Skip to content
ModelCap

Model decision surface

Compare AI models

Start with Mercury 2.5 and Qwen3.5 4B, or choose any two current ranked language models. Compare capability evidence, price, context, provider availability, and weight access without pretending one field decides every use case.

Current public data

Mercury 2.5 vs Qwen3.5 4B

Live dataset updated 9/9/2026, 9:50:24 PM UTC

Open 1200×630 evidence receipt
Factual comparison of Mercury 2.5 and Qwen3.5 4B
Field
Mercury 2.5

Inception Labs

ModelCap position#109#105
Index score38.039.5
EvidenceEstimatedglobal-corpus-prior over 180 held-out anchors (22%); opens from measured predecessor inception/mercury-2 (78%); shrunk 4.6 up toward the measured corpusEstimatedpublisher-corpus-prior over 180 held-out anchors (28%); launch card against 3 resolved peers on 10 rows (73%); exceeds every named peer on 2 of 10 rows; optimism haircut 0.6 from cross-lab-probe; shrunk 4.3 up toward the measured corpus
Input / 1M$0.04Unavailable
Output / 1M$0.15Unavailable
Pricing statusfreshunavailable
Context260K—
Providers10
Weight accessAPI onlyOpen weights

Decision facts

  • Mercury 2.5 is #109; Qwen3.5 4B is #105 on the same current language board.
  • Index scores are 38.0 for Mercury 2.5 and 39.5 for Qwen3.5 4B. Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.
  • Both positions use Estimated evidence.
  • Weight access differs: Mercury 2.5 is none; Qwen3.5 4B is open.
  • ModelCap currently lists 1 providers for Mercury 2.5 and 0 for Qwen3.5 4B.

These are separate published fields, not a synthetic winner. ModelCap does not collapse price, access, context, and capability evidence into a hidden recommendation score.

Each comparison page is a permanent, shareable URL with the same live figures as this tool: ModelCap Index position, API pricing, context window, provider count, weight access and every shared benchmark board.