ZMIME
Video model comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Wan v2.7 vs Veo 3.1 Lite

Lowest entry price: Veo 3.1 Lite · Longest clips: Wan v2.7 · Newest: Wan v2.7. Not enough arena votes yet for a quality score, so this is a spec comparison.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Wan v2.7

    Released Apr 7, 2026

    • Text to video
    • Image to video
    • Video editing
    • Audio input
    • Native audio
    • Arena1,428
    • From$0.10/s
    • Max length10 s
  2. Google

    Veo 3.1 Lite

    Released Mar 31, 2026

    • Text to video
    • Image to video
    • Video editing
    • Native audio
    • Arena—
    • From$0.03/s
    • Max length8 s
  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — At a glance

Where they differ

Quality is the arena score from blind, side-by-side human votes. Price, length and resolution come from each lab’s own listings.

  • Lowest entry priceVeo 3.1 LiteWan v2.7 from $0.10/s (720p–1080p) · Veo 3.1 Lite from $0.03/s (720p)
  • Longest clipsWan v2.7Wan v2.7: 2–10 s · Veo 3.1 Lite: 4, 6 or 8 s
  • Highest resolutionSame top resolutionWan v2.7: 1080p · Veo 3.1 Lite: 1080p
  • NewestWan v2.7Wan v2.7 Apr 7, 2026 · Veo 3.1 Lite Mar 31, 2026
  • Widest inputsWan v2.7Wan v2.7: Text prompts, Reference images, Audio, Video · Veo 3.1 Lite: Text prompts, Reference images, Video
  • Native audioBoth generate soundGenerates an audio track with the video: Wan v2.7 yes · Veo 3.1 Lite yes
  • Image to videoBoth animate imagesStarts from an uploaded image: Wan v2.7 yes · Veo 3.1 Lite yes
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs and apps
  • Most API hostsVeo 3.1 LiteWan v2.7: 1 · Veo 3.1 Lite: 2
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Dashes mean the data is not published.

Wan v2.7 vs Veo 3.1 Lite specifications side by side
SpecificationWan v2.7Alibaba (Qwen)Veo 3.1 LiteGoogle
Quality (blind human votes)
Text to video arenaElo-style score · higher is better1,337 ±7#20 of 48 · 27,626 votes—
Image to video arenaElo-style score · higher is better1,428 ±5#11 of 48 · 85,521 votes—
Price
Starting price$0.10/s 720p–1080p$0.03/s 720p (best)
Top price—$0.08/s 1080p, with audio
10-second clip$1.00at the starting rate$0.30at the starting rate (best)
How it is billedPer secondPer second
Output
ProducesVideo with soundVideo with sound
Resolutions720p · 1080p720p · 1080p
Highest resolution1080p1080p
Clip length2–10 s4, 6 or 8 s
Longest clip10 s (best)8 s
SoundOptionalOptional
Frame controlFirst and last frameFirst and last frame
Aspect ratios—16:9 · 9:16
Inputs
Text promptsYesYes
Start image (image to video)YesYes
Video inputYesYes
Audio inputYesNo
ReferencesImages—
Access
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
API hosts12 (best)
ReleasedApr 7, 2026Mar 31, 2026
03 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better, Wan v2.7 or Veo 3.1 Lite?

Neither model has enough arena votes for a reliable quality score yet, so this page compares specs only. Run the same three or four prompts through each and judge the results.

Which is cheaper?

Wan v2.7 costs from $0.10/s (720p–1080p); Veo 3.1 Lite costs from $0.03/s (720p), up to $0.08/s (1080p, with audio). A 10-second clip at the lowest rate: Wan v2.7 $1.00, Veo 3.1 Lite $0.30. Prices are list rates and change often; check the lab before budgeting.

How long can the videos be, and at what resolution?

Wan v2.7: 2–10 s, 720p / 1080p; Veo 3.1 Lite: 4, 6 or 8 s, 720p / 1080p.

What is the difference between Wan v2.7 and Veo 3.1 Lite?

Wan v2.7 is a video model from Alibaba (Qwen) (Apr 7, 2026), taking text prompts, reference images, audio and video and producing video with sound. Veo 3.1 Lite is a video model from Google (Mar 31, 2026), taking text prompts, reference images and video and producing video with sound.

Which is newer?

Wan v2.7 Apr 7, 2026; Veo 3.1 Lite Mar 31, 2026.

Which generates video with sound?

Generates an audio track with the video: Wan v2.7 yes; Veo 3.1 Lite yes.

Can I run any of these on my own hardware?

No open weights. Both are available only through APIs and apps.