Sign in

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

Kimi K3.1 Pro vs WeVisOne-VL-4B

WeVisOne-VL-4B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Kimi K3.1 Pro's 48.6 (D), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 6359 open weights comparisons

Kimi K3.1 ProMoonshot AI · Open-weight model D48.6/100#151 of 160 open-weight models WeVisOne-VL-4BTencent (WeChat Vision) · Open-weight model C61/100#84 of 160 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

No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.

Watch for

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

WeVisOne-VL-4B C

Best for Agents that need to locate, count or cut out objects in images on a small GPU, under a permissive licence

Ahead on

  • Reach, 70 against 40
  • Risk, 55 against 50
  • Agent interface, 70 against 65

Watch for

The pixel decoder ships as a pickle file

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 WeVisOne-VL-4B +30

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.

WeVisOne-VL-4B 70

Memory 30, the only build from Tencent is the BF16 safetensors file with its decoder, 9.7 GB, and 9.7 GB × 1.2 = 11.6 GB, within 16 GB. No runtime library has a build. Runtimes 15, the architecture is Qwen3VLForConditionalGeneration, which vLLM 0.33.0, SGLang 0.5.23 and Transformers 5.22.2 run from the safetensors file, three at 5 each. Builds 0, Tencent publishes the BF16 weights only. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 in the card's metadata with the LICENSE file in the repository, and nothing added. Download 10, the Hub API reports gated false on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account and nothing to accept. Hosted 0, Hugging Face maps no inference provider to it. 30 + 15 + 0 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 70.

Risk WeVisOne-VL-4B +5

Kimi K3.1 Pro 50

File safety 15, safetensors only, less 10 for remote code and prompts built by the repository's script. Provenance 15, Moonshot's own organisation with a hash on every file. Safety evaluation 10, Moonshot's own cyber benchmark results and nobody else's yet. Agent guidance 0, none on the card. Licence risk 10, the revenue threshold. Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw found. 15 + 15 + 10 + 0 + 10 + 0 = 50.

WeVisOne-VL-4B 55

File safety 15, the backbone is safetensors, but mask_decoder.pt, a PyTorch pickle the card calls a required component, sits beside it. Provenance 15, the files sit in the tencent organisation, which Tencent's GitHub repository for the model links to (10), and the Hub gives a SHA-256 for the large files (5). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card or in the README. Agent guidance 5, General cautions: the card says the release is for research, isn't for autonomous high-impact decisions or identifying individuals, and lists where masks go wrong. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 with no use policy, no threshold and no right to change the terms. Security programme 5, Tencent's Security Response Center takes vulnerability reports company-wide, as the Hy3 listing records (5). 15 + 15 + 0 + 5 + 15 + 5 = 55.

Agent interface WeVisOne-VL-4B +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.

WeVisOne-VL-4B 70

Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (5,292 characters), Qwen3-VL's template. Tool-calling format 25, Read for a perception model as what it takes and returns. Trained tool calling 10, Read for a perception model as the inputs it was trained to use. Structured output 15, Read for a perception model as typed outputs. Reasoning control 0, the card says it writes structured output directly with no chain-of-thought reasoning. Context 0, Tencent states no context length for it. 20 + 25 + 10 + 15 + 0 + 0 = 70.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runKimi K3.1 ProWeVisOne-VL-4BEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%254070WeVisOne-VL-4B +30
Risk20%205055WeVisOne-VL-4B +5
Agent interface10%106570WeVisOne-VL-4B +5
Documentation and upkeep10%105148Kimi K3.1 Pro +3
Negative events≤1500
TotalD 48.6/100C 61/100

Facts side by side

FactKimi K3.1 ProWeVisOne-VL-4B
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorMoonshot AITencent (WeChat Vision)
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceKimi K3.1 Pro License (modified MIT)Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-11-052026-10-27
Terms last updatedno document linkednot read yet
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked

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.

WeVisOne-VL-4B

A small Apache 2.0 perception model that finds, counts, reads and cuts out what you name in an image, and says None when it isn't there. Boxes and points run in vLLM, SGLang or Transformers. Masks and mattes need Tencent's package and a pickle file. Two weeks old, with no questions answered yet and no safety results.

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

WeVisOne-VL-4B

  1. Use Tencent's package: WeVisOneVL("tencent/WeVisOne-VL-4B", backend="vllm") then model.predict(image, task=..., query=...)
  2. Tasks are detection, referring, point, count_box, count_point, ocr, ocr_grounding, segmentation and matting
  3. A None answer means the target isn't in the image. Treat it as a result, not an error
  4. mask_decoder.pt is a pickle. Load it only from the tencent repository, and check its SHA-256 against the Hub's
  5. Send one image a turn. Video grids are rejected by the decoder
  6. The card says it isn't for identifying individuals or for high-impact decisions on its own

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Kimi K3.1 Pro or WeVisOne-VL-4B?

WeVisOne-VL-4B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Kimi K3.1 Pro's 48.6 (D), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories.

Other comparisons with Kimi K3.1 Pro or WeVisOne-VL-4B

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