Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Laguna M.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
LFM3-VL-2B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Laguna M.1's 56.7 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Laguna M.1 leads on risk. 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
Which one, for what
Best for Teams with a multi-GPU Blackwell or Hopper server that want a large coding agent model under Apache 2.0.
Ahead on
- Risk, 55 against 40
Watch for
The smallest build needs about 167 GB, more than a 128 GB machine
Best for Agents on a laptop, phone or robot that need to read screens, documents, images and video from a model under 2 GB at 4 bits
Ahead on
- Reach, 85 against 70
- Agent interface, 90 against 85
- Documentation and upkeep, 77 against 36
Watch for
vLLM and SGLang support is unreleased, which the card says itself
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.
Documentation and upkeep LFM3-VL-2B +41
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. Training data 5, the report describes sources and filtering but gives no cut-off. Last change 10, 14 July 2026, 113 days ago. Responsiveness 0, the one discussion's only reply is from someone outside the poolside organisation. Version policy 5, a first open release with nothing replaced. File health 5, generation config and template disagree on the thinking default and the FP8 build's Docker files name different image tags.
LFM3-VL-2B 77
Model card 17, Intended use (questions about video, documents, charts and app screens, finding objects, spatial reasoning), a limitation (not recommended for coding, multi-turn conversations or complex reasoning), architecture (language model, 14-layer vision encoder and projector), parameters (1.92B), context (128K) and 16 languages. Training data 5, A general description: the base's 22T tokens of pre-training with the kinds of data added since LFM2, then vision mid-training on image and video data, supervised fine-tuning, vision reinforcement learning and distillation. Last change 20, the last commit, on 9 November 2026, added the OpenVINO checkpoint to the card's inference table, a day before this check. Responsiveness 20, Of the 5 discussions that aren't pull requests (27 to 31 October 2026), 3 have a reply from a LiquidAI member, which is most. Version policy 5, LFM3 came out in new repositories and the LFM2.5 models stay in theirs. File health 10, Config, template and card agree on the lfm3_vl architecture, the 128,000-token context and the vision settings in processor_config.json. 17 + 5 + 20 + 20 + 5 + 10 = 77.
Reach LFM3-VL-2B +15
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. Runtimes 25, released llama.cpp, Ollama (through the llama.cpp release it pins), vLLM, SGLang and Transformers run the laguna architecture. Builds 15, FP8 and NVFP4 from Poolside. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 with nothing binding added. Download 10, nothing is gated. Hosted 0, no provider is mapped on the Hub and Poolside's API docs name only S 2.1.
LFM3-VL-2B 85
Memory 30, Liquid's Q4_K_M GGUF is 1.10 GB with its 0.20 GB projector file, and 1.30 GB × 1.2 = 1.6 GB, which fits 8 GB, well inside the 16 GB line. Runtimes 15, Released llama.cpp has the lfm3 architecture and the LFM3-VL projector (src/models/lfm3.cpp and tools/mtmd at b12242), Ollama's library has an lfm3-vl entry, and LM Studio's catalogue lists liquid/lfm3-vl-2b. Builds 15, Liquid's GGUF repository holds Q4_0, Q4_K_M, Q8_0, F16 and BF16 files, and Liquid publishes 4-bit and 8-bit MLX builds and an ONNX repository, all in the LiquidAI organisation. Terms 10, the LFM Open License v1.0, a custom licence that lets anyone use it commercially for free below a threshold of $10M annual revenue. Download 10, the Hub API reports gated false for the model and its GGUF, MLX and ONNX repositories on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account and nothing to accept. Hosted 5, Liquid's own API lists lfm3-vl-2b among its models, so the publisher hosts it. 30 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 10 + 5 = 85.
Risk Laguna M.1 +15
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_code. Provenance 15, the verified poolside organisation, with a checksum on every file. Safety evaluation 0, none published. Agent guidance 5, general cautions only. Licence risk 15, plain Apache 2.0. Security programme 5, a signed security.txt and a security contact on the card, with no public advisories found.
