Alibaba Qwen 7-72BB vs Zhipu AI GLM-4.6

Detailed comparison for LLMs

AlibabaZhipu AI

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Alibaba Qwen 7-72BB is the more secure of the two: Qwen 7-72BB scores 36.5% and GLM-4.6 scores 39.0% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.

Head-to-Head Overview

Qwen 7-72BB is the overall winner in this comparison!

Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)

ASR for Alibaba Qwen 7-72BB vs Zhipu AI GLM-4.6. Green marks the safer model on each metric. Only the overall score is available for estimated models.

Overall (ASR)

Qwen 7-72BB
36.5%
GLM-4.6
39.0%

TAP Attack Method (ASR)

Qwen 7-72BB
GLM-4.6
100.0%

Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)

Qwen 7-72BB
GLM-4.6
100.0%

Zero-Shot (ASR)

Qwen 7-72BB
9.5%
GLM-4.6
100.0%

Key Highlights

  • Alibaba Qwen 7-72BB has a lower Overall (ASR).
  • Alibaba Qwen 7-72BB has a lower Zero-Shot (ASR).

Security Profile

Outward is better on every axis.

OverallTAPCrescendoZero-Shot
Qwen 7-72BB
GLM-4.6
Full security profile
Alibaba Qwen 7-72BB
Full security profile
Zhipu AI GLM-4.6

Frequently asked questions

Is Alibaba Qwen 7-72BB or Zhipu AI GLM-4.6 more secure?

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Alibaba Qwen 7-72BB is the more secure of the two: Qwen 7-72BB scores 36.5% and GLM-4.6 scores 39.0% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.

What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Qwen 7-72BB vs GLM-4.6?

Qwen 7-72BB has a 36.5% ASR and GLM-4.6 has a 39.0% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.

How were Qwen 7-72BB and GLM-4.6 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.

Related Comparisons