Anthropic vs Qwen (Alibaba)
Anthropic (30 models) vs Qwen (Alibaba) (43 models) - compared across composite scores, pricing, capabilities, and context windows.
Anthropic
View all modelsQwen (Alibaba)
View all modelsHead-to-Head: Anthropic vs Qwen (Alibaba) Model Matchups
Capability Comparison
| Capability | Anthropic | Qwen (Alibaba) | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
Vision | 30/30 | 26/43 | Anthropic |
Reasoning | 30/30 | 28/43 | Anthropic |
Function Calling | 30/30 | 41/43 | Qwen (Alibaba) |
JSON Mode | 29/30 | 42/43 | Qwen (Alibaba) |
Web Search | 30/30 | 0/43 | Anthropic |
Streaming | 30/30 | 43/43 | Qwen (Alibaba) |
Image Output | 0/30 | 0/43 | Tie |
Pricing Comparison
| Metric | Anthropic | Qwen (Alibaba) |
|---|---|---|
| Cheapest Input (per 1M tokens) | $0.050 Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) | $0.030 Qwen3.7 Flash |
| Cheapest Output (per 1M tokens) | $0.250 | $0.130 |
| Most Expensive Input (per 1M tokens) | $15.00 Claude Opus 4.1 | $4.00 Qwen3.8 Max Prime |
| Most Expensive Output (per 1M tokens) | $75.00 | $12.00 |
| Free Models | 0 | 0 |
| Max Context Window | 1.0M | 1.0M |
All Anthropic Models (30)
| Model | Score | Input $/M | Output $/M |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Fable 5.1 | 96 | $10.00 | $50.00 |
| Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) | 96 | $5.00 | $25.00 |
| Claude Fable 5 | 96 | $10.00 | $50.00 |
| Claude Fable 5 (batch) | 96 | $5.00 | $25.00 |
| Claude Opus 5.5 | 95 | $4.00 | $20.00 |
| Claude Opus 5 | 95 | $5.00 | $25.00 |
| Claude Opus 4.8 | 95 | $5.00 | $25.00 |
| Claude Opus 4.7 | 95 | $5.00 | $25.00 |
| Claude Opus 4.6 | 90 | $5.00 | $25.00 |
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 | 85 | $2.00 | $10.00 |
| Claude Sonnet 5 | 85 | $2.00 | $10.00 |
| Claude Sonnet 4.6 | 85 | $3.00 | $15.00 |
| Claude Opus 4.5 | 85 | $5.00 | $25.00 |
| Claude Opus 4.5 (batch) | 85 | $2.50 | $12.50 |
| Claude Opus 4.8 (batch) | 84 | $2.50 | $12.50 |
| Claude Opus 4.7 (batch) | 84 | $2.50 | $12.50 |
| Claude Opus 4.6 (batch) | 84 | $2.50 | $12.50 |
| Claude Opus 4.1 (batch) | 83 | $7.50 | $37.50 |
| Claude Sonnet 4.5 | 82 | $3.00 | $15.00 |
| Claude Opus 4.1 | 82 | $15.00 | $75.00 |
All Qwen (Alibaba) Models (43)
| Model | Score | Input $/M | Output $/M |
|---|---|---|---|
| Qwen3.5 397B A17B | 71 | $0.500 | $3.60 |
| Qwen3.5-122B-A10B | 70 | $0.260 | $2.08 |
| Qwen3.5-27B | 69 | $0.260 | $2.60 |
| Qwen3.5-35B-A3B | 69 | $0.140 | $1.00 |
| Qwen3.5-9B | 67 | $0.170 | $0.250 |
| Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 | 65 | $0.450 | $3.50 |
| Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 | 65 | $0.140 | $0.800 |
| Qwen3.8 Max Prime | 40 | $4.00 | $12.00 |
| Qwen3.8 Omni Flash | 40 | $0.150 | $0.470 |
| Qwen3.8 Max (0902) | 40 | $2.00 | $6.00 |
| Qwen3.8 Flash | 40 | $0.150 | $0.470 |
| Qwen3.8 27B | 40 | $0.150 | $1.88 |
| Qwen3.8 27B (batch) | 40 | $0.160 | $2.00 |
| Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | 40 | $2.00 | $6.00 |
| Qwen3.7 Flash | 40 | $0.030 | $0.130 |
| Qwen3.7 Plus | 40 | $0.320 | $1.28 |
| Qwen3.7 Plus (batch) | 40 | $0.230 | $0.920 |
| Qwen3.7 Max | 40 | $1.48 | $4.42 |
| Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 | 40 | $0.300 | $1.80 |
| Qwen3.6 Flash | 40 | $0.188 | $1.13 |
More Provider Comparisons
Compare any two AI providers side-by-side.
Anthropic's focused portfolio strategy yields a 55/100 average score across 13 models, compared to Qwen's 45/100 average across 50 models. This 10-point performance gap suggests Anthropic prioritizes quality over quantity, with their top model (Claude Sonnet 4.6 at 66/100) outperforming Qwen's best (Qwen3.5-Flash at 60/100) by 6 points.
Qwen's open source commitment translates to dramatically lower costs, with their cheapest option at $0.090 per 1M tokens versus Anthropic's minimum of $1.25 per 1M tokens. Additionally, Qwen offers 2 free models while Anthropic provides none, making Qwen's ecosystem 14x cheaper at the entry level for developers who can self-host.
Anthropic provides universal vision support (13/13 models, 100%) and strong reasoning coverage (11/13 models, 85%), while Qwen's larger portfolio shows significant gaps with only 19/50 models (38%) supporting vision and 24/50 models (48%) supporting reasoning. For production multimodal applications, Anthropic's consistent capability coverage across all models eliminates the need to cherry-pick specific models for different tasks.
Qwen's architecture prioritizes programmatic integration through function calling (45/50 models) while Anthropic balances both with 100% function calling support and 92% web search coverage (12/13 models). This makes Qwen ideal for API-driven applications and custom tool integration, while Anthropic better serves use cases requiring real-time information retrieval without external infrastructure.
Despite identical 1M token context limits, Anthropic's 36x higher minimum price and 66/100 top model score positions it for mission-critical applications where the 6-point performance advantage over Qwen's 60/100 justifies the premium. Qwen's pricing makes it optimal for high-volume processing, experimentation, and applications where 90% of Anthropic's performance at 6% of the cost delivers better ROI.