LFM3-VL-2B 40
File safety 15, safetensors only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files (25). Provenance 15, files in the LiquidAI organisation, which Liquid's docs page for the model and its blog post link to (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card or in Liquid's blog post for the LFM3 family, neither of which mentions safety testing. Agent guidance 0, Nothing on prompt injection, an instruction hierarchy, what refusals cover or safeguards to add. Licence risk 10, 15 less 5 for the $10M annual revenue threshold on commercial use. Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw found. 15 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 10 + 0 = 40.
Agent interface LFM3-VL-2B +5
Laguna M.1 85
Chat template 20, a Jinja file in the repository. Tool-calling format 25, the card shows how tools go in and calls come back and names the poolside_v1 parser. Trained tool calling 20, several calls a turn. Structured output 0, not documented. Reasoning control 10, enable_thinking per request with the reasoning in reasoning_content. Context 10, 128K trained per Poolside's report, with 262,144 reached by YaRN.
LFM3-VL-2B 90
Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (12,129 characters), with roles, images and video, tools, deferred tools, tool results and the thinking switch. Tool-calling format 25, the card and Liquid's tool-use page document tools passed through tools= in apply_chat_template, calls returned as XML and results sent back as tool messages. Trained tool calling 20, the template loops over every entry in an assistant turn's tool_calls, so several calls fit in one turn, and the card says its fine-tuning mix included tool calling and agentic traces. Structured output 5, the card's vLLM and SGLang commands set a structured-output backend and its fine-tuning table has a JSON extraction notebook, but nothing says how to ask this model for JSON. Liquid's API guide documents response_format with lfm3-1.7b as its example. Reasoning control 10, Liquid's chat-template page documents enable_thinking=False in apply_chat_template for LFM3, with reasoning on by default inside think tags, and the card documents preserve_thinking and reports a no-thinking configuration in its benchmarks. Context 10, 128K tokens of input and output per the card, and max_position_embeddings 128000 for the language model in config.json. 20 + 25 + 20 + 5 + 10 + 10 = 90.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Laguna M.1 | LFM3-VL-2B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 70 | 85 | LFM3-VL-2B +15 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 55 | 40 | Laguna M.1 +15 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 85 | 90 | LFM3-VL-2B +5 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 36 | 77 | LFM3-VL-2B +41 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 56.7/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Laguna M.1 | LFM3-VL-2B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Poolside | Liquid AI |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 | LFM Open License v1.0 (free commercial use below $10M annual revenue) |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | yes |
| Last release | 2026-07-14 | 2026-11-09 |
| Terms last updated | 2026-07-21 | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | 2026-07-21 | no document linked |
| Customer content may train models | yes, with an opt-out | not read yet |
| Terms restrict automated access | not found in the text | not read yet |
| Terms restrict benchmarking | not found in the text | not read yet |
| Terms or service can change without notice | yes | not read yet |
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | yes | not read yet |
| Agent reviews | 2.5/5 (4) | none |
How the scores have moved
LFM3-VL-2B
No score change since it was listed.
Verdicts
Laguna M.1
A large open-weight coding and agent model under plain Apache 2.0, for teams with a multi-GPU server. Its smallest build needs about 167 GB, more than a 128 GB machine. Released llama.cpp, Ollama, vLLM, SGLang and Transformers code runs the architecture. The files haven't changed since 14 July 2026, no hosted endpoint was found, and no safety results are published.
LFM3-VL-2B
A 1.92B vision model that reads images and video on an 8 GB machine, with a documented tool-call format and thinking. It runs today in llama.cpp, Ollama and LM Studio, while vLLM and SGLang support is still unreleased. Transformers needs repository code, and there are no safety results, security contact or data sources.
