Command A Plus vs LFM2 24B A2B vs Qwen3.5 4B
Qwen3.5 4B comes out ahead, 78 to 58 and 35 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
CohereCommand A Plus
35/100- ECI—
- Price$2.50 / $10.00
- Context128K
Liquid AILFM2 24B A2B
58/100- ECI—
- Price$0.03 / $0.12
- Context33K
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.5 4B
78/100- ECI—
- Price$0.04 / $0.07
- Context262K
Qwen3.5 4B is our pick
Qwen3.5 4B is the better all-round choice, scoring 78/100 against LFM2 24B A2B (58) and Command A Plus (35). It leads on context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceQwen3.5 4BQwen3.5 4B $0.048 · LFM2 24B A2B $0.052 · Command A Plus $4.38 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3.5 4BQwen3.5 4B 262,144 · Command A Plus 128,000 · LFM2 24B A2B 32,768 tokens
- Widest inputsQwen3.5 4BCommand A Plus: Text, Images · LFM2 24B A2B: Text · Qwen3.5 4B: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Command A Plus | LFM2 24B A2B | Qwen3.5 4B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 19 | 100 | 100 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 70 | 25 | 70 |
| Context window | 20% | 24 | 0 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 35/100 | 58/100 | 78/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Command A PlusCohere | LFM2 24B A2BLiquid AI | Qwen3.5 4BAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | — | — | 55.8% |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $2.50 | $0.03 (best) | $0.04 |
| Output | $10.00 | $0.12 | $0.07 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $4.38 | $0.052 | $0.048 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Cohere API | Median of 1 providers | Median of 3 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 128,000 tokens | 32,768 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 64,000 tokens | 32,768 tokens | 81,920 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | OpenLFM Open License v1.0 | OpenApache-2.0 |
| API model ID | command-a-plus-05-2026 | — | — |
| API providers | 3 | 1 | 5 (best) |
| Released | May 20, 2026 | Feb 24, 2026 | Mar 2, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Apr 1, 2025 | — | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Command A Plus$45.00
- LFM2 24B A2B$0.54
- Qwen3.5 4B$0.54
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Command A Plus, LFM2 24B A2B or Qwen3.5 4B?
Qwen3.5 4B is the better all-round choice, scoring 78/100 against LFM2 24B A2B (58) and Command A Plus (35). It leads on context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Command A Plus, LFM2 24B A2B or Qwen3.5 4B?
Qwen3.5 4B is cheaper at $0.04 input / $0.07 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). LFM2 24B A2B costs $0.03 input / $0.12 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider); Command A Plus costs $2.50 input / $10.00 output per million tokens (official Cohere API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.048 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 4B versus $0.052 for LFM2 24B A2B (1.1× as much) and $4.38 for Command A Plus (92× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Command A Plus has not been scored yet, LFM2 24B A2B has not been scored yet and Qwen3.5 4B has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Command A Plus, LFM2 24B A2B and Qwen3.5 4B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.5 4B has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 128,000 for Command A Plus and 32,768 for LFM2 24B A2B. Maximum output per response: Command A Plus up to 64,000, LFM2 24B A2B up to 32,768, Qwen3.5 4B up to 81,920 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Command A Plus accepts text and images; LFM2 24B A2B accepts text; Qwen3.5 4B accepts text, images and video. Qwen3.5 4B handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, all three publish their weights (LFM Open License v1.0 and Apache-2.0), so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
Command A Plus is the newest, released May 20, 2026. Qwen3.5 4B came out Mar 2, 2026; LFM2 24B A2B came out Feb 24, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Command A Plus Apr 1, 2025.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
