Pyyan / Compare / Docling vs GLM-OCR vs dots.ocr vs DeepSeek-OCR
Docling vs GLM-OCR vs dots.ocr vs DeepSeek-OCR
4 of 5OCR & Document AI · verified 13 Aug 2026
| Specification | Docling | GLM-OCR | dots.ocr | DeepSeek-OCR |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Summary | Document conversion aimed squarely at RAG pipelines. | Currently the top scorer on document parsing. | Small, multilingual, layout-aware. | Compresses pages into far fewer vision tokens. |
| OmniDocBench | ~88 | 94.6 | ~93 | ~92 |
| Open weights | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Handles | PDF, DOCX, PPTX, HTML | Tables, formulas, handwriting | Layout, 100+ languages | Dense text, tables |
| Licence | MIT | Open weights | MIT | MIT |
| Kind | Pipeline | Vision language model | Vision language model | Vision language model |
| Category | OCR & Document AI | OCR & Document AI | OCR & Document AI | OCR & Document AI |
| Official | IBM ↗ | Zhipu AI ↗ | Xiaohongshu ↗ | DeepSeek ↗ |
Highlighted rows are where these differ.
Docling
- Outputs a structured document model, not just text
- Integrates with LlamaIndex and LangChain
Best for feeding a retrieval pipeline.
GLM-OCR
- Ahead of Gemini 3 Pro and GPT-5.2 on the same benchmark
- 94.0 on OCRBench
Best for complex documents end to end.
dots.ocr
- Layout and content in one pass
- Strong for its size
Best for multilingual layout parsing.
DeepSeek-OCR
- Treats the page image as compressed context
- Notable for cost per page rather than raw accuracy
Best for long documents on a budget.