Kimi K2.6 vs GLM 5.3
Model Markets Rankings
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
| Ranking | Kimi-K2.6 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | #17 of 36$0.095 per LiveBench case | #28 of 36$0.248 per LiveBench case |
Ranks come from the current complete eligible cohorts. Green highlights appear only when both models are ranked in the same metric. Missing required inputs remain unranked, and the three dimensions are not collapsed into an overall winner.
Benchmark Performance
Available Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi-K2.6 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-01-011508720696 · arena_rating · leader | 1,455.0199% of row best · rating · kimi-k2.6; 95% CI [1450.48846324, 1459.52803920]; votes 37573; rank 34 | 1,474.49100% of row best · rating · glm-5.3-max; 95% CI [1467.12172899, 1481.86064533]; votes 7401; rank 18 |
| LiveBench2026-06-25 · overall · leader | 74.1894% of row best · percent · kimi-k2.6-thinking · 27,001 output tokens / case | 79.15100% of row best · percent · glm-5.3 · 62,090 output tokens / case |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above | 0 benchmark wins | 2 benchmark winsOverall lead |
Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.
Technical Differences
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Kimi-K2.6 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Moonshot AI | Z.ai |
| Family | Kimi K2 6 | Glm 5 3 |
| Model | Kimi-K2.6 | GLM-5.3 |
| Version | Kimi-K2.6 | GLM-5.3 |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-04-20 | Unknown |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 262K | 1,000K |
| Total parameters | 1T | Unknown |
| Active parameters | 32B | Unknown |
| License | other | Unknown |
| Open weights | Yes | No |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | No |
| Provider access | Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard) | Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Together Ai (Standard), Z.ai (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, tools | agents, chat, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools |
13 comparable fields · 10 material differences · Pair passes the primary-source comparison gate
Kimi K2.6 Capabilities
GLM 5.3 Capabilities
Internal Comparison Graph
Related Comparisons
| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
 Kimi-K2.6Moonshot AI | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Kimi-K2.6Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs | Kimi-K2.6Moonshot AI | cross-developer peerstext |
 DeepSeek-V4-ProDeepSeek | vs | Kimi-K2.6Moonshot AI | cross-developer peerstext |
Kimi-K2.6Moonshot AI | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Kimi-K2.6Moonshot AI | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Kimi-K2.6Moonshot AI | vs | Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | family variantsembedding, image, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Kimi-K2.6Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Kimi-K2.6Moonshot AI | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | vs | Kimi-K2.6Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | vs | Kimi-K2.6Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
| vs | Kimi-K2.6Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Kimi K2.6 vs GLM 5.3 FAQs
Is Kimi K2.6 or GLM 5.3 better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Kimi K2.6 and GLM 5.3, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Kimi K2.6 or GLM 5.3?+
Kimi K2.6 is $0.75 and GLM 5.3 is $1.20 per million tokens, so Kimi K2.6 is cheaper on this metric. Kimi K2.6 is $3.50 and GLM 5.3 is $4.00 per million tokens, so Kimi K2.6 is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Kimi K2.6 or GLM 5.3?+
GLM 5.3 has the larger sourced context window. Kimi K2.6 supports 262K and GLM 5.3 supports 1,000K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Kimi K2.6 or GLM 5.3?+
GLM 5.3 leads the current overall benchmark count. The result uses 2 protocol-matched benchmarks from 2 publishers; it is not a universal quality score.
Can Kimi K2.6 or GLM 5.3 be self-hosted?+
Kimi K2.6 is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Kimi K2.6 is open weight; GLM 5.3 is not marked open weight.
Can Kimi K2.6 and GLM 5.3 understand images?+
Kimi K2.6 is documented with image input; GLM 5.3 is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Kimi K2.6 or GLM 5.3?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Kimi K2.6 is — and GLM 5.3 is 131K.
Do Kimi K2.6 and GLM 5.3 support reasoning and tool use?+
Kimi K2.6: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. GLM 5.3: reasoning and tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Kimi K2.6 or GLM 5.3?+
Kimi K2.6 has 5 sourced provider routes; GLM 5.3 has 4, so Kimi K2.6 has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Kimi K2.6 or GLM 5.3?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.