Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-2B
LFM3-VL-2B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Qwen3.5-2B's 50.5 (D), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Qwen3.5-2B 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 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 80
- Agent interface, 90 against 60
- Documentation and upkeep, 77 against 37
Watch for
vLLM and SGLang support is unreleased, which the card says itself
Best for Builders who want a cheap local helper or fine-tuning base for narrow tasks and image reading on a laptop, small GPU or CPU
Ahead on
- Risk, 55 against 40
Watch for
No quantised build from Alibaba, and only one inference provider
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 +40
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.
Qwen3.5-2B 37
The card covers six of the seven items, missing only a cut-off (17), because it states the intended uses and warns about thinking loops. Training data is a general description without a cut-off (5). The files last changed on 2 March 2026, 247 days before 4 November, within a year (5). No Qwen member has answered any of the 6 discussions that aren't pull requests (0). Qwen3-1.7B stays in its own repository without a dated note (5), and a template fix and the missing generation_config.json wait unanswered (5). 17+5+5+0+5+5 = 37.
Agent interface LFM3-VL-2B +30
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.
Qwen3.5-2B 60
The template ships in the repository (20) and the model was trained for tool use with several calls per turn in the template (20). Tool-calling format gets 10, because the card names the qwen3_coder parser but leaves the format to the template. Reasoning control scores 0, since the card shows how to turn thinking on but not where the reasoning comes back. 262,144 tokens is native (10). Structured output scores 0, as nothing documents JSON output for the model. 20+10+20+0+0+10 = 60.
Risk Qwen3.5-2B +15
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.
Qwen3.5-2B 55
Safetensors only with no remote code gives file safety its 25, and files in the Qwen organisation the publisher's GitHub links to, each with a hash on the Hub, give provenance 15. The Apache 2.0 licence carries none of the deductions, so licence risk keeps 15. Safety evaluation, agent guidance and a security programme score 0, since the card has no safety results or agent cautions and no reporting route was found. The Qwen3.5 blog and Alibaba's security response centre couldn't be read, so those are scored as absent and left open. 25+15+0+0+15+0 = 55.
Reach LFM3-VL-2B +5
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.
Qwen3.5-2B 80
Memory earns the full 30, since LM Studio's Q4_K_M GGUF with its vision projector is 1.94 GB, about 2.3 GB with the fifth added (Ollama's Q4_K_M build was 1.9 GB on 21 October). Alibaba publishes no quantised 2B, so builds scores 0. Runtimes reach the 25 cap, with llama.cpp b11963 and Ollama through the build it pins re-read today. Apache 2.0 with nothing added gives terms 15 and the ungated download 10. Hosted too scores 0, as only Featherless AI is in the Hub's provider mapping and the line needs two. 30+25+0+15+10+0 = 80.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | LFM3-VL-2B | Qwen3.5-2B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 85 | 80 | LFM3-VL-2B +5 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 40 | 55 | Qwen3.5-2B +15 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 90 | 60 | LFM3-VL-2B +30 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 77 | 37 | LFM3-VL-2B +40 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 61/100 | D 50.5/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | LFM3-VL-2B | Qwen3.5-2B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Liquid AI | Alibaba (Qwen team) |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | LFM Open License v1.0 (free commercial use below $10M annual revenue) | Apache-2.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | yes | no |
| Last release | 2026-11-09 | 2026-03-02 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Agent reviews | none | 3/5 (4) |
Verdicts
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.
Qwen3.5-2B
A small vision-language model for prototypes, fine-tuning and narrow local steps such as tool calls, tagging or reading an image. It runs in about 2 GB at 4 bits in six runtimes under plain Apache 2.0. Keep thinking off, since the card warns it loops. The card has no safety results, and Qwen has answered none of its discussions.
Before you call either
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
Qwen3.5-2B
- Smallest start is
ollama run qwen3.5:2b-q4_K_M(1.9 GB); plainqwen3.5:2bpulls the 2.7 GB Q8_0 build - Full precision
vllm serve Qwen/Qwen3.5-2B --port 8000 --max-model-len 262144 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder - Thinking is off by default; if you turn it on with
"chat_template_kwargs": {"enable_thinking": true}, stream and cut off runaway output, since the card warns of thinking loops, and add--reasoning-parser qwen3in vLLM or SGLang to split the reasoning out - There's no generation_config.json, so pass the card's sampling yourself, for example
temperature=1.0, top_p=1.0, top_k=20, presence_penalty=2.0for text without thinking - Use it for narrow steps or as a fine-tuning base, not as the main agent, as the card itself suggests
- Validate any JSON it returns, since structured output isn't documented
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, LFM3-VL-2B or Qwen3.5-2B?
LFM3-VL-2B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Qwen3.5-2B's 50.5 (D), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Qwen3.5-2B leads on risk.
Other comparisons with LFM3-VL-2B or Qwen3.5-2B
- Agents-A1-4B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Arete-27B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Arete-27B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Carbon-X vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Carbon-X vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3.5-2B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.5-2B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.5-2B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.5-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.5-2B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.5-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM3-VL-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.5-2B
- gpt-oss-20b vs LFM3-VL-2B
- gpt-oss-20b vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Hy3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Inkling-Small vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Inkling-Small vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Inkling vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Inkling vs Qwen3.5-2B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LFM3-VL-2B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Kimi K3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kimi K3 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Kolibri-1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Kronos vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kronos vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Laguna M.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LBS-27B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM3-1.7B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- 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 Qwen3.5-397B-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
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Mistral Large 4 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Nanbeige4.3-33B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Ornith-1.5-122B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Qwen3.5-0.8B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- Qwen3.5-2B vs SmolLM3-3B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3.5-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/lfm3-vl-2b-vs-qwen3-5-2b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/lfm3-vl-2b.json·/api/v1/tools/qwen3-5-2b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare lfm3-vl-2b qwen3-5-2b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "lfm3-vl-2b", "b": "qwen3-5-2b"}at/mcp, no key