AI agents · OpenClaw · self-hosting · automation

Quick Answer

DeepSeek V4 vs Kimi K2.6 vs GLM-5.1: Open Models April 2026

Published:

DeepSeek V4 vs Kimi K2.6 vs GLM-5.1: Open Models April 2026

DeepSeek V4 dropped April 24, 2026. The open-weight frontier just reshuffled — again. Here’s how the three current open-weight leaders stack up as of April 25, 2026.

Last verified: April 25, 2026

TL;DR

DeepSeek V4-ProKimi K2.6GLM-5.1
MakerDeepSeek (Hangzhou)Moonshot AIZ.ai (Zhipu)
Total params1.6T MoE1T MoE800B MoE (est.)
Active per token49B~32B~25B
Context window1M256K1M
SWE-bench Verified80.6%80.2%78.4%
SWE-Bench Pro47.2%44.1%49.8%
Terminal-Bench67.9%64.1%61.3%
API price ($/M in/out)1.74 / 3.480.60 / 2.500.30 / 1.10
LicenseCustom (commercial OK)Apache 2.0Apache 2.0

DeepSeek V4-Pro — the new open-weight king

Released: April 24, 2026 (preview)

V4-Pro is the most capable open-weight model on the market right now. It’s within 0.2 points of Claude Opus 4.7 on SWE-bench Verified, beats it on Terminal-Bench and LiveCodeBench, and trails only Gemini 3.1 Pro on world knowledge.

Strengths:

  • Best open-weight reasoning and general intelligence
  • 1M token context (full monorepos, full books)
  • Aggressive pricing — $3.48/M output is unprecedented at this quality
  • Officially supported on Huawei Ascend 950 supernodes (vLLM-Ascend)
  • Open weights on Hugging Face (deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V4-Pro)

Weaknesses:

  • Custom license (not OSI-compliant; Apache 2.0 / MIT models are stricter “open source”)
  • Smaller MCP/tool ecosystem than Anthropic stack
  • Tool-calling reliability still ~5 points behind closed-frontier models
  • Self-hosting V4-Pro at full quality needs multi-node infra

Best for: Teams that want the highest open-weight quality, 1M context use cases, China-friendly deployments, anyone running >100M tokens monthly.

Kimi K2.6 — the agentic swarm specialist

Released: February 2026

Kimi K2.6 is Moonshot AI’s flagship and the best open-weight model for parallel multi-agent work. Its standout feature is native support for ~300 concurrent sub-agents within a single workflow — something no other open or closed model matches today.

Strengths:

  • 300+ parallel sub-agents in a single agent loop
  • Apache 2.0 — fully open, no commercial restrictions
  • Strong tool-calling reliability (one of the best open models for tool use)
  • Excellent agentic coding (80.2% SWE-bench Verified)
  • Strong long-form writing

Weaknesses:

  • 256K context (vs 1M for V4-Pro and GLM-5.1)
  • Lower world-knowledge benchmarks than V4-Pro
  • Slightly more expensive on output ($2.50 vs Pro $3.48 — but Kimi has a smaller param count, so this is mostly a positioning choice)
  • Smaller community than DeepSeek

Best for: Multi-agent swarms, complex tool-orchestration agents, teams that need true Apache 2.0 licensing, research workflows.

GLM-5.1 — the production-patch champion

Released: March 2026

Zhipu AI / Z.ai’s GLM-5.1 is quieter in marketing but punches above its weight on a critical benchmark: SWE-Bench Pro, which measures production-grade patch quality on real GitHub issues. GLM-5.1 leads the open-weight pack here at 49.8%.

Strengths:

  • Best open-weight model on SWE-Bench Pro (production patches)
  • 1M context window
  • Cheapest of the three on API ($0.30/$1.10)
  • Apache 2.0 license
  • Smallest deployable footprint — fits on 8×H100 or single H200 with INT4
  • Strong English/Chinese bilingual performance

Weaknesses:

  • Lower SWE-bench Verified score (78.4% vs V4 80.6%)
  • Smaller ecosystem than DeepSeek
  • Less name recognition outside China — fewer English tutorials
  • Occasional tool-calling format quirks

Best for: Teams optimizing for production patch quality, cost-conscious self-hosting, anyone who needs full Apache 2.0 + 1M context.

Side-by-side benchmarks

BenchmarkV4-ProKimi K2.6GLM-5.1
MMLU-Pro83.2%80.4%79.1%
GPQA Diamond78.6%75.2%73.4%
SWE-bench Verified80.6%80.2%78.4%
SWE-Bench Pro47.2%44.1%49.8%
LiveCodeBench93.5%89.1%87.4%
Terminal-Bench 2.067.9%64.1%61.3%
τ²-Bench (agents)71.4%74.8%68.2%
AIME 2026 (math)88.4%84.1%82.7%

Bottom line: V4-Pro wins most categories. Kimi K2.6 wins on multi-agent (τ²-Bench). GLM-5.1 wins on production patches (SWE-Bench Pro).

Pricing for 100M tokens/month (50/50 split)

ModelAPI monthly cost
GLM-5.1$70
Kimi K2.6$155
DeepSeek V4-Flash$21
DeepSeek V4-Pro$261
Claude Sonnet 4.6$375

If pure cost is the priority, V4-Flash dominates. If you need full Pro-tier quality, GLM-5.1 is the budget pick at $70/M tokens.

Decision tree

  • Need the best open-weight quality? → DeepSeek V4-Pro
  • Need lowest cost with 1M context? → DeepSeek V4-Flash
  • Building agentic swarms / multi-agent workflows? → Kimi K2.6
  • Need Apache 2.0 license? → Kimi K2.6 or GLM-5.1
  • Production patch quality matters most? → GLM-5.1
  • Self-hosting on modest hardware? → GLM-5.1
  • Need Chinese-market deployment + Huawei Ascend? → DeepSeek V4

What to actually do

For most builders in late April 2026:

  1. Default to DeepSeek V4-Flash for routine work. $0.14/$0.28 is unbeatable.
  2. Escalate to V4-Pro or GLM-5.1 for hard tasks — your choice based on license needs.
  3. Use Kimi K2.6 specifically when you need parallel sub-agents or guaranteed Apache 2.0.

The real story isn’t which model wins — it’s that the open-weight tier is now within striking distance of Claude Opus 4.7 and GPT-5.5 at one-tenth the cost. Production AI no longer needs to mean US-frontier API spend.


Last verified: April 25, 2026. Sources: DeepSeek V4 release notes, Moonshot AI Kimi K2.6 model card, Z.ai GLM-5.1 model card, Hugging Face leaderboards, AkitaOnRails LLM Coding Benchmark April 2026.