OpenAI compatible API · Attested · Public status

MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 vs Z.ai: GLM 4.5 Air

MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 vs Z.ai: GLM 4.5 Air: compare current API pricing, context, provider routes, privacy, p50 latency, and OpenAI-compatible access.

Verify gateway

Onebase URL to migrate

100sof models and routes

0prompt or output logs. Always.

Compare routesProviders, price, context, and policy posture in one view.

Use auto when uptime mattersKeep a primary model and let fallback handle provider failures.

Same API shapeUse the OpenAI client and set the model you want.

Practical read

Monthly evidence

Z.ai: GLM 4.5 Air has the lower cheapest prompt+completion route on TrustedRouter. MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 has more provider fallback routes, while MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 has the larger context window. Current TrustedRouter probes show MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 with the lower p50 TTFT.

$4.1989/1MMoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 cheapest route

$1.153468/1MZ.ai: GLM 4.5 Air cheapest route

1474 msMoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 fastest measured p50 TTFT via parasail

3162 msZ.ai: GLM 4.5 Air fastest measured p50 TTFT via zai

Prices and live route measurements can change. Use the monthly reports when you need a stable evidence window, then run a small task-specific eval before choosing a production default.

MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6Z.ai: GLM 4.5 Air

Model idmoonshotai/kimi-k2.6z-ai/glm-4.5-air

Publisher Kimi Z.AI

AI IQ IQ 118#35 —

Context262,144 tokens131,072 tokens

Credits provider routes202

Cheapest route$4.1989/1M$1.153468/1M

Cached input$0.06119/1M to $0.441676/1M$0.03165/1M to $0.082643/1M

Privacy posturehas provider E2EE routeprovider posture varies

Fastest measured p50 TTFT1474 ms via parasail3162 ms via zai

Highest measured throughput93 tok/s via azurenot enough data

Recent route uptime range66.67% to 100.00%100.00%

Modes chat chat

MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 routes

Overview20 Credits routes
PricingInput, cached input, and output rates
BenchmarksTrustedRouter and external sources
ProvidersAll serving providers

Z.ai: GLM 4.5 Air routes

Overview2 Credits routes
PricingInput, cached input, and output rates
ProvidersAll serving providers

Related comparisons

Browse every comparison

MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.248 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.346 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash46 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.644 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K344 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 vs OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b42 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.637 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0423 vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.636 combined provider routes

Production choice

Pick a default model. Keep fallback enabled.

TrustedRouter is useful when you know the model you want, but still need provider rollover, budget limits, usage records, and a prompt path you can verify.

OpenAI clientPython

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://api.trustedrouter.com/v1",
    api_key="sk-tr-v1-..."
)

response = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="moonshotai/kimi-k2.6",
    messages=messages,
)

Questions

Which should I use, MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 or Z.ai: GLM 4.5 Air?

Is MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 or Z.ai: GLM 4.5 Air cheaper?

The current cheapest TrustedRouter route is $4.1989/1M for MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 and $1.153468/1M for Z.ai: GLM 4.5 Air. The comparison uses current catalog prices and updates as provider pricing changes.

Is MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 or Z.ai: GLM 4.5 Air faster?

Current measured p50 time to first token is 1474 ms for MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 and 3162 ms for Z.ai: GLM 4.5 Air. These are routed probe measurements, not vendor-advertised speeds, and update as new samples arrive.

Can I test MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 and Z.ai: GLM 4.5 Air with the same API?

Yes. Use the same OpenAI-compatible TrustedRouter base URL and API key, then change only the model id between moonshotai/kimi-k2.6 and z-ai/glm-4.5-air. This makes side-by-side evals possible without maintaining two provider integrations.