Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Kimi K2.5 vs Laguna M.1

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 4 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

Kimi K2.5
Moonshot AI
58.78/100
No comparison
Laguna M.1
Poolside
N/A
1 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Kimi K2.5 #60 (Supported); Laguna M.1 unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Kimi K2.5 and Laguna M.1 share 4 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 59 results are unique to Kimi K2.5; 1 to Laguna M.1.

Updated July 27, 2026
Shared results
4
Kimi K2.5 only
59
Laguna M.1 only
1
Comparable categories
2 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. Kimi K2.5 makes more sense if agentic is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model; Laguna M.1 is the better fit if coding is the priority or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 4 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Kimi K2.5 and Laguna M.1 finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.

Laguna M.1 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Kimi K2.5 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Kimi K2.5 and Laguna M.1
CategoryKimi K2.5ΔLaguna M.1
AgenticKimi K2.555.0Margin← 9.2Laguna M.145.8
CodingKimi K2.559.4Margin→ 5.4Laguna M.164.8
ReasoningKimi K2.561.0MarginNo overlapLaguna M.1Not measured
KnowledgeKimi K2.556.9MarginNo overlapLaguna M.1Not measured
MathKimi K2.560.6MarginNo overlapLaguna M.1Not measured
MultilingualKimi K2.582.3MarginNo overlapLaguna M.1Not measured
MultimodalKimi K2.578.5MarginNo overlapLaguna M.1Not measured
Inst. FollowingKimi K2.593.9MarginNo overlapLaguna M.1Not measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Kimi K2.5B · Laguna M.1

  1. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 50.8%B 45.8%
    Winner: Kimi K2.5Δ 5
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Kimi K2.5 scored 50.8%; Laguna M.1 scored 45.8%. Kimi K2.5 wins this benchmark.

  2. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 76.8%B 74.6%
    Winner: Kimi K2.5Δ 2.2
    SWE-bench Verified: Kimi K2.5 scored 76.8%; Laguna M.1 scored 74.6%. Kimi K2.5 wins this benchmark.

  3. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 50.7%B 49.2%
    Winner: Kimi K2.5Δ 1.5
    SWE-bench Pro: Kimi K2.5 scored 50.7%; Laguna M.1 scored 49.2%. Kimi K2.5 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricKimi K2.5Laguna M.1Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensKimi K2.5$0.6 input / $3 outputLaguna M.1Not availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondKimi K2.545 tok/sLaguna M.1Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenKimi K2.52.38 sLaguna M.1Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensKimi K2.5256KLaguna M.1256KListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticKimi K2.5 wins
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Laguna M.1Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 50.8%45.8%Kimi K2.5 leads
BrowseCompSource 60.6%—Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 52.3%—Not comparable
QwenClawBenchSource 54.3%—Not comparable
τ³-bench resultsSource 65.7%—Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource 77.1%—Not comparable
DeepPlanningSource 14.4%—Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 27.8%—Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 29.5%—Not comparable
MCP-TasksSource 59.1%—Not comparable
WideResearchSource 72.7%—Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 95.9%—Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource 11.5%—Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 45.88%—Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource 14.0%—Not comparable
JobBenchSource 8.7%—Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 21.7%—Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 25.1%—Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1003—Not comparable
CodingLaguna M.1 wins
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Laguna M.1Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 76.8%74.6%Kimi K2.5 leads
SWE-bench Verified*Source 70.8%—Not comparable
LiveCodeBench v6Source 85.0%—Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 50.7%49.2%Kimi K2.5 leads
SWE MultilingualSource 73%63.1%Kimi K2.5 leads
SWE-RebenchSource 58.5%—Not comparable
React Native EvalsSource 77.2%—Not comparable
SciCodeSource 48.7%—Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 49.0%—Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 46.8%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source —45.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Laguna M.1Result
LongBench v2Source 61%—Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 65.3%—Not comparable
CritPtSource 3.1%—Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Laguna M.1Result
GPQASource 87.6%—Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 87.6%—Not comparable
SuperGPQASource 69.2%—Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 87.1%—Not comparable
MMLU-Pro (Arcee)Source 87.1%—Not comparable
HLESource 30.1%—Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 35.4%—Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 87.9%—Not comparable
AA-HLESource 29.4%—Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -8.1%—Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 34.3%—Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 64.6%—Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Laguna M.1Result
AIME 2025Source 96.1%—Not comparable
AIME26Source 95.8%—Not comparable
AIME25 (Arcee)Source 96.3%—Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2025Source 95.4%—Not comparable
HMMT Nov 2025Source 91.1%—Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source 87.1%—Not comparable
MMAnswerBenchSource 81.8%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 27.900%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 4.200%—Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Laguna M.1Result
MMLU-ProXSource 82.3%—Not comparable
NOVA-63Source 56.0%—Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Laguna M.1Result
MMMU-ProSource 78.5%—Not comparable
Video-MMESource 87.4%—Not comparable
MMVUSource 80.4%—Not comparable
VideoMMMUSource 86.6%—Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 75.4%—Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1275—Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Laguna M.1Result
IFEvalSource 93.9%—Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource 70.2%—Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Which is better, Kimi K2.5 or Laguna M.1?

Kimi K2.5 and Laguna M.1 are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.

Which is better for coding, Kimi K2.5 or Laguna M.1?

Laguna M.1 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 64.8 versus 59.4. Inside this category, SWE Multilingual is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Kimi K2.5 or Laguna M.1?

Kimi K2.5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 55 versus 45.8. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Self-host vs API cost

Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.

Kimi K2.5
API / mo$2,700
Self-host / mo$5,221
Break-even132M/day
Laguna M.1
API / mo$0
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even—
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Model the full break-even

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Moonshot AI Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 27, 2026

Know when it’s worth switching models

The model to choose, the cheaper alternative, and the release we would wait on.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.