# Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Laguna M.1 (slim)

> Laguna M.1 scores 56.7 (C) to Kimi K3.1 Pro's 48.6 (D) for open-weight models you run yourself. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/kimi-k3-1-pro-vs-laguna-m-1.md (~8,950 tokens) · this version ~830 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/kimi-k3-1-pro-vs-laguna-m-1.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/kimi-k3-1-pro-vs-laguna-m-1
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · MCP: https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp · Updated: 2026-11-10
- Licence: CC BY 4.0, credit Anchor Terminal and link this page (https://www.anchorterminal.com/terms/#data)

Laguna M.1 scores 56.7 (C) on agent readiness against Kimi K3.1 Pro's 48.6 (D), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Kimi K3.1 Pro leads on documentation and upkeep. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

- Kimi K3.1 Pro: D 48.6, rank #151 of 160 open-weight models · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/kimi-k3-1-pro.min.md
- Laguna M.1: C 56.7, rank #112 of 160 open-weight models · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/laguna-m-1.min.md
- Kimi K3.1 Pro, good 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 Documentation and upkeep, 51 against 36.
- Laguna M.1, good for Teams with a multi-GPU Blackwell or Hopper server that want a large coding agent model under Apache 2.0. Ahead on Reach, 70 against 40; Risk, 55 against 50; Agent interface, 85 against 65.

| Category | Kimi K3.1 Pro | Laguna M.1 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Capability (35%) | pending | pending |
| Reach (25%) | 40 | 70 |
| Risk (20%) | 50 | 55 |
| Agent interface (10%) | 65 | 85 |
| Documentation and upkeep (10%) | 51 | 36 |

| Fact (where they differ) | Kimi K3.1 Pro | Laguna M.1 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | Moonshot AI | Poolside |
| Licence | Kimi K3.1 Pro License (modified MIT) | Apache-2.0 |
| Last release | 2026-11-05 | 2026-07-14 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | 2026-07-21 |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | 2026-07-21 |
| Customer content may train models | not read yet | yes, with an opt-out |
| Terms restrict automated access | not read yet | not found in the text |
| Terms restrict benchmarking | not read yet | not found in the text |
| Terms or service can change without notice | not read yet | yes |
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | not read yet | yes |
| Agent reviews | none | 2.5/5 (4) |

Why the edge:
- Reach, Laguna M.1 +30: Kimi K3.1 Pro 40 (Memory 0, the only build is Moonshot's 1,561 GB MXFP4 release, far above 256 GB.); Laguna M.1 70 (Memory 5 of 30, the smallest 4-bit build is Poolside's 139.3 GB NVFP4, which needs 192 GB with a fifth added, beyond our reference machine.)
- Agent interface, Laguna M.1 +20: Kimi K3.1 Pro 65 (Chat template 10, the format is only code to run.); Laguna M.1 85 (Chat template 20, a Jinja file in the repository.)
- Documentation and upkeep, Kimi K3.1 Pro +15: Kimi K3.1 Pro 51 (Model card 11, no limitations, languages or cut-off.); Laguna M.1 36 (Model card 11 of 20, intended use, architecture, parameters and context are there, limitations, languages and a cut-off aren't.)
- Risk, Laguna M.1 +5: Kimi K3.1 Pro 50 (File safety 15, safetensors only, less 10 for remote code and prompts built by the repository's script.); Laguna M.1 55 (File safety 15 of 25, safetensors only, but the repository ships model code behind auto_map and the card's SGLang and TensorRT-LLM instructions use trust_remote…)