Compared on repository metadata · 20 September 2026
Jev vs laya
Both are decision models. What separates them is licence, architecture, size and whether anyone has checked the numbers. Only one of those is a matter of opinion.
Side by side
Rows marked with a dot are where the two genuinely differ. Everything here comes from each repository’s own metadata, read on 20 September 2026.
| Dimension | Jev | laya |
|---|---|---|
| Published by | TypeSafe | convaiinnovations |
| Weights | Hosted only | Open |
| Licence | Proprietary | apache-2.0 |
| Base model | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Architecture | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Parameters | Not disclosed | 421M |
| Local formats | Original weights only | Original weights only |
| Measured by us | Yes | No |
| Attention | Not on Hugging Face | 1,054 likes |
What actually separates them
The licence decides this one before any benchmark does
Jev is licensed Proprietary, which is not a commercial licence. If this is going into a product, laya is the only one of the two you can ship, and no accuracy figure changes that.
One you run, one you call
Jev is a hosted API: no weights to operate, but a key, a network round trip and a vendor version number in the path of every decision. laya is yours to run, which removes all three and hands you the operational cost instead.
One has been measured and one has not
We ran Jev on a frozen 2,000-decision split and published accuracy, calibration and a risk and coverage curve. Nobody outside its own authors has published anything comparable for laya. That is a gap in the evidence, not a verdict about the model.
What this page cannot tell you
Which one is more accurate on your traffic. Nothing above is a benchmark result, because for laya no independent benchmark exists. A comparison built from metadata narrows a shortlist. It does not close it. That takes your own data.
Find out what your data actually supports
We turn your historical decisions into a frozen test set, then tell you which model, which threshold, and how much of it you can safely automate.