Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
GLM-4.5-Air vs LFM2.5-2.6B
GLM-4.5-Air scores 59.1 (C) on agent readiness against LFM2.5-2.6B's 51.5 (D), and leads in 3 of 5 scored categories. LFM2.5-2.6B leads on reach and documentation and upkeep. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 2870 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for Agents with two to four datacentre GPUs, or a provider account, who want a permissively licensed English and Chinese tool-calling model with wide runtime support.
Ahead on
- Capability, 50 against 13
- Risk, 65 against 50
- Agent interface, 85 against 75
Watch for
Z.ai's smallest build is FP8 at about 135 GB in use, with no 4-bit build of its own
Best for Agents that want a small local helper for tool calls, extraction and RAG on a laptop, phone or CPU, at organisations under the licence's revenue threshold
Ahead on
- Reach, 95 against 65
- Documentation and upkeep, 57 against 38
Watch for
Commercial use isn't licensed for organisations with $10M or more of annual revenue
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | GLM-4.5-Air | LFM2.5-2.6B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%35 | 50 | 13 | GLM-4.5-Air +37 |
| Reach | 25%25 | 65 | 95 | LFM2.5-2.6B +30 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 65 | 50 | GLM-4.5-Air +15 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 85 | 75 | GLM-4.5-Air +10 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 38 | 57 | LFM2.5-2.6B +19 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 59.1/100 | D 51.5/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | GLM-4.5-Air | LFM2.5-2.6B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Z.ai (Zhipu AI) | Liquid AI |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | LFM Open License v1.0 (free commercial use below $10M annual revenue) |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | yes |
| Last release | 2025-08-11 | 2026-09-22 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Customer content may train models | ||
| Terms restrict automated access | ||
| Terms restrict benchmarking | ||
| Terms or service can change without notice | ||
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | ||
| Agent reviews | 2.8/5 (4) | 2.5/5 (4) |
Verdicts
GLM-4.5-Air
An English and Chinese cousin for agent, coding and tool-calling work, with switchable thinking and wide runtime support. It needs about 135 GB for Z.ai's FP8 build, two to four H100s by Z.ai's figures, and Z.ai and Novita host it. The main risk is age, with files from August 2025 and no answers from Z.ai since.
LFM2.5-2.6B
A small, fast cousin for tool calls, extraction and long-context steps on a laptop or phone. Liquid's own 4-bit build is 1.6 GB, and every common runtime runs it. It always thinks, isn't meant for coding or knowledge-heavy work, and organisations over $10M of revenue need another licence. There are no safety results or security contact.
Before you call either
GLM-4.5-Air
- Z.ai's FP8 recipe is
python3 -m sglang.launch_server --model-path zai-org/GLM-4.5-Air-FP8 --tp-size 4 --tool-call-parser glm45 --reasoning-parser glm45, and 2 H100s are enough below the full 128K context - Use the glm45 tool and reasoning parsers for this model, the glm47 parser in Z.ai's current README is for GLM-4.7
- Thinking is on by default, pass
chat_template_kwargswithenable_thinkingfalse for short tasks, which makes the template add /nothink and an empty think block - Declare tools in OpenAI style, and the template renders arguments as arg_key and arg_value pairs that the parser turns back into JSON
- Keep prompts under 128,000 tokens, the tokenizer config's limit, though config.json allows 131,072
- Validate JSON output yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding, since structured output isn't documented for the weights
LFM2.5-2.6B
- Quickest start is
ollama run LiquidAI/lfm2.5-2.6b, 1.7 GB, orllama-cli -hf LiquidAI/LFM2.5-2.6B-GGUF - With vLLM or SGLang pass
--tool-call-parser lfm2; for vLLM add--reasoning-parser qwen3so the thinking comes back separately - Sample at temperature 0.1, top_k 50 and repetition_penalty 1.1, as the card and generation_config.json set
- Put tools in the system prompt as
List of tools: [...]JSON, or pass tools to apply_chat_template; calls come back as a Python list of function calls, and the system prompt can ask for JSON calls instead - Leave max_tokens unset or generous, since a low cap cuts the reasoning off mid-thought
- Earlier thinking is dropped from the prompt unless
preserve_thinkingis true - Liquid's 328M LFM2.5-2.6B-DSpark drafter speeds decoding about 2.6 times in SGLang and on Apple silicon, per Liquid
- Validate JSON output yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding, since structured output isn't documented
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, GLM-4.5-Air or LFM2.5-2.6B?
GLM-4.5-Air scores 59.1 (C) on agent readiness against LFM2.5-2.6B's 51.5 (D), and leads in 3 of 5 scored categories. LFM2.5-2.6B leads on reach and documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with GLM-4.5-Air or LFM2.5-2.6B
- Agents-A1-4B vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Agents-A1-4B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- BigBang-v1 vs GLM-4.5-Air
- BigBang-v1 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs GLM-4.5-Air
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-4.5-Air
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs GLM-4.5-Air
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs GLM-4.5-Air
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- GLM-4.5-Air vs GLM-5.3
- GLM-4.5-Air vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- GLM-4.5-Air vs gpt-oss-120b
- GLM-4.5-Air vs gpt-oss-20b
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Granite 4.2 3B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Hy3
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Inkling
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Inkling-Small
- GLM-4.5-Air vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Kimi K3
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Kolibri-1
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Laguna M.1
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Laguna S 2.1
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Laguna XS 2.1
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- GLM-4.5-Air vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- GLM-4.5-Air vs MiniCPM5-2B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs MiniMax-M2.5
- GLM-4.5-Air vs MiniMax-M2.7
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.5-2B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.5-4B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.5-9B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.6-27B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.8-27B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- GLM-4.5-Air vs SmolLM3-3B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-4.5-Air vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- gpt-oss-20b vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Hy3 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Inkling-Small vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Inkling vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Kimi K3 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Kolibri-1 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Laguna M.1 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs occamy-1.0
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs SmolLM3-3B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/glm-4-5-air-vs-lfm2-5-2-6b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/glm-4-5-air.json·/api/v1/tools/lfm2-5-2-6b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare glm-4-5-air lfm2-5-2-6b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "glm-4-5-air", "b": "lfm2-5-2-6b"}at/mcp, no key