Skip to main content
Kaino.dev
Discover
Evals
News
Academics
Insights
Kaino.dev

Discover, evaluate, and compare AI tools, models, and agents.

Explore

  • Discover
  • Evaluations
  • News
  • Academics
  • Insights

Community

  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Instagram
Privacy PolicyTerms of Service

© 2026 Kaino.dev. All rights reserved.

Version 1.1.0
Kimi K2.5 · Evaluations · Kaino
Kimi K2.5 logo
model evaluation

Kimi K2.5

Moonshot AI

Open-source multimodal agentic model for coding, visual understanding, documents, research, and multi-step developer workflows.

modelsource:kimi.commultimodalagenticopen-sourcecodingdocumentsresearchmoonshot-ai
81.2KAINO SCORERecommended
Evaluated Jun 15, 202615 reviews
Website Docs GitHub

Scorecard

PricingMultimodalCostDev expTechnicalSpeedCodingReasoningRiskAdoption
  • Coding & agentic86
  • Multimodal & I/O84
  • Technical capability83
  • Cost effectiveness82
  • Developer experience82
  • Speed & availability80
  • Risk & evidence80
  • Reasoning & knowledge78
  • Pricing clarity76
  • Adoption signal73

Kainotomic evaluation

Kimi K2.5 has strong evidence for coding and agentic developer work. Official Moonshot sources describe an open-source, multimodal, agentic model for coding, visual understanding, documents, research, and multi-step workflows. Public coding evidence is also substantive: SWE-bench Verified lists Kimi K2.5 high reasoning at 70.80% resolved, while Moonshot’s Hugging Face card reports Kimi K2.5 Thinking at 76.8 on SWE-Bench Verified using an internal 5-run framework. LiveCodeBench evidence reports 85.0, ranked 9th among 31 models shown. The model’s broader capability profile is good but not uniformly frontier. Artificial Analysis lists a 47 Intelligence Index, 256k context, 44.2 output tokens/s for the reasoning model, and prices of $0.58/M input and $3.00/M output tokens. Separate provider benchmarking shows much faster non-reasoning hosted options, including Fireworks at 337.8 tokens/s and a lowest blended price of $0.39/M tokens. This supports favorable cost-effectiveness, though availability and performance depend heavily on provider and reasoning mode. Evidence quality is reasonably high because official docs, model pages, GitHub, SWE-bench, LiveCodeBench, Artificial Analysis, Terminal-Bench, and LMArena were checked. Caveats remain: DeepSWE/DataCurve had no Kimi K2.5 row, CodeSOTA only indicates no DeepSWE result, and Terminal-Bench lists “Terminus 2 Kimi K2.5” at 43.2% ± 2.9, which is a weaker agentic terminal result. LMArena ranks are useful public preference signals, not controlled capability measurements.

Strengths

  • Strong public coding evidence from SWE-bench Verified and LiveCodeBench.
  • Official positioning covers multimodal, document, research, coding, and agentic workflows.
  • Open-source project presence through Moonshot AI GitHub and Hugging Face model card.
  • Competitive token pricing and provider options according to Artificial Analysis.
  • Large 256k-token context window reported by Artificial Analysis.

Caveats

  • SWE-bench results differ by source: official leaderboard reports 70.80%, while Moonshot Hugging Face reports 76.8 from an internal 5-run framework.
  • DeepSWE/DataCurve was checked but has no Kimi K2.5 row or score.
  • Terminal-Bench result is modest and appears under a specific “Terminus 2 Kimi K2.5” setup.
  • LMArena evidence is preference/product-feel signal, not a controlled benchmark.
  • Speed and price vary materially between reasoning and non-reasoning provider configurations.