The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Fable 5.2 vs LFM2.5-VL-3B

Claude Fable 5.2 leads the LLM Stats Score 61.3 to 3.0.

Anthropic · Liquid AI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Fable 5.2 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 61.3 to 3.0, ranking #1 overall.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Claude Fable 5.2

  • overall performance matters — it scores 61.3 and ranks #1 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and agents — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Nov 2026

Choose LFM2.5-VL-3B

  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Fable 5.2
Anthropic
LFM2.5-VL-3B
Liquid AI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
61.3
#1
3.0
#353
Reasoning
60.3
#1
-2.4
#373
Agents
47.1
#1
-3.4
#222
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$8.00 / M
— / M
Output price
$40.00 / M
— / M
Context window
1,000,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
Claude Fable 5.2
LFM2.5-VL-3B
Vision
48.1#1
1.0#209
Multimodal
44.5#1
3.0#168
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

29 reported for Claude Fable 5.2 · 23 for LFM2.5-VL-3B

No common benchmarks found

Claude Fable 5.2 and LFM2.5-VL-3Bdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude Fable 5.2 specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only Claude Fable 5.2 specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude Fable 5.2
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Liquid AI
LFM2.5-VL-3B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Wed Nov 11 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Claude Fable 5.2 and LFM2.5-VL-3B support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Claude Fable 5.2

Text
Images
Audio
Video

LFM2.5-VL-3B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Fable 5.2 is licensed under a proprietary license, while LFM2.5-VL-3B uses LFM Open License v1.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude Fable 5.2

Proprietary

Closed source

LFM2.5-VL-3B

LFM Open License v1.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Fable 5.2 was released on 2026-11-09, while LFM2.5-VL-3B was released on 2026-08-12.

Claude Fable 5.2 is 3 months newer than LFM2.5-VL-3B.

Claude Fable 5.2

Nov 9, 2026

0 days ago

2mo newer
LFM2.5-VL-3B

Aug 12, 2026

2 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Fable 5.2 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while LFM2.5-VL-3B's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Claude Fable 5.2's training data extends to 2026-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without LFM2.5-VL-3B's cutoff date.

Claude Fable 5.2

Jun 2026

LFM2.5-VL-3B

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Fable 5.2 and LFM2.5-VL-3B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Fable 5.2
✓ Preferred
LFM2.5-VL-3B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Fable 5.2 vs LFM2.5-VL-3B.

Which is better, Claude Fable 5.2 or LFM2.5-VL-3B?

Claude Fable 5.2 leads the LLM Stats Score 61.3 to 3.0. Claude Fable 5.2 is made by Anthropic and LFM2.5-VL-3B is made by Liquid AI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Fable 5.2 compare to LFM2.5-VL-3B in benchmarks?

Claude Fable 5.2 scores SWE-bench Multilingual: 96.6%, Global-MMLU: 96.0%, MILU: 94.1%, SWE-Bench Pro: 93.0%, Chartography: 91.6%. LFM2.5-VL-3B scores DocVQA: 91.1%, POPE: 88.7%, RefCOCO-avg: 87.9%, TextVQA: 84.3%, OCRBench: 84.2%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Fable 5.2 and LFM2.5-VL-3B?

Claude Fable 5.2 supports 1.0M tokens and LFM2.5-VL-3B supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Fable 5.2 and LFM2.5-VL-3B?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (61.3 vs 3.0), licensing (Proprietary vs LFM Open License v1.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Fable 5.2 and LFM2.5-VL-3B?

Claude Fable 5.2 is developed by Anthropic and LFM2.5-VL-3B is developed by Liquid AI.

Related comparisons