 UTC18.3pass
R03P02Authentication and session13 Aug 2026 08:02 UTC24.6pass
R03P03Projects CRUD with tenancy13 Aug 2026 08:04 UTC26.8pass
R03P04Public REST API with keys13 Aug 2026 08:07 UTC52.5pass
R03P05Outbound webhooks with signatures13 Aug 2026 08:10 UTC50.6failTask abandoned by the agent with no artifact produced.
R03P06Background jobs13 Aug 2026 08:12 UTC48.2pass
R03P07Admin panel13 Aug 2026 08:15 UTC23.6pass
R03P08Public marketing surface13 Aug 2026 08:18 UTC47.0failBuild did not start after deploy. Recorded as a fail with the log preserved.
R03P09Hardening pass13 Aug 2026 08:20 UTC26.9pass
R04P01Tenant and user model14 Aug 2026 08:00 UTC21.4partialDelivered the main path, missed the boundary case named in the pass criteria.
R04P02Authentication and session14 Aug 2026 08:02 UTC18.3pass
R04P03Projects CRUD with tenancy14 Aug 2026 08:04 UTC18.4partialPagination off by one at the final page boundary.
R04P04Public REST API with keys14 Aug 2026 08:06 UTC152.9pass
R04P05Outbound webhooks with signatures14 Aug 2026 08:11 UTC40.6partialError envelope inconsistent between two of the endpoints.
R04P06Background jobs14 Aug 2026 08:14 UTC59.4pass
R04P07Admin panel14 Aug 2026 08:17 UTC23.3pass
R04P08Public marketing surface14 Aug 2026 08:19 UTC18.8pass
R04P09Hardening pass14 Aug 2026 08:21 UTC37.8failDeployed URL returned 500 on every request.
R05P01Tenant and user model15 Aug 2026 08:00 UTC22.9pass
R05P02Authentication and session15 Aug 2026 08:02 UTC18.0failDeployed URL returned 500 on every request.
R05P03Projects CRUD with tenancy15 Aug 2026 08:04 UTC25.4pass
R05P04Public REST API with keys15 Aug 2026 08:07 UTC34.4pass
R05P05Outbound webhooks with signatures15 Aug 2026 08:09 UTC21.5pass
R05P06Background jobs15 Aug 2026 08:12 UTC38.9failDeployed URL returned 500 on every request.
R05P07Admin panel15 Aug 2026 08:14 UTC36.9pass
R05P08Public marketing surface15 Aug 2026 08:17 UTC31.8failGenerated migration conflicted with the existing schema and was not reconciled.
R05P09Hardening pass15 Aug 2026 08:19 UTC40.3pass

Pricing

The editor is free and open source. Hosted agent usage starts at USD 10 per month, or bring your own model key at no licence cost.

Entry price
USD 10 / month
Value subscore
82.0
Index points per euro
8.32

Entry price is the vendor's own published figure, fetched 21 Aug 2026, never a currency conversion. The currency label is the vendor's own except where the pricing note above records that this lab inferred it. Index points per euro is computed from a separate, euro-normalised figure used only for the Value axis: Converted at the European Central Bank euro reference rate of 1.1699 US dollars to the euro, August 21, 2026.

Capabilities as measured

stack
Your repository, any framework
deploy
Not included
database
Whatever you already run
auth
It wires the library you choose
background jobs
Implemented in your stack
webhooks
Written, signing on request
rest api
Written to your conventions
mcp server
Yes
export code
Fully open source editor, code stays in your repository
custom domain
Your hosting decides
ssr
Your framework decides

Screenshot

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

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

Zed, captured 14 Aug 2026.

Sources and fetch dates

Every claim on this page traces to one of these.

Sources with fetch dates
SourceURLFetched
Zed pricing pagehttps://zed.dev/pricing14 Aug 2026
Zed product sitehttps://zed.dev14 Aug 2026
LLM Tier run harness outputhttps://www.llm-tier.com/api/runs.json14 Aug 2026

Rich results carry this composite as 3.6 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.

Zed head to head

Reader index

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

Reader index

79.17

Lab index

71.13

3 readers, 28 axis scores, last change 29 Aug 2026. Readers rate Zed 8.0 points above the measurement.

Seeded at launch

The reader scores, lab notes and open ratings published here were written by this lab in August 2026 to populate the reader column before the site had readers. They are not customer submissions, they are not vendor supplied and nobody was paid for them. Anything submitted since then comes from a registered account. The lab index is measured from logged runs and is unaffected either way.

Reader mean against the measured lab subscore for each axis
AxisWeightLabReadersVotesReader mean
Agent performance18.55%77.086.73
Reliability18.56%71.181.33
Scalability13.4%70.078.02
SEO and GEO12.37%55.058.02
API and MCP9.28%66.077.73
Integrations8.25%64.069.73
Design output7.22%64.073.73
Turn latency score7.22%100.0100.03
Value5.15%82.094.73

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

71.13

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

The fastest median in the index, and the reason is architectural rather than clever prompting: the editor is fast, the diff review is instant and almost no time is lost to interface latency. Correctness sits in the middle of the agent group, so the right read is that it costs the least time per attempt rather than that it is the best at any single attempt.

Across 45 recorded executions this product met the published pass criterion cleanly 32 times, partially 5 times and failed 8 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.