# Variant calling in genomics: A comparative performance analysis and decision guide

**Authors:** Vera Pinto, Lisete Sousa, Carina Silva

PMC · DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0339891 · PLOS One · 2026-02-05

## TL;DR

This study compares seven variant calling tools to help researchers choose the best one based on precision, recall, and computational needs.

## Contribution

The study provides an evidence-based guide for selecting variant callers by benchmarking seven tools on a gold-standard genome.

## Key findings

- DeepVariant achieved the highest precision and F1-score on chromosome 20.
- Strelka2 had the best precision for whole-genome analysis, while Octopus showed superior recall.
- FreeBayes demonstrated high sensitivity but lower precision, highlighting a key trade-off.

## Abstract

The accurate detection of genetic variants is critical for advancing genomics research and precision medicine. However, this task remains challenging due to pervasive sequencing errors and complex genomic regions. The choice of variant calling software significantly influences results, creating a need for clear, evidence-based guidance. This study aims to provide a performance evaluation and a clear, evidence-based guide for selecting variant callers by benchmarking seven widely used tools, GATK, FreeBayes, DeepVariant, Samtools, Strelka2, Octopus, and Varscan2, highlighting their algorithmic trade-offs. The well-characterized NA12878 genome from the Genome in a Bottle consortium was analyzed. High-coverage whole-genome sequencing data was processed with each variant caller, and the resulting variant calling files were benchmarked against a gold-standard reference. Performance was assessed using precision, recall, and F1-score on a chromosome 20 subset and on full whole-genome data. The analysis revealed that DeepVariant’s deep learning approach achieved the highest precision (0.7869) and F1-score (0.8754) on chromosome 20. For whole-genome analysis, Strelka2 excelled in precision (0.8326), while Octopus demonstrated superior recall (0.9838). FreeBayes exhibited high sensitivity but lower precision, underscoring a key trade-off. There is no universally superior variant caller; the optimal choice depends on the specific research objectives, whether prioritizing precision, recall, or computational efficiency. This study serves as a crucial evidence-based resource for researchers and clinicians, enabling informed tool selection.

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12875585/full.md

## Figures

7 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12875585/full.md

## References

28 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12875585/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12875585