ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Mercury 2.5 vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin vs Laguna XS 2.1

Too close to call on our weighted score (Mercury 2.5 71, Laguna XS 2.1 68, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin 65). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Inception

    Mercury 2.5

    Released Sep 8, 2026

    71/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.04 / $0.15
    • Context260K
  2. inclusionAI

    Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

    Released Aug 27, 2026

    65/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.075 / $0.22
    • Context262K
  3. Poolside

    Laguna XS 2.1

    Released Jul 2, 2026

    68/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.06 / $0.12
    • Context262K
01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (Mercury 2.5 71/100, Laguna XS 2.1 68/100, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin 65/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Mercury 2.5 on price. 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 priceMercury 2.5Mercury 2.5 $0.068 · Laguna XS 2.1 $0.075 · Ling 3.0 Flash Fin $0.111 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextAbout the sameLing 3.0 Flash Fin 262,144 · Laguna XS 2.1 262,144 · Mercury 2.5 260,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsMercury 2.5: Text · Ling 3.0 Flash Fin: Text · Laguna XS 2.1: Text
  • Self-hostingLaguna XS 2.1Publishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightMercury 2.5Ling 3.0 Flash FinLaguna XS 2.1
Price50%10095100
Inputs & features30%453535
Context window20%363737
Overall100%71/10065/10068/100

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.

Mercury 2.5 vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin vs Laguna XS 2.1 specifications side by side
SpecificationMercury 2.5InceptionLing 3.0 Flash FininclusionAILaguna XS 2.1Poolside
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.04 (best)$0.075$0.06
Output$0.15$0.22$0.12 (best)
Cached input$0.004——
Blended (3:1)$0.068 (best)$0.111$0.075
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Inception APIMedian of 1 providersMedian of 1 providers
Limits
Context window260,000 tokens262,144 tokens (best)262,144 tokens (best)
Max output65,536 tokens (best)32,768 tokens32,768 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoNoNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningYeslow · medium · highYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesNoNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietaryOpen
API model IDmercury-2.5—poolside/laguna-xs-2.1
API providers124 (best)
ReleasedSep 8, 2026Aug 27, 2026Jul 2, 2026
Knowledge cutoffNov 1, 2025——
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.

  • Mercury 2.5$0.70
  • Ling 3.0 Flash Fin$1.19
  • Laguna XS 2.1$0.84
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Mercury 2.5, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin or Laguna XS 2.1?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (Mercury 2.5 71/100, Laguna XS 2.1 68/100, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin 65/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Mercury 2.5 on price. 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, Mercury 2.5, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin or Laguna XS 2.1?

Mercury 2.5 is cheaper at $0.04 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (official Inception API price). Laguna XS 2.1 costs $0.06 input / $0.12 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider; free on Poolside); Ling 3.0 Flash Fin costs $0.075 input / $0.22 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.068 per million tokens for Mercury 2.5 versus $0.075 for Laguna XS 2.1 (1.1× as much) and $0.111 for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (1.6× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Mercury 2.5 has not been scored yet, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin has not been scored yet and Laguna XS 2.1 has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Mercury 2.5, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin and Laguna XS 2.1 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?

Their context windows are effectively the same size: Mercury 2.5 260,000, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin 262,144 and Laguna XS 2.1 262,144 tokens. Maximum output per response: Mercury 2.5 up to 65,536, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin up to 32,768, Laguna XS 2.1 up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Mercury 2.5 accepts text; Ling 3.0 Flash Fin accepts text; Laguna XS 2.1 accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

Laguna XS 2.1 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Mercury 2.5 and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Mercury 2.5 is the newest, released Sep 8, 2026. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin came out Aug 27, 2026; Laguna XS 2.1 came out Jul 2, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Mercury 2.5 Nov 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 Oct 4, 2026.