Delta Air Lines vs United Airlines

Domestic airlines60 scenarios

Panel, equal weight

claude-haiku-5.5anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5 @ claude-haiku-5.5 via OpenRouter
deepseek-v4.1-flashdeepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash @ deepseek-v4.1-flash via OpenRouter
gemini-3.8-flashgoogle/gemini-3.8-flash @ gemini-3.8-flash via OpenRouter
glm-5.3-flashz-ai/glm-5.3-flash @ glm-5.3-flash via OpenRouter
gpt-6-lunaopenai/gpt-6-luna @ gpt-6-luna via OpenRouter
grok-4.7x-ai/grok-4.7 @ grok-4.7 via OpenRouter

Fast panel

Clear6 of 6 API models picked Delta Air Lines; the panel’s interval leans Delta Air Lines and excludes 50%.

Delta Air Lines83%

United Airlines17%

Consensus95% interval 75–89%

The AI consensus leans to ⁨Delta Air Lines⁩

Each model

Share for Delta Air LinesLeans to …

Conditional pick share for Delta Air Lines by judge (among scenarios where the judge picked a brand), with confidence intervals. 95% confidence intervals (hull of the scenario-clustered bootstrap and Wilson intervals, widened for small samples in battles and newer boards)
Judge (API model)	Share for Delta Air Lines	Confidence interval	Leaning
claude-haiku-5.5	78%	68–86%	Leans to Delta Air Lines
deepseek-v4.1-flash	87%	78–94%	Leans to Delta Air Lines
gemini-3.8-flash	89%	79–96%	Leans to Delta Air Lines
glm-5.3-flash	85%	76–91%	Leans to Delta Air Lines
gpt-6-luna	88%	82–94%	Leans to Delta Air Lines
grok-4.7	69%	57–80%	Leans to Delta Air Lines

Vote

Which brand would you choose?

Your tap stays in this browser: nothing is sent.

Visitors' votes are shown next to the AI results for comparison only and are never mixed into the AI numbers.

How votes are counted

Replay it as a dropSimulated

Delta Air Lines

United Airlines

Simulation: scenario paths made up to reproduce the published per-judge shares, not measured rows.

The AI consensus leans to Delta Air Lines

Published 95% confidence interval for Delta Air Lines: 75–89%. Press Drop to watch simulated scenarios land.

How to read it

Each ball is a simulated buying scenario. Each row of pins is an AI model, pushing the ball toward the brand it picked.

One drop is one sample. Drop again and the pile shifts; the orange band shows where the balance lands in 95% of drops.

A leader is named only when the band clears the middle. The paths are simulated from the published per-judge shares: no model saw these scenarios.

Tap to drop. Hold to keep dropping.

The numbers behind the machine

Signed snapshote594c5a4ac1cJSON

Embed

Free to embed. It shows the latest edition; keep the source line and the link.

Embed code (iframe)

<iframe src="https://pickbench.ai/embed/en/battle/delta-vs-united/" title="Pickbench Brand Battle: Delta Air Lines vs United Airlines" width="100%" height="480" loading="lazy" frameborder="0" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" sandbox="allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox"></iframe>
<p><a href="https://pickbench.ai/en/battles/delta-vs-united/">Source: Pickbench</a></p>

Static card (SVG)

How to read this

Each scenario offers the models both brands; the split is how often each is chosen. The headline is the panel consensus with equal model weights.
The band is the 95% interval for the left brand's share. A model leans to a brand only when its whole interval sits on one side of 50%.
95% confidence intervals (MOVER combination of the per-judge intervals, widened for small samples in battles and newer boards). The consensus gives equal weight to each model family. Per-judge results below are the primary measure.
A single model's view is one judge, not the consensus.
The drop machine is simulated: its paths reproduce the published per-model shares.
Need cuts are withheld below 30 scenarios.
Each page shows the latest edition. Dates are in the downloadable JSON.
Fast panel: the fast or small current models of each vendor, not the full flagship panel.

Details and sources

Results computed but not published Only the overall consensus and per-judge results are published for this battle: each buyer need has fewer than 30 scenarios, the pre-registered minimum for a need row. See who was counted and why

Who was counted

The rule that decides which judges count was fixed before the run. Judges that met it are counted with the weights below; the others are listed with their reasons.

60 buyer scenarios were planned.
None of them was left out.

