The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Claude Haiku 5.5 and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin are closely matched at 49.9 and 42.9 on the LLM Stats Score. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 2.2x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · InclusionAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Haiku 5.5 and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 49.9 and 42.9.

On price, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is roughly 2.2x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Claude Haiku 5.5 also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

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

Choose Claude Haiku 5.5

  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

Choose Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

  • cost matters — it's about 2.2x cheaper per token

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Haiku 5.5
Anthropic
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
InclusionAI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
49.9
#20
42.9
#59
Reasoning
47.5
#25
44.7
#44
Agents
33.8
#33
28.6
#54
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.10 / M
$0.06 / M
Output price
$0.50 / M
$0.18 / M
Context window
1,000,000
262,144

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Claude Haiku 5.5
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Tool use
20.3#66
20.7#65
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

36 reported for Claude Haiku 5.5 · 6 for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

No common benchmarks found

Claude Haiku 5.5 and Ling 3.0 Flash Findon'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

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin costs less

For input processing, Claude Haiku 5.5 ($0.10/1M tokens) is 1.7x more expensive than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin ($0.06/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Haiku 5.5 ($0.50/1M tokens) is 2.8x more expensive than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin ($0.18/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Haiku 5.5 is more expensive than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Thu Oct 22 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Haiku 5.5
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.50
Best providerAnthropic
InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Input tokens$0.06
Output tokens$0.18
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude Haiku 5.5 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to Ling 3.0 Flash Fin's 262,144 tokens. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while Claude Haiku 5.5 is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Haiku 5.5
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
Thu Oct 22 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Haiku 5.5 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ling 3.0 Flash Fin does not.

Claude Haiku 5.5 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Haiku 5.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Haiku 5.5 was released on 2026-10-07, while Ling 3.0 Flash Fin was released on 2026-09-03.

Claude Haiku 5.5 is 1 month newer than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin.

Claude Haiku 5.5

Oct 7, 2026

1 weeks ago

1mo newer
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Sep 3, 2026

1 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Haiku 5.5 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while Ling 3.0 Flash Fin's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Claude Haiku 5.5's training data extends to 2026-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Ling 3.0 Flash Fin's cutoff date.

Claude Haiku 5.5

Jun 2026

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

—

Provider Availability

Claude Haiku 5.5 is available from Anthropic. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is available from DeepInfra.

Claude Haiku 5.5

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.50/1M

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.06/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.18/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Haiku 5.5 and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Haiku 5.5
✓ Preferred
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin.

Which is better, Claude Haiku 5.5 or Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Claude Haiku 5.5 and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 49.9 and 42.9. Claude Haiku 5.5 is made by Anthropic and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is made by InclusionAI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Haiku 5.5 compare to Ling 3.0 Flash Fin in benchmarks?

Claude Haiku 5.5 scores Global-MMLU: 87.8%, MILU: 87.6%, BenchCAD (with Python tool): 87.0%, Chartography: 86.2%, SWE-bench Multilingual: 83.7%. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin scores SpreadSheetBench-v1: 86.5%, Finance Agent v1.1: 69.2%, Finance Agent v2: 59.8%, Tau3 Banking: 41.0%, APEX-Agents: 29.2%.

Is Claude Haiku 5.5 cheaper than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 1.7x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Haiku 5.5 costs $0.10/M input and $0.50/M output via anthropic. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin costs $0.06/M input and $0.18/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Haiku 5.5 and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Claude Haiku 5.5 supports 1.0M tokens and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin supports 262K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Haiku 5.5 and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (49.9 vs 42.9), context window (1.0M vs 262K), input pricing ($0.10 vs $0.06/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Unknown). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Haiku 5.5 and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Claude Haiku 5.5 is developed by Anthropic and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is developed by InclusionAI.

Related comparisons