Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Llama 4 Maverick

Anthropic · US  |  Meta · US · Updated June 2026

Quick verdict

Pick Claude Haiku 4.5 for fastest claude model or low-latency, high-volume api calls. Pick Llama 4 Maverick for open weights, 1m context or strong image + text understanding. Choose Llama 4 Maverick if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Claude Haiku 4.5 if you want a managed API.

Claude Haiku 4.5 (Anthropic) and Llama 4 Maverick (Meta) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Claude Haiku 4.5 is anthropic's fastest, most compact model — built for speed and volume. Llama 4 Maverick is meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.

Key differences at a glance

Side-by-side specs

SpecClaude Haiku 4.5Llama 4 Maverick
ProviderAnthropic (US) Meta (US)
Released2025 April 2025
Context window200K (~300 pages) 1M (~1,500 pages)
Price (in/out)$1/$5 per 1M tokens Open weight (self-host / free)
Open weight?No — API only Yes — self-hostable
Modalitiestext, image, code text, image, code
SWE-Bench VerifiedNot published Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1MNot published Not published

Who wins what

Fastest Claude model

Claude Haiku 4.5

A core design strength of Claude Haiku 4.5.

Low-latency, high-volume API calls

Claude Haiku 4.5

A core design strength of Claude Haiku 4.5.

Real-time interactions

Claude Haiku 4.5

A core design strength of Claude Haiku 4.5.

Open weights, 1M context

Llama 4 Maverick

A core design strength of Llama 4 Maverick.

Strong image + text understanding

Llama 4 Maverick

A core design strength of Llama 4 Maverick.

Self-hostable

Llama 4 Maverick

A core design strength of Llama 4 Maverick.

Lowest cost at scale

Llama 4 Maverick

At Open weight (self-host / free), it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.

Largest single-prompt input

Llama 4 Maverick

Its 1M window is about 5× larger, fitting roughly 1,500 pages in one prompt.

Which should you pick?

A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume

Llama 4 Maverick

At Open weight (self-host / free) it undercuts Claude Haiku 4.5, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.

Someone analysing very long documents or codebases

Llama 4 Maverick

Larger 1M window fits more in one prompt.

A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs

Llama 4 Maverick

Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Claude Haiku 4.5 is API-only.

Anyone whose priority is fastest claude model

Claude Haiku 4.5

It is specifically built for that.

Anyone whose priority is open weights, 1m context

Llama 4 Maverick

That is its strongest area.

Claude Haiku 4.5: where it fits

Anthropic's fastest, most compact model — built for speed and volume. Released 2025 by Anthropic, it is built for fastest Claude model, low-latency, high-volume API calls, real-time interactions, and cheapest Claude tier.

Its trade-offs are real: smallest context in the family (200K), and not for deep reasoning. At $1 in / $5 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.

Llama 4 Maverick: where it fits

Meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments. Released April 2025 by Meta, it is built for open weights, 1M context, strong image + text understanding, self-hostable, and 400B MoE, 17B active.

Its trade-offs: needs serious hardware to self-host, and trails closed frontier on reasoning. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.

The bottom line for this matchup

The defining split here is open vs. closed. Llama 4 Maverick gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Claude Haiku 4.5 gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.

Want both Claude Haiku 4.5 and Llama 4 Maverick without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.

See pricing

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Haiku 4.5 or Llama 4 Maverick better for coding?

Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Claude Haiku 4.5 leans toward fastest claude model while Llama 4 Maverick leans toward open weights, 1m context, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.

Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Llama 4 Maverick?

Llama 4 Maverick is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Claude Haiku 4.5 is API-metered at $1/$5 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.

Which has the bigger context window?

Llama 4 Maverick — 1M vs 200K, about 5× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.

Can I use both Claude Haiku 4.5 and Llama 4 Maverick together?

Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Haiku 4.5, Llama 4 Maverick and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.

Which is newer, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Llama 4 Maverick?

Claude Haiku 4.5 — released 2025, about 6 months after Llama 4 Maverick.

Related comparisons

Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.