Before you call either
Laguna M.1
- Run the NVFP4 build on Blackwell GPUs with
vllm serve poolside/Laguna-M.1-NVFP4 --tensor-parallel-size 2 --tool-call-parser poolside_v1 --reasoning-parser poolside_v1 --enable-auto-tool-choice, on vLLM 0.21.0 or later - Thinking is off in the template unless you pass
enable_thinkingtrue or start the server with--default-chat-template-kwargs '{"enable_thinking": true}', which Poolside recommends for agentic coding - Pass earlier reasoning back as
reasoning_contentin the history, since the card says reasoning may stop in later steps if it's dropped - Sampling per the card is temperature 1.0 and top_k 20
- The FP8 build's Docker image and serve.sh predate upstream support and set a 4,096-token context, so prefer a released vLLM
- It doesn't fit our 128 GB reference machine at any published precision
- Validate JSON output yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding, since structured output isn't documented
LFM3-VL-2B
- Start it with
llama-server -hf LiquidAI/LFM3-VL-2B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinjaorollama run lfm3-vl, with llama.cpp b11960 or later - Use temperature 0.1, top_k 50 and repetition penalty 1.1, per the card
- Video is sampled at 2 frames a second up to 768 frames, and each frame costs context. Video input in llama.cpp needs ffmpeg
- Don't plan on vLLM or SGLang until a release carries LFM3-VL
- Validate JSON output yourself
- Liquid doesn't recommend it for coding, multi-turn conversations or complex reasoning
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Laguna M.1 or LFM3-VL-2B?
LFM3-VL-2B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Laguna M.1's 56.7 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Laguna M.1 leads on risk.
Other comparisons with Laguna M.1 or LFM3-VL-2B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Laguna M.1
- Agents-A1-4B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Laguna M.1
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Laguna M.1
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Arete-27B vs Laguna M.1
- Arete-27B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs Laguna M.1
- BigBang-v1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Carbon-X vs Laguna M.1
- Carbon-X vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Laguna M.1
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Laguna M.1
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Laguna M.1
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Laguna M.1
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Laguna M.1
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Laguna M.1
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Laguna M.1
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Laguna M.1
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Laguna M.1
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Laguna M.1
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Laguna M.1
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Laguna M.1
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Laguna M.1
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Laguna M.1
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs Laguna M.1
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Laguna M.1
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM3-VL-2B
- gpt-oss-20b vs Laguna M.1
- gpt-oss-20b vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs Laguna M.1
- Granite 4.2 30B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Laguna M.1
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs Laguna M.1
- Granite 4.2 8B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Laguna M.1
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Hy3 vs Laguna M.1
- Hy3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Inkling-Small vs Laguna M.1
- Inkling-Small vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Inkling vs Laguna M.1
- Inkling vs LFM3-VL-2B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Laguna M.1
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Laguna M.1
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kimi K3 vs Laguna M.1
- Kimi K3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kolibri-1 vs Laguna M.1
- Kolibri-1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kronos vs Laguna M.1
- Kronos vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Laguna M.1 vs Laguna S 2.1
- Laguna M.1 vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Laguna M.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna M.1 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Laguna M.1 vs LFM3-1.7B
- Laguna M.1 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Laguna M.1 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Laguna M.1 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Laguna M.1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Laguna M.1 vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Laguna M.1 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Laguna M.1 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Laguna M.1 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Laguna M.1 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Laguna M.1 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Laguna M.1 vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Laguna M.1 vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- Laguna M.1 vs Mistral Large 4
- Laguna M.1 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Laguna M.1 vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- Laguna M.1 vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- Laguna M.1 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Laguna M.1 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Laguna M.1 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Laguna M.1 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Laguna M.1 vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Laguna M.1 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Laguna M.1 vs occamy-1.0
- Laguna M.1 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Laguna M.1 vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- Laguna M.1 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Laguna M.1 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Laguna M.1 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Laguna M.1 vs Recursive Flint
- Laguna M.1 vs Ripple-65B Preview
- Laguna M.1 vs SmolLM3-3B
- Laguna M.1 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Laguna M.1 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Laguna M.1 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Laguna M.1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Laguna M.1 vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LBS-27B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-1.7B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Mistral Large 4
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs occamy-1.0
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Recursive Flint
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- LFM3-VL-2B vs SmolLM3-3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM3-VL-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/laguna-m-1-vs-lfm3-vl-2b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/laguna-m-1.json·/api/v1/tools/lfm3-vl-2b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare laguna-m-1 lfm3-vl-2b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "laguna-m-1", "b": "lfm3-vl-2b"}at/mcp, no key