The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 44.8 to 18.4.

Liquid AI · Xiaomi · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 44.8 to 18.4, ranking #45 overall.

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

Choose LFM2.5-2.6B

  • you are already invested in the Liquid AI ecosystem

Choose MiMo-V2.6-Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 44.8 and ranks #45 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

LFM2.5-2.6B
Liquid AI
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Xiaomi
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
18.4
#234
44.8
#45
Reasoning
14.1
#255
43.6
#50
Coding
16.0
#148
34.0
#37
Agents
6.7
#162
32.0
#38
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
— / M
$0.14 / M
Output price
— / M
$0.28 / M
Context window
—
1,048,576

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
LFM2.5-2.6B
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Tool use
0.3#197
26.4#33
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

9 reported for LFM2.5-2.6B · 16 for MiMo-V2.6-Flash

No common benchmarks found

LFM2.5-2.6B and MiMo-V2.6-Flashdon'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

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

306.3B diff

MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 306.3B more parameters than LFM2.5-2.6B, making it 11387.0% larger.

Liquid AI
LFM2.5-2.6B
2.7Bparameters
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
309.0Bparameters
2.7B
LFM2.5-2.6B
309.0B
MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash specifies input context (1,048,576 tokens).

Liquid AI
LFM2.5-2.6B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output- tokens
Fri Oct 23 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

MiMo-V2.6-Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas LFM2.5-2.6B does not.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

LFM2.5-2.6B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

LFM2.5-2.6B is licensed under LFM Open License v1.0, while MiMo-V2.6-Flash uses MIT.

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

LFM2.5-2.6B

LFM Open License v1.0

Open weights

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

LFM2.5-2.6B was released on 2026-08-04, while MiMo-V2.6-Flash was released on 2026-09-22.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 2 months newer than LFM2.5-2.6B.

LFM2.5-2.6B

Aug 4, 2026

2 months ago

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Sep 22, 2026

3 weeks ago

1mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against LFM2.5-2.6B and MiMo-V2.6-Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

LFM2.5-2.6B
✓ Preferred
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash.

Which is better, LFM2.5-2.6B or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 44.8 to 18.4. LFM2.5-2.6B is made by Liquid AI and MiMo-V2.6-Flash is made by Xiaomi. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does LFM2.5-2.6B compare to MiMo-V2.6-Flash in benchmarks?

LFM2.5-2.6B scores Multi-IF: 80.1%, PinchBench: 68.2%, Claw-Eval: 62.8%, LiveCodeBench v6: 59.4%, IFBench: 59.2%. MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores CyberGym: 95.1%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 87.6%, OSWorld-Verified: 80.8%, MiMo Cyber Bench: 77.2%, Toolathlon-Verified: 73.6%.

What are the context window sizes for LFM2.5-2.6B and MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

LFM2.5-2.6B supports an unknown number of tokens and MiMo-V2.6-Flash supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between LFM2.5-2.6B and MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (18.4 vs 44.8), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (LFM Open License v1.0 vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes LFM2.5-2.6B and MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

LFM2.5-2.6B is developed by Liquid AI and MiMo-V2.6-Flash is developed by Xiaomi.

Related comparisons