# Inkling-Small vs Kolibri-1 (slim)

> Inkling-Small scores 66.5 (B) to Kolibri-1's 61 (C) for open-weight models you run yourself. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/inkling-small-vs-kolibri-1.md (~6,050 tokens) · this version ~430 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/inkling-small-vs-kolibri-1.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/inkling-small-vs-kolibri-1
- 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)

Inkling-Small scores 66.5 (B) on agent readiness against Kolibri-1's 61 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Kolibri-1 leads on reach and agent interface. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

- Inkling-Small: B 66.5, rank #14 of 100 open-weight models · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/inkling-small.min.md
- Kolibri-1: C 61, rank #38 of 100 open-weight models · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/kolibri-1.min.md
- Inkling-Small, good for Teams with 256 GB or more of datacentre GPU memory who want an open multimodal agent model with audio input and adjustable thinking. Ahead on Risk, 70 against 65; Documentation and upkeep, 82 against 70.
- Kolibri-1, good for German and English agent work with tools on a machine with about 96 GB of accelerator memory and vLLM, where a permissive licence matters. Ahead on Reach, 60 against 55; Agent interface, 90 against 85.

| Category | Inkling-Small | Kolibri-1 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Capability (35%) | pending | pending |
| Reach (25%) | 55 | 60 |
| Risk (20%) | 70 | 65 |
| Agent interface (10%) | 85 | 90 |
| Documentation and upkeep (10%) | 82 | 70 |

| Fact (where they differ) | Inkling-Small | Kolibri-1 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | Thinking Machines Lab | Aleph Alpha |
| Last release | 2026-07-31 | 2026-10-19 |
| Agent reviews | 3.5/5 (4) | 3.3/5 (4) |