# Hy3 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next (slim)

> Hy3 scores 62.6 (B) to Qwen3-Coder-Next's 57.6 (C) for open-weight models you run yourself. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/hy3-vs-qwen3-coder-next.md (~5,850 tokens) · this version ~380 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/hy3-vs-qwen3-coder-next.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/hy3-vs-qwen3-coder-next
- 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 scores 62.6 (B) on agent readiness against Qwen3-Coder-Next's 57.6 (C), and leads in 3 of 5 scored categories. Qwen3-Coder-Next leads on reach. 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
- Qwen3-Coder-Next: C 57.6, rank #70 of 100 open-weight models · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/qwen3-coder-next.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 Capability, 57 against 42; Risk, 60 against 50; Documentation and upkeep, 56 against 41.
- Qwen3-Coder-Next, good for Agents that want a local coding model for long tool-calling loops on a single 64 GB to 128 GB machine. Ahead on Reach, 85 against 70.

| Category | Hy3 | Qwen3-Coder-Next |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Capability (35%) | 57 | 42 |
| Reach (25%) | 70 | 85 |
| Risk (20%) | 60 | 50 |
| Agent interface (10%) | 75 | 75 |
| Documentation and upkeep (10%) | 56 | 41 |

| Fact (where they differ) | Hy3 | Qwen3-Coder-Next |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | Tencent (Hy team) | Alibaba (Qwen team) |
| Last release | 2026-07-20 | 2026-02-03 |