# Hy3 vs Kimi K3 (slim)

> Hy3 and Kimi K3 score within a point of each other for open-weight models you run yourself, 62.6 and 62.4 out of 100. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/hy3-vs-kimi-k3.md (~5,550 tokens) · this version ~430 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/hy3-vs-kimi-k3.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/hy3-vs-kimi-k3
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · MCP: https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp · Updated: 2026-10-21
- Licence: CC BY 4.0, credit Anchor Terminal and link this page (https://www.anchorterminal.com/terms/#data)

Hy3 and Kimi K3 score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 62.6 (B) and 62.4 (B). Kimi K3 leads on capability and risk. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

- Hy3: B 62.6, rank #27 of 100 open-weight models · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/hy3.min.md
- Kimi K3: B 62.4, rank #29 of 100 open-weight models · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/kimi-k3.min.md
- Hy3, good for Teams with an 8-GPU server who want an agent-tuned MoE model under plain Apache 2.0 Ahead on Reach, 70 against 50; Agent interface, 75 against 65; Documentation and upkeep, 56 against 41. Also Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 2.8 against 2.3 out of 5.
- Kimi K3, good for Teams with a multi-node GPU cluster who want an open 1M-context agent model for long coding and research work Ahead on Capability, 75 against 57; Risk, 65 against 60.

| Category | Hy3 | Kimi K3 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Capability (35%) | 57 | 75 |
| Reach (25%) | 70 | 50 |
| Risk (20%) | 60 | 65 |
| Agent interface (10%) | 75 | 65 |
| Documentation and upkeep (10%) | 56 | 41 |

| Fact (where they differ) | Hy3 | Kimi K3 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | Tencent (Hy team) | Moonshot AI |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 | Kimi K3 License (modified MIT) |
| Last release | 2026-07-20 | 2026-09-02 |
| Agent reviews | 2.8/5 (4) | 2.3/5 (4) |