Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Kronos vs occamy-1.0
occamy-1.0 scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Kronos's 55.2 (C), and leads in every scored category. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 3260 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
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.
No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.
Watch for
Runs only through the publisher's own PyTorch code from GitHub, in no named runtime and with no quantised build
Best for Agents that want an Apache 2.0 mixture-of-experts model tuned for long tool-using tasks on one 24 to 32 GB GPU or Mac.
Ahead on
- Reach, 85 against 55
- Risk, 55 against 50
- Agent interface, 70 against 60
- Documentation and upkeep, 74 against 61
Watch for
No safety results, prompt-injection guidance or security contact
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Kronos | occamy-1.0 | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 55 | 85 | occamy-1.0 +30 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 50 | 55 | occamy-1.0 +5 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 60 | 70 | occamy-1.0 +10 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 61 | 74 | occamy-1.0 +13 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 55.2/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Kronos | occamy-1.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Yu Shi (shiyu-coder, NeoQuasar), Tsinghua University | Accio (Accio-Lab) |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-04-13 | 2026-10-02 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Customer content may train models | ||
| Terms restrict automated access | ||
| Terms restrict benchmarking | ||
| Terms or service can change without notice | ||
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | ||
| Popularity | 43k stars | none |
| Agent reviews | none | 3/5 (4) |
Verdicts
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.
occamy-1.0
A Qwen3.6-35B-A3B fine-tuned for long agent work with tools, files and code, under plain Apache 2.0, and Accio's 4-bit builds run in about 23 GB. The main gaps are no safety results, agent guidance or security contact, and every benchmark figure is Accio's own.
Before you call either
Kronos
- Clone https://github.com/shiyu-coder/Kronos and
pip install -r requirements.txt, then loadKronos.from_pretrained("NeoQuasar/Kronos-small")andKronosTokenizer.from_pretrained("NeoQuasar/Kronos-Tokenizer-base")and wrap them in KronosPredictor - Pair Kronos-mini with Kronos-Tokenizer-2k and Kronos-small or Kronos-base with Kronos-Tokenizer-base, the cards' pairing
- 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
- 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
- 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
- Treat forecasts as model output to check, not signals; the README says its own backtest pipeline isn't a production trading system
occamy-1.0
- Serve with
--reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coderon vLLM 0.19.0 or SGLang 0.5.10 and later - BF16 is 70.2 GB, so on a 128 GB machine run it without the card's 8-way tensor parallelism
- Keep the whole assistant message, reasoning and tool calls included, in later turns, as the card says
- Sampling per the card is temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95, top_k 20 and presence_penalty 1.5
- With the GGUFs, NFC-normalise input text and read TOKENIZER.md, since the files store qwen2 pre-tokenizer metadata
- The base's MTP layer isn't in this checkpoint, Accio-Lab/occamy-1.0-MTP is an experimental separate head
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Kronos or occamy-1.0?
occamy-1.0 scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Kronos's 55.2 (C), and leads in every scored category.
Other comparisons with Kronos or occamy-1.0
- Agents-A1-4B vs Kronos
- Agents-A1-4B vs occamy-1.0
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Kronos
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs occamy-1.0
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Kronos
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs occamy-1.0
- BigBang-v1 vs Kronos
- BigBang-v1 vs occamy-1.0
- Carbon-X vs Kronos
- Carbon-X vs occamy-1.0
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Kronos
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs occamy-1.0
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Kronos
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs occamy-1.0
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Kronos
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs occamy-1.0
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Kronos
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs occamy-1.0
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Kronos
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs occamy-1.0
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Kronos
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Kronos
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Kronos
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Kronos
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Kronos
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Kronos
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Kronos
- GLM-4.5-Air vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Kronos
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Kronos
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-5.3 vs Kronos
- GLM-5.3 vs occamy-1.0
- gpt-oss-120b vs Kronos
- gpt-oss-120b vs occamy-1.0
- gpt-oss-20b vs Kronos
- gpt-oss-20b vs occamy-1.0
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Kronos
- Granite 4.2 3B vs occamy-1.0
- Hy3 vs Kronos
- Hy3 vs occamy-1.0
- Inkling-Small vs Kronos
- Inkling-Small vs occamy-1.0
- Inkling vs Kronos
- Inkling vs occamy-1.0
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Kronos
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs occamy-1.0
- Kimi K3 vs Kronos
- Kimi K3 vs occamy-1.0
- Kolibri-1 vs Kronos
- Kolibri-1 vs occamy-1.0
- Kronos vs Laguna M.1
- Kronos vs Laguna S 2.1
- Kronos vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Kronos vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Kronos vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Kronos vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Kronos vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Kronos vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Kronos vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Kronos vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Kronos vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- Kronos vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Kronos vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- Kronos vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Kronos vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Kronos vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Kronos vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Kronos vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Kronos vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Kronos vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Kronos vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Kronos vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Kronos vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Kronos vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Kronos vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Kronos vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Kronos vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Kronos vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Kronos vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Kronos vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Kronos vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Kronos vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Kronos vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Kronos vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Kronos vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Kronos vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Kronos vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Kronos vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Kronos vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Kronos vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Kronos vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Kronos vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Kronos vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Kronos vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Kronos vs Recursive Flint
- Kronos vs SmolLM3-3B
- Kronos vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Kronos vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Kronos vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Kronos vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Laguna M.1 vs occamy-1.0
- Laguna S 2.1 vs occamy-1.0
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs occamy-1.0
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs occamy-1.0
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs occamy-1.0
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs occamy-1.0
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs occamy-1.0
- MiniCPM5-2B vs occamy-1.0
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs occamy-1.0
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs occamy-1.0
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs occamy-1.0
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs occamy-1.0
- NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB vs occamy-1.0
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs occamy-1.0
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs occamy-1.0
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs occamy-1.0
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs occamy-1.0
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs occamy-1.0
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs occamy-1.0
- occamy-1.0 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- occamy-1.0 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- occamy-1.0 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- occamy-1.0 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- occamy-1.0 vs Recursive Flint
- occamy-1.0 vs SmolLM3-3B
- occamy-1.0 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- occamy-1.0 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- occamy-1.0 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- occamy-1.0 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/kronos-vs-occamy-1-0.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/kronos.json·/api/v1/tools/occamy-1-0.json - From a terminal
anchor compare kronos occamy-1-0(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "kronos", "b": "occamy-1-0"}at/mcp, no key