INDURO.AI and the LLM Ranking Consortium

Objective LLM Rankings for CPG & Pharma

We test 300+ models with identical prompts and measure exactly what comes back. No vendor bias. No marketing claims. Just data.

331
Models Evaluated
20
CPG Use Cases
6
Capability Profiles
3-Stage
Evaluation Funnel

The LLM Ranking Consortium Mission

The LLM Ranking Consortium brings together industry leaders, researchers, and practitioners to establish common standards for evaluating large language models in enterprise contexts.

Our mission is to create transparent, reproducible benchmarks grounded in real-world use cases—eliminating vendor bias and marketing claims through collaborative, expert-driven evaluation.

Core Principles:
✓ Shared golden datasets and evaluation methodologies
✓ Expert judgment panels for quality validation
✓ Open standards accessible to all members
✓ Continuous improvement through collective research

Industry Use Case — LLM Router

INDURO.AI's LLM Router is built on the principles of the LLM Ranking Consortium. Just as the consortium defines common standards, golden data, and expert-driven evaluation, the router applies these foundations in a production-ready system.

How It Works

Use Case Driven

The router leverages real industry use cases contributed to the consortium, ensuring routing decisions are relevant and business-aligned.

Benchmark-Based Routing

By integrating consortium standards, the router can rank and route queries across multiple LLMs—selecting the right model for accuracy, safety, and cost efficiency.

Golden Samples Inside

The router is continuously improved with golden data sets and evaluation methodologies shared within the consortium.

Expert-Validated

Decisions are traceable, benchmarked, and supported by expert judgment panels, giving enterprises confidence in outcomes.

Value for Customers

For CPG and Pharma organizations, INDURO.AI's LLM Router means:

  • Trusted routing aligned with industry standards
  • Faster integration and lower experimentation cost
  • Benchmarks grounded in shared, validated use cases
  • Direct link to the collective intelligence of the consortium

In short, INDURO.AI operationalizes the consortium's mission, turning shared research and evaluation into a live enterprise solution that delivers measurable ROI.

20 CPG Use Cases We Test

Each use case tested with 30-120 prompts across 6 capability profiles

Some of the cases include:

Content Creation & Marketing

Automated content generation for product descriptions, social media, and marketing campaigns

Creative

Supply Chain Optimization

Real-time visibility, demand forecasting, and logistics optimization

Operational

Consumer Insights & Analytics

Sentiment analysis, trend detection, and consumer behavior prediction

Analytical

Product Development & Innovation

Formulation optimization, ingredient research, and market gap analysis

Technical

Quality Control & Safety

Automated quality checks, compliance monitoring, and defect detection

Regulatory

Customer Service Automation

Chatbots, email response, and customer query resolution

Support

Demand Planning & Forecasting

Sales prediction, inventory optimization, and trend forecasting

Analytical

Sustainability & ESG Reporting

Carbon footprint tracking, packaging optimization, sustainability metrics

Regulatory

Competitive Intelligence

Market analysis, competitor monitoring, and strategic insights

Analytical

Data Analytics & BI

Automated reporting, data visualization, and insight generation

Technical

Personalization & CX

Personalized recommendations, dynamic content, and customer journey optimization

Creative

Workforce Training & Support

Training content creation, knowledge base management, and onboarding automation

Support

The Induro.AI Evaluation Methodology

From 331 models to production-ready recommendations through rigorous CPG-specific testing

0

Stage 0: Discovery (Fast Screen)

Goal: Quickly identify viable models from the full catalog.

Test all 331 models with 30 broad prompts spanning all 6 capability profiles. Deterministic testing (temp 0.0-0.2), 3 runs per model with median scoring, 30-second timeout. Eliminates obvious underperformers.
331 models tested 30 broad prompts Top 30% advance (~150)
1

Stage 1: Profile Battery (CPG Deep Dive)

Goal: Deep testing on CPG-specific tasks across 6 profiles.

30-60 prompts per profile testing: Trade promotion planning, QC defect triage, RAG with citations, supply chain optimization. Tests Creative, Analytical, Operational, Support, Technical, and Regulatory capabilities.
~150 models tested 30-60 prompts/profile Top 20% advance (~30)
2

Stage 2: Finals (Production Readiness)

Goal: Comprehensive production assessment.

80-120 prompts per use case with heavy scoring on: RAG groundedness verification, JSON/function-calling stress tests, long-context performance, multilingual capability, adversarial safety testing. Apply hard gates (safety ≥70, JSON ≥70).
~30 models tested 80-120 prompts/use case Final rankings + gates
3

Scoring Pipeline (Multi-Judge + Gates)

How scores are calculated:

1. Programmatic scoring (exact match/F1)
2. LLM ensemble (2+ diverse judges)
3. Pairwise preference (reduce bias)
4. Normalization (p5-p95 range) + Profile-based weighting + Hard gates
10 weighted criteria Multi-judge ensemble 0-100 normalized

6 Capability Profiles Mapped to 20 Use Cases

Each use case is assigned a profile that determines how we weight the 10 evaluation criteria

P1: Creative/Marketing

High weights on creativity, storytelling, brand voice

Use Cases: Content Creation & Marketing (#1), Brand Management & Localization (#15)

P2: Analytical/BI

High weights on reasoning, groundedness, data accuracy

Use Cases: Consumer Insights (#3), Demand Planning (#7), Retail & Trade Promotion (#11), AI Strategy (#12), Data Analytics & BI (#16), Competitive Intelligence (#17)

