ComparisonDernière mise à jour : 2026-07-29
Wan 2.6 vs Kling 2.5
Compare Alibaba Wan 2.6 and Kling 2.5: credits, FX/camera, audio, and best workflows.
Wan 2.6 — Idéal pour :
- +Creative FX and transitions
- +Budget text-to-video experiments
- +Voiceover-friendly drafts
- +Camera-controlled motion tests
Kling 2.5 — Idéal pour :
- +Social media content (TikTok, Reels)
- +Product showcases and ads
- +Budget-conscious professional teams
- +Content requiring audio narration
- +Multi-clip storytelling
| Feature | Alibaba | Kuaishou |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba | Kuaishou |
| Price | 3 credits/video | 2 credits/video |
| Duration | 5–15s | 5–10s variable |
| Resolution | 720p–1080p | 720p–1080p |
| Aspect Ratios | 16:9, 9:16, 1:1, 4:3, 3:4 | 16:9, 9:16, 1:1, 3:4, portrait, landscape |
| Native Audio | Yes | Yes |
| Référence première image | No | Yes |
| Référence dernière image | No | Yes |
| Base64 Support | Yes | Yes |
| Negative Prompt | Yes | Yes |
| Prompt Enhancement | Yes | No |
| Camera Control | Yes | No |
Les limites de Wan 2.6
- -Base64-oriented input workflow
- -No first/last frame refs like Kling
- -Less cinematic polish than Veo 3.1
- -Max 1080p (no 4K)
Les limites de Kling 2.5
- -Max 1080p (no 4K)
- -Portrait-optimized but less cinematic
- -Less accurate text rendering
- -Slightly less consistent physics
- -No reference image for identity
Prêt à créer ?
Essayez les deux modèles sur videobao — un abonnement, tous les modèles.