Sign in

Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run

Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Kronos

Kronos scores 55.2 (C) on agent readiness against Kimi K3.1 Pro's 48.6 (D), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Kimi K3.1 Pro leads on agent interface. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 4969 open weights comparisons

Kimi K3.1 ProMoonshot AI · Open-weight model D48.6/100#130 of 135 open-weight models KronosYu Shi (shiyu-coder, NeoQuasar), Tsinghua University · Open-weight model C55.2/100#104 of 135 open-weight models

Which one, for what

Kimi K3.1 Pro D

Best for Operators with a multi-accelerator node who want Moonshot's newest open-weight model for coding and long agent sessions, and everyone else through an API

Ahead on

  • Agent interface, 65 against 60

Watch for

1,561 GB of files, so it needs a node of eight large accelerators at least

Kronos C

Best for Agents that need a quick local forecast or synthetic sample of a candlestick series on modest hardware, for research or as one input among others.

Ahead on

  • Reach, 55 against 40
  • Documentation and upkeep, 61 against 51

Watch for

Runs only through the publisher's own PyTorch code from GitHub, in no named runtime and with no quantised build

Why the edge

Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.

Reach Kronos +15

Kimi K3.1 Pro 40

Memory 0, the only build is Moonshot's 1,561 GB MXFP4 release, far above 256 GB. Runtimes 5, llama.cpp b12242 alone has the model code in a release, since vLLM's recipe needs 0.34.0 and SGLang's cookbook a branch. Builds 10, one precision. Terms 10, free commercial use below a model-as-a-service revenue threshold. Download 10, not gated. Hosted 5, Moonshot's API and Together serve it. 0 + 5 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 5 = 40.

Kronos 55

Memory 30, the publisher's Kronos-mini with its tokeniser is 0.03 GB and even Kronos-base is 0.43 GB in FP32. Runtimes 0, it runs only through the publisher's own PyTorch package from GitHub, and none of the six named runtimes supports it. Builds 0, FP32 safetensors only. Terms 15, MIT with nothing added. Download 10, nothing is gated. Hosted 0, no inference provider or publisher API serves it (provider mapping still empty on 4 November).

Documentation and upkeep Kronos +10

Kimi K3.1 Pro 51

Model card 11, no limitations, languages or cut-off. Training data 5, one general sentence. Last change 20, a commit on 5 November 2026. Responsiveness 0, none of the 8 newest discussions has a reply from Moonshot. Version policy 5, Kimi K3 keeps its repository and no dated note was found. File health 10, the files agree. 11 + 5 + 20 + 0 + 5 + 10 = 51.

Kronos 61

Model card 11, intended use, architecture, parameters and context are there, limitations, languages and a cut-off aren't. Training data 20, the paper lists every exchange with asset and observation counts, the filtering and a June 2024 end. Last change 5, the reference code on 13 April 2026 (still the newest commit on 4 November, 205 days) and the Hub repositories on 9 September 2025. Responsiveness 20, the publisher answered 10 of 18 Hugging Face discussions (recounted by script on 4 November), though none since 24 November 2025, and the seven opened since April 2026 have no reply from it. Version policy 5, a first release. File health 0, the cards point to example data the repository has deleted and to licence and requirements links on a branch that doesn't exist.

Agent interface Kimi K3.1 Pro +5

Kimi K3.1 Pro 65

Chat template 10, the format is only code to run. Tool-calling format 10, the parser is named in the runtimes' recipes and the card doesn't say how tools are declared. Trained tool calling 20, several calls a turn on Kimi K3's tools channel. Structured output 5, named among linked guides without the how. Reasoning control 10, reasoning_effort per request. Context 10, 1M tokens. 10 + 10 + 20 + 5 + 10 + 10 = 65.

Kronos 60

Read for a forecasting model, the tool-calling, trained tool calling and structured-output lines stand for what it takes and returns. The card documents the DataFrame and timestamps it takes and the DataFrame it returns, and the publisher's KronosPredictor builds and parses them (25). It was trained on six K-line fields with calendar fields, one series per forecast (10). Output is a typed DataFrame indexed by the requested timestamps, the mean of the sampled paths (15). The input format is given only as code (10). Reasoning control and context score 0, with no reasoning and a 512-bar context (2,048 for Kronos-mini).

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runKimi K3.1 ProKronosEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%254055Kronos +15
Risk20%205050even
Agent interface10%106560Kimi K3.1 Pro +5
Documentation and upkeep10%105161Kronos +10
Negative events≤1500
TotalD 48.6/100C 55.2/100

Facts side by side

FactKimi K3.1 ProKronos
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorMoonshot AIYu Shi (shiyu-coder, NeoQuasar), Tsinghua University
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceKimi K3.1 Pro License (modified MIT)MIT
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-11-052026-04-13
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Popularitynone43k stars

Verdicts

Kimi K3.1 Pro

Moonshot's newest flagship, eight days old when read, for operators with a rack. Only llama.cpp has its model code in a release, with vLLM and SGLang support still on a release candidate and a branch. The licence is permissive below a revenue threshold, and Moonshot hasn't answered a discussion on the repository yet.

Kronos

Forecasts the next price bars from a history of up to 512 candlestick bars. Every size fits in under 0.5 GB and runs on a CPU, but only through the publisher's own Python package. Nobody has benchmarked it independently, its quickstart data was deleted from the repository, and the publisher hasn't replied since November 2025.

Before you call either

Kimi K3.1 Pro

  1. Use Moonshot's API or Together unless you have a node of eight B300-class accelerators
  2. With vLLM use 0.34.0 or later and the recipe's flags, --tool-call-parser kimi_k3 --reasoning-parser kimi_k3
  3. Pass the whole assistant message back in later turns, reasoning_content and tool_calls included, as the card requires
  4. Set reasoning_effort to low, high or max per request. Max is the default and thinking can't be turned off
  5. Kimi K3's model code doesn't load it, because the attention layers changed
  6. Validate JSON output yourself, since the card doesn't document structured output for the weights

Kronos

  1. Clone https://github.com/shiyu-coder/Kronos and pip install -r requirements.txt, then load Kronos.from_pretrained("NeoQuasar/Kronos-small") and KronosTokenizer.from_pretrained("NeoQuasar/Kronos-Tokenizer-base") and wrap them in KronosPredictor
  2. Pair Kronos-mini with Kronos-Tokenizer-2k and Kronos-small or Kronos-base with Kronos-Tokenizer-base, the cards' pairing
  3. The examples read examples/data/XSHG_5min_600977.csv, which no longer exists; point them at tests/data/regression_input.csv, 2,500 five-minute bars
  4. Keep the lookback at or under max_context, 512 bars, and pass the future timestamps you want as y_timestamp, since the calendar fields come from them
  5. Raise sample_count for a steadier forecast, but expect only the mean back; call the lower-level auto_regressive_inference yourself if you need the paths
  6. Treat forecasts as model output to check, not signals; the README says its own backtest pipeline isn't a production trading system

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Kimi K3.1 Pro or Kronos?

Kronos scores 55.2 (C) on agent readiness against Kimi K3.1 Pro's 48.6 (D), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Kimi K3.1 Pro leads on agent interface.

Other comparisons with Kimi K3.1 Pro or Kronos

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.

Get an auditSee a sample report