Free audit
$0
25 samples, one task, 5 runs a day. Agreement, routing table, cost projection, router snippet.
Free cutover audit · no signup
Paste examples your current model already labelled. A cheaper model answers the same task, and you get a short report: where it agrees, the confidence threshold that keeps quality, and what that does to the monthly bill.
candidate · conf ≥ 0.984% of calls
agreement on those99.0%
hybrid bill$174.30/mo −83%
Current model$0
Hybrid$0
$0
25 samples, one task, 5 runs a day. Agreement, routing table, cost projection, router snippet.
$49
One payment, no subscription. 5 runs within 30 days, up to 500 yes/no or 200 extraction samples per run, the full list of samples where the cheaper model disagrees (JSON and CSV), plus the per-field breakdown and router snippet.
See a sample full report (example data).
Loading checkout…
Today: Levanto Sage 2, a classify/extract model priced at $0.05 per million input tokens that returns calibrated probabilities. The audit code is model-swappable; more candidates are being added.
No. Samples are sent to the candidate model to run the audit, then dropped. Nothing is written to a database, and the report lives only in your browser. Don’t paste personal or sensitive data: the candidate model is a US service.
Because that is the cutover question: will switching change the answers your product already relies on? If you have human-checked labels, paste those instead and the same numbers become accuracy.
It’s enough to rule a switch in or out, not to sign it off. One disagreement in 25 moves agreement by 4 points. The full audit (up to 500 yes/no or 200 extraction samples per run) narrows that.
Then the report says so. If you already run a small model at about $0.10 per million input tokens, a switch rarely saves enough to matter, and the audit will mark it “not worth it”.