Alibaba Qwen QwQ 32B vs Meta Llama 4 Maverick
Detailed comparison for LLMs
On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Meta Llama 4 Maverick is the more secure of the two: Qwen QwQ 32B scores 40.0% and Llama 4 Maverick scores 27.7% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better).
Head-to-Head Overview
Llama 4 Maverick is the overall winner in this comparison!
Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)
ASR for Alibaba Qwen QwQ 32B vs Meta Llama 4 Maverick. Green marks the safer model on each metric.
Overall (ASR)
TAP Attack Method (ASR)
Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)
Zero-Shot (ASR)
Key Highlights
- Meta Llama 4 Maverick has a lower Overall (ASR).
- Meta Llama 4 Maverick has a lower TAP Attack Method (ASR).
- Meta Llama 4 Maverick has a lower Crescendo Attack Method (ASR).
- Meta Llama 4 Maverick has a lower Zero-Shot (ASR).
Security Profile
Outward is better on every axis.
Frequently asked questions
Is Alibaba Qwen QwQ 32B or Meta Llama 4 Maverick more secure?
On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Meta Llama 4 Maverick is the more secure of the two: Qwen QwQ 32B scores 40.0% and Llama 4 Maverick scores 27.7% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better).
What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Qwen QwQ 32B vs Llama 4 Maverick?
Qwen QwQ 32B has a 40.0% ASR and Llama 4 Maverick has a 27.7% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.
How were Qwen QwQ 32B and Llama 4 Maverick 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.