Consensus weights of 6 counted judges

Weight of each counted judge in the consensus
Judge (API model)	Model family	Weight in the consensus
`anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5 @ claude-haiku-5.5 via OpenRouter`	`anthropic`	16.7%
`deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash @ deepseek-v4.1-flash via OpenRouter`	`deepseek`	16.7%
`google/gemini-3.8-flash @ gemini-3.8-flash via OpenRouter`	`google`	16.7%
`z-ai/glm-5.3-flash @ glm-5.3-flash via OpenRouter`	`z-ai`	16.7%
`openai/gpt-6-luna @ gpt-6-luna via OpenRouter`	`openai`	16.7%
`x-ai/grok-4.7 @ grok-4.7 via OpenRouter`	`xai`	16.7%

Judges not counted

jdg-live-kimi-k3-1-pro-or-v1: Too few valid answers (below the pre-registered minimum), Fewer scenarios than the pre-registered minimum, and Answered too few of the planned scenarios
jdg-live-llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct-or-v1: Too few valid answers (below the pre-registered minimum), Fewer scenarios than the pre-registered minimum, and Answered too few of the planned scenarios
jdg-live-mistral-small-2603-or-v1: Too few valid answers (below the pre-registered minimum), Fewer scenarios than the pre-registered minimum, and Answered too few of the planned scenarios
jdg-live-qwen3-8-flash-or-v1: Too few valid answers (below the pre-registered minimum), Fewer scenarios than the pre-registered minimum, and Answered too few of the planned scenarios

Results computed but not published

Per-need scenario counts (n) are computed deterministically from the pre-registered plan.

Buyer need: Budget weekend getaway: n = 6 scenarios (fewer than 30) — Fewer scenarios than the pre-registered minimum
Buyer need: Coast-to-coast comfort: n = 6 scenarios (fewer than 30) — Fewer scenarios than the pre-registered minimum
Buyer need: Family vacation with luggage: n = 6 scenarios (fewer than 30) — Fewer scenarios than the pre-registered minimum
Buyer need: Frequent business travel: n = 6 scenarios (fewer than 30) — Fewer scenarios than the pre-registered minimum
Buyer need: Reliability at holiday peaks: n = 6 scenarios (fewer than 30) — Fewer scenarios than the pre-registered minimum
Buyer need: Last-minute schedule flexibility: n = 6 scenarios (fewer than 30) — Fewer scenarios than the pre-registered minimum
Buyer need: Trip with oversized sports gear: n = 6 scenarios (fewer than 30) — Fewer scenarios than the pre-registered minimum
Buyer need: Rewards value for occasional fliers: n = 6 scenarios (fewer than 30) — Fewer scenarios than the pre-registered minimum
Buyer need: Flying with a small pet in the cabin: n = 6 scenarios (fewer than 30) — Fewer scenarios than the pre-registered minimum
Buyer need: Trip from a smaller regional airport: n = 6 scenarios (fewer than 30) — Fewer scenarios than the pre-registered minimum

Methodology

Each judge is an AI model called through an API; “About this result” names each model and how it was called. In each buyer scenario, the judge chooses between the two brands. The scenario is the unit of analysis.

The results are based on 60 buyer scenarios.

A judge leans to a brand only when its confidence interval excludes 50%. Point estimates alone never count as a win.

Precision figures on this page are measured.

Precision: Measured
Consensus, needs and languages: 95% confidence intervals (MOVER combination of the per-judge intervals, widened for small samples in battles and newer boards)
Per judge: 95% confidence intervals (hull of the scenario-clustered bootstrap and Wilson intervals, widened for small samples in battles and newer boards)
Scenario languages: English

Data warnings

Brand names only: the models saw each option as a brand name, with no product facts, and answered from their own knowledge.

About this result

What was measured, how, when, and how to check it.

Methodology

ACM-1.0

AI models (API)

anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5 @ claude-haiku-5.5 via OpenRouter, via OpenRouter (pinned providers)
deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash @ deepseek-v4.1-flash via OpenRouter, via OpenRouter (pinned providers)
google/gemini-3.8-flash @ gemini-3.8-flash via OpenRouter, via OpenRouter (pinned providers)
z-ai/glm-5.3-flash @ glm-5.3-flash via OpenRouter, via OpenRouter (pinned providers)
openai/gpt-6-luna @ gpt-6-luna via OpenRouter, via OpenRouter (pinned providers)
x-ai/grok-4.7 @ grok-4.7 via OpenRouter, via OpenRouter (pinned providers)

Conditions

Each model was called through the route listed next to it and chose between the two brands in 60 buyer scenarios. Scenario languages: English.

Judges counted

The pre-registered inclusion rule counted 6 of the 10 judges on the panel. The results use 60 of the 60 planned scenarios.

See who was counted and why

Pre-registration (SHA-256)

b1fb8c14b26e1f24cac4463fbc60c9b84e5c6fa95628826b94f16bb8b5fb1bcf

What the pre-registration fixes

Signed snapshot

Verify this result: download the signed snapshot (JSON)

Signing key (kid): FnG9tqyrr6Y0YUh6teXhpERjAKUSfzL78m4WdnEZ9Jg; Production key
SHA-256 of the payload: e594c5a4ac1c76d48064a98167688bbda904985dc0a4dc63f7a01f118830a863

How to verify a snapshot

Rank, inclusion and influence on results are never sold.