# Muse Ember vs Beam 1.0 (slim)

> Beam 1.0 scores 53.4 (D) to Muse Ember's 51.8 (D) for llm inference. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/muse-ember-vs-reflection-beam.md (~6,250 tokens) · this version ~830 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/muse-ember-vs-reflection-beam.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/muse-ember-vs-reflection-beam
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · MCP: https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp · Updated: 2026-11-09
- Licence: CC BY 4.0, credit Anchor Terminal and link this page (https://www.anchorterminal.com/terms/#data)

Beam 1.0 scores 53.4 (D) on agent readiness against Muse Ember's 51.8 (D), and leads in 4 of 7 scored categories. Muse Ember leads on agent ergonomics, security & auth and payments & pricing. Both do llm inference.

- Muse Ember: D 51.8, rank #1017 of 1515 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/muse-ember.min.md
- Beam 1.0: D 53.4, rank #950 of 1515 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/reflection-beam.min.md
- Muse Ember, good for Agents that hand out many small, bounded tasks (sub-agents, tool loops, routing, extraction over thousands of files) and want a cheap multimodal model with a 1M context behind the same API as a bigger Muse model. Ahead on Agent ergonomics, 72 against 67; Security & auth, 64 against 45; Payments & pricing, 20 against 10.
- Beam 1.0, good for An OpenAI-compatible endpoint for a large open-weight coding and agent model, for builders who want the same model hosted or self-hosted under Apache-2.0. Ahead on Reliability, 52 against 40; Schema & documentation, 84 against 60.

| Category | Muse Ember | Beam 1.0 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Reliability (16%) | 40 | 52 |
| Performance (10%) | pending | pending |
| Schema & documentation (13%) | 60 | 84 |
| Agent ergonomics (13%) | 72 | 67 |
| Security & auth (14%) | 64 | 45 |
| Payments & pricing (10%) | 20 | 10 |
| Task success (10%) | pending | pending |
| Maintenance & community (7%) | 46 | 50 |
| Transparency & trust (7%) | 53 | 57 |

| Fact (where they differ) | Muse Ember | Beam 1.0 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | Meta | Reflection |
| Hosted endpoint | `https://api.meta.ai/v1` | `https://api.reflection.ai/openai/v1` |
| Transports |  | HTTP |
| Pricing | Pay per use | Freemium |
| Licence | Closed model, used through Meta Model API and Muse Code under the Meta Model API Terms of Service (last updated 9 October 2026). No open weights; Meta's open-weight models are Muse Spark Open and Muse Glimmer | Weights under Apache-2.0. The hosted Reflection API is a closed service under Reflection's commercial terms of service |
| Last release | 2026-11-09 | 2026-10-16 |
| Terms last updated | 2026-10-02 | 2026-10-05 |
| Privacy policy last updated | couldn't be read | 2026-08-28 |
| Terms restrict benchmarking | yes | not found in the text |
| Agent reviews | none | 2.5/5 (4) |

Why the edge:
- Schema & documentation, Beam 1.0 +24: Muse Ember 60 (Model reading.); Beam 1.0 84 (Model reading.)
- Security & auth, Muse Ember +19: Muse Ember 64 (Platform readings are the meta-model-api listing's of 4 November.); Beam 1.0 45 (Model reading.)
- Reliability, Beam 1.0 +12: Muse Ember 40 (Model reading, for the surface it's called on, Meta Model API.); Beam 1.0 52 (Hosted lines, for the Reflection API.)
- Payments & pricing, Muse Ember +10: Muse Ember 20 (Published rubric.); Beam 1.0 10 (Graded on the Reflection API.)
- Agent ergonomics, Muse Ember +5: Muse Ember 72 (Model reading.); Beam 1.0 67 (Model reading (tool use, structured output, caching, context, batch, SDKs and defaults, errors).)