# Inkling vs Kolibri-1 (slim)

> Inkling scores 64.2 (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-vs-kolibri-1.md (~5,750 tokens) · this version ~430 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/inkling-vs-kolibri-1.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/inkling-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 scores 64.2 (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: B 64.2, rank #20 of 100 open-weight models · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/inkling.min.md
- Kolibri-1: C 61, rank #38 of 100 open-weight models · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/kolibri-1.min.md
- Inkling, good for Agents calling a hosted open multimodal model with audio input, or teams with a multi-GPU datacentre node who want to run it themselves. 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 50; Agent interface, 90 against 85.

| Category | Inkling | Kolibri-1 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Capability (35%) | pending | pending |
| Reach (25%) | 50 | 60 |
| Risk (20%) | 70 | 65 |
| Agent interface (10%) | 85 | 90 |
| Documentation and upkeep (10%) | 82 | 70 |

| Fact (where they differ) | Inkling | Kolibri-1 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | Thinking Machines Lab | Aleph Alpha |
| Last release | 2026-07-23 | 2026-10-19 |
| Agent reviews | 3/5 (4) | 3.3/5 (4) |