ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

LFM2 24B A2B vs Qwen3.5 4B

Qwen3.5 4B comes out ahead, 78 to 58 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Liquid AI

    LFM2 24B A2B

    Released Feb 24, 2026

    58/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.03 / $0.12
    • Context33K
    Full specs Remove LFM2 24B A2B
  2. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 4B

    Released Mar 2, 2026

    78/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.04 / $0.07
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.5 4B

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Qwen3.5 4B is our pick

Qwen3.5 4B is the better all-round choice, scoring 78/100 against LFM2 24B A2B (58). It leads on inputs & features and 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 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.5 4BQwen3.5 4B 262,144 · LFM2 24B A2B 32,768 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.5 4BLFM2 24B A2B: Text · Qwen3.5 4B: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightLFM2 24B A2BQwen3.5 4B
Price50%100100
Inputs & features30%2570
Context window20%037
Overall100%58/10078/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

LFM2 24B A2B vs Qwen3.5 4B specifications side by side
SpecificationLFM2 24B A2BLiquid AIQwen3.5 4BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—55.8%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.03 (best)$0.04
Output$0.12$0.07 (best)
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.052$0.048 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 1 providersMedian of 3 providers
Limits
Context window32,768 tokens262,144 tokens (best)
Max output32,768 tokens81,920 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoYes
ReasoningNoYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenLFM Open License v1.0OpenApache-2.0
API model ID——
API providers15 (best)
ReleasedFeb 24, 2026Mar 2, 2026
Knowledge cutoff——
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • LFM2 24B A2B$0.54
  • Qwen3.5 4B$0.54
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: LFM2 24B A2B or Qwen3.5 4B?

Qwen3.5 4B is the better all-round choice, scoring 78/100 against LFM2 24B A2B (58). It leads on inputs & features and 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, 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). 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).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models 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 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. Both 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 32,768 for LFM2 24B A2B. Maximum output per response: LFM2 24B A2B up to 32,768, Qwen3.5 4B up to 81,920 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

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, both publish their weights (LFM Open License v1.0 and Apache-2.0), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.5 4B is the newest, released Mar 2, 2026. LFM2 24B A2B came out Feb 24, 2026.

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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons