Moonshot AI Kimi K2-Thinking-0905 vs Alibaba Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking
Detailed comparison for LLMs
Moonshot AI Kimi K2-Thinking-0905 and Alibaba Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking are evenly matched at about 38.0% attack success rate (ASR) on Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark. One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.
Head-to-Head Overview
It's a close match between Kimi K2-Thinking-0905 and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking!
Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)
ASR for Moonshot AI Kimi K2-Thinking-0905 vs Alibaba Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking. Green marks the safer model on each metric. Only the overall score is available for estimated models.
Overall (ASR)
TAP Attack Method (ASR)
Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)
Zero-Shot (ASR)
Key Highlights
No specific highlights generated for this comparison.
Security Profile
Outward is better on every axis.
Frequently asked questions
Is Moonshot AI Kimi K2-Thinking-0905 or Alibaba Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking more secure?
Moonshot AI Kimi K2-Thinking-0905 and Alibaba Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking are evenly matched at about 38.0% attack success rate (ASR) on Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark. One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.
What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Kimi K2-Thinking-0905 vs Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking?
Kimi K2-Thinking-0905 has a 38.0% ASR and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking has a 38.0% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.
How were Kimi K2-Thinking-0905 and Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking tested?
Both were red-teamed with the HarmBench framework across zero-shot, TAP (Tree of Attacks with Pruning), and Crescendo multi-turn attacks, scored by Attack Success Rate.