P3: Operational

High weights on JSON/structured output, instruction following

Use Cases: Supply Chain Optimization (#2), Workforce Management (#9), Operational Efficiency (#18)

P4: Customer Support

High weights on safety, latency, multilingual

Use Cases: Personalization & CX (#6), Customer Service Automation (#10), Ecommerce & Digital Commerce (#14)

P5: R&D/Technical

High weights on reasoning, long-context, task quality

Use Cases: Product Development (#4), Digital Twin Technology (#13), Innovation Acceleration & R&D (#19)

P6: Safety/Regulatory

High weights on safety, groundedness, compliance (hard gates)

Use Cases: Quality Control & Manufacturing (#5), Packaging Innovation & Sustainability (#8), Sustainability & Environmental Impact (#20)

Why Profiles Matter: A model that scores 96.5% for Creative marketing might score 81% for Operational tasks. Different use cases need different strengths. We test all 331 models across all 6 profiles to find the best fit for each CPG need.

3-Stage Evaluation Funnel

Progressive filtering from 331 models down to production-ready finalists

331
Stage 0: Discovery
~30 broad prompts

Fast screening. All models tested with identical inputs. Timeout 30s. Top 30% advance (~150 models).

~150
Stage 1: Profile Battery
30-60 prompts per profile

Domain-specific CPG tasks. 6 profiles tested. Top 20% advance to finals (~30 models).

~30
Stage 2: Finals
80-120 prompts/use case

Production readiness. RAG, JSON, safety gates. Heavy scoring. Final rankings with recommendations.

Why This Matters:

Testing 331 models × 120 prompts × 20 use cases = 795,600 API calls. The 3-stage funnel reduces this to ~50,000 calls while maintaining accuracy. Stage 0 eliminates obvious failures fast. Stage 1 finds domain fit. Stage 2 ensures production quality. Result: 70% cost savings with 96%+ accuracy.

10 Weighted Evaluation Criteria

Weights adapt based on use case profile - Creative, Analytical, Operational, Support, Technical, or Regulatory

Task Quality

Weight: 15-30%

Programmatic scoring: word count, structure, keyword matching, professional language. Multi-judge rubric 0-100 scale.

Instruction Following

Weight: 5-20%

IFEval constraint satisfaction - did the model do exactly what was asked? No more, no less.

Reasoning & Planning

Weight: 5-20%

GSM8K accuracy for math, multi-step problem decomposition, logical coherence in complex tasks.

Groundedness

Weight: 10-20%

RAGAS metrics for RAG tasks, citation checking, TruthfulQA scores. Catches hallucinations.

JSON/Structured Output

Weight: 5-20%

Schema conformance testing. Critical gate (≥70) for operational use cases. Validates parseable output.

Safety

Weight: 10-20%

JailbreakBench resistance, RealToxicityPrompts scoring. Hard gate (≥70) for customer-facing applications.

Latency

Weight: 5-10%

p50/p95 response time metrics. Measured in milliseconds. Critical for real-time applications.

Cost

Weight: 3-10%

$/task using native token pricing. Normalized and inverted (lower cost = higher score). Free models score 100.

Context Handling

Weight: 2-10%

Accuracy degradation testing with long inputs. Measures performance at 4K, 32K, 128K+ token contexts.

Multilingual

Weight: 2-10%

FLORES-200 benchmark across 5+ languages. Tests translation quality and cultural appropriateness.

Example: How We Score (Theoretical)

Same input, different outputs, objective measurement - methodology demonstration

Identical Input (42 tokens)

As a CPG marketing expert, provide 3 specific strategies for Content Creation & Marketing Automation. Focus on practical implementation for consumer packaged goods companies. Be specific and actionable.

Gemini 2.0 Flash

96.5%
Output: 287 tokens with 3 innovative strategies, real brand examples (Unilever, Coca-Cola), 5 quantified metrics (35%, 60%, 40%, 55%, 25-30%), structured with bullets and bold headers.
Creativity: 100/100
Cost: $0 (FREE)
Speed: 1.2s
Quality: 100/100

Phi-3 Medium

81.0%
Output: 164 tokens with 3 technical strategies, industry terms (DAM, CRM, APIs), 1 quantified metric (40-50%), structured workflow approach. More concise, less creative.
Creativity: 35/100
Cost: $0 (FREE)
Speed: 0.8s
Quality: 92/100

Key Insight (Example Scenario)

Note: This is a theoretical example demonstrating our methodology. In this scenario, Model A scores higher for creative marketing while Model B excels at speed and technical precision. Context matters. Our methodology tests all scenarios across all 331 models to find the best fit for each use case.

Model Rankings (Coming Soon)

We will publish comprehensive rankings after completing our evaluation pipeline

📊

Rankings Will Include:

Top 30 models per use case
Performance scores (0-100)
Cost per 1M tokens
Detailed criteria breakdown
Safety & compliance gates
Implementation recommendations

Get Early Access to Rankings

Be the first to receive comprehensive LLM rankings for your CPG use cases. Share your specific needs and we'll notify you when results are available.

Help us understand which use cases are most relevant to you.

Full Transparency

Note: The methodology and examples shown on this page are our planned testing framework. We are currently building the evaluation pipeline and have not yet completed full testing of all 331 models across the 20 CPG use cases. The scoring examples demonstrate how our system will work once operational. We test all models with temperature 0.0-0.2 for deterministic, reproducible results. No vendor bias. No cherry-picking. Just objective measurement.