BoilerPrompt

The best AI app builders

Four tools that turn a written spec into a running full-stack app, ranked by how far they get before you have to open the code.

Some links are affiliate links, marked with an arrow. They never change what you pay, and they never affect which tools we recommend — see our disclosure.

Picks last checked . Jump to: Lovable, Bolt, Replit Agent, v0

An AI app builder starts from nothing. You describe an application — pages, data model, who can log in — and it generates a working project with a live preview, usually with hosting and a database a click away. That is a different job from an AI coding assistant, which edits a repo you already have.

The thing nobody tells you is that these tools are far more sensitive to prompt structure than assistants are. A one-line request produces a generic shell you then spend twenty messages reshaping, and most of them meter usage, so the reshaping is what costs you. A complete opening spec — screens, data model, roles, states, styling direction — is the single biggest quality lever available.

Each pick links to its full prompt library, including the landing page and section prompts that tend to be the first thing people build.

How these were ranked

Ranked on how complete the generated app is before hand-editing: whether auth and a real database are first-class, whether you can edit the generated files directly, whether deploys and hosting are included, and how gracefully the tool handles a follow-up request that changes scope. Preview quality matters too — you cannot judge a dashboard that renders empty.

1. Lovable

Best for full-stack apps that need auth and a real database

Lovable is the most complete of these when the app has users, roles, and persisted data. Supabase integration is first-class rather than bolted on, so login, row-level security, and real tables show up early instead of being retrofitted. That also sets the prompt shape: declare which pages require a session and what each role can see in your first message, because adding auth later means rewriting protected routes and policies across every table.

What it does well

  • Supabase-backed auth and database treated as part of the product, not an integration afterthought
  • Handles multi-page apps with roles and permissions better than the others here
  • Good at holding a design direction across screens once you state it

Where it falls down

  • Less file-level exposure than Bolt, so hand-fixing generated code is more awkward
  • Vague debugging prompts ("it's broken") often restyle things you liked — paste the exact error

Pricing: Free tier with a daily message allowance; paid plans priced by monthly credits.

Try Lovable

Prompts to try in Lovable

All 34 Lovable prompts

2. Bolt

Best when you want the whole project, editable file by file

Bolt runs your entire project inside a WebContainer — a Node environment in the browser tab — so npm installs, the dev server, and a terminal all execute right there with no local setup. The generated file tree sits open next to the preview, which makes it the best pick if you are comfortable reading source and want to fix things by hand mid-conversation. The catch is the runtime: it cannot run Postgres or other native binaries, so declare where data lives in your first prompt or you will get a mock layer you did not ask for.

What it does well

  • Full project output — frontend, server routes, config — with every file directly editable
  • No local setup at all; the dev server and terminal run in the tab
  • Fixes precise pasted errors in a single turn, reliably

Where it falls down

  • The browser runtime cannot run native services, so persistence needs Supabase or memory
  • Meters by tokens, and late scope changes trigger expensive wholesale rewrites

Pricing: Free daily token allowance; paid plans buy larger monthly token budgets.

Try Bolt(20% off)

Prompts to try in Bolt

All 34 Bolt prompts

3. Replit Agent

Best for going from idea to deployed and hosted in one place

Replit Agent's advantage is that the whole lifecycle lives in one environment: it writes the app, runs it on a real Linux container, provisions a database, and deploys it to a URL without you leaving the tab. Because it is a real container rather than a browser runtime, it can run services the others cannot. It is the most forgiving pick if you do not want to think about infrastructure at all, and the least precise if you have strong opinions about project structure.

What it does well

  • Real container, so native dependencies and background services actually run
  • Deployment and hosting are part of the flow rather than a separate step
  • Handles long-running or scheduled work that browser-based builders cannot

Where it falls down

  • Generated project structure is opinionated and not always what you would have chosen
  • You are on Replit's hosting unless you export and move the project yourself

Pricing: Paid plans with monthly usage credits; agent runs and always-on deployments consume them.

Replit Agent prompts

Prompts to try in Replit Agent

All 26 Replit Agent prompts

4. v0

Best for UI-first work you will paste into an existing project

v0 is the odd one out and deliberately so. It is strongest at generating React components and full page layouts you export into a codebase you already control, rather than owning the whole application. If your app already exists and you need a settings page, a dashboard shell, or a pricing section that matches your design system, v0 gets you there faster than the full-project builders. If you need auth, a schema, and a deployed backend, it is the wrong tool.

What it does well

  • Best raw UI quality of the four, especially with shadcn/ui and Tailwind conventions
  • Output is a component you paste into an existing repo, no lock-in
  • Iterating on a single screen is fast and cheap compared with regenerating a project

Where it falls down

  • Not a full-stack builder — no real backend, auth, or database story
  • You own the integration work of dropping components into your codebase

Pricing: Free tier with monthly credits; paid plans scale the credit allowance.

v0 prompts

Prompts to try in v0

All 34 v0 prompts

Write the whole spec in the first message

This is the highest-leverage habit with every builder here. Before you hit enter, list the screens, the data model, who can log in and what each role sees, the empty and error states, and a styling direction. Builders regenerate aggressively when scope shifts, and most of them meter usage, so a complete opening brief is cheaper than five rounds of "actually, also add". Treat the first prompt like a ticket you would hand a contractor, not like the start of a conversation.

Declare persistence before you build anything

Where data lives is the decision that is most expensive to change later. Say it explicitly in the first prompt: in memory, in localStorage, or in a real database through the tool's integration. Bolt's browser runtime cannot run Postgres at all. Lovable expects Supabase. Replit provisions its own. Leave it unstated and you get whatever the tool guesses, which is usually a mock layer you will rip out.

Ask for seed data

The live preview is the whole point of these tools, and an empty table tells you nothing. Ask for realistic seed records and deterministic mock generators so every list, chart, and detail view renders populated. Layout bugs and spacing problems hide behind blank states, and you will not catch them until real data arrives.

When the builder stalls, switch to an assistant

There is a point in every project where the builder's conversational loop becomes slower than editing code directly — usually once the app has real complexity and each change risks breaking something that already works. Export the project, open it in Cursor or Claude Code, and prompt against the actual files from there. Knowing when to make that switch is most of the skill.

Common questions

What is the difference between an AI app builder and an AI coding assistant?

A builder starts from an empty project and generates a whole application from a description, usually with a preview and hosting. An assistant edits a codebase you already have, file by file, and leaves a diff. Builders take a product spec; assistants take a scoped change request.

Can AI app builders make production apps?

They can produce something real users touch, and plenty of small products run on them. What they do not give you for free is the boring production work: proper error handling, access control you have actually audited, migrations, monitoring, and a test suite. Expect to export the project and finish that part with an assistant.

Which one is cheapest?

All four have a free tier, and all four meter by usage under different names — messages, tokens, or credits. The real cost driver is not the plan, it is how many times you regenerate. A complete first prompt is worth more than any pricing difference between them.

Do I own the code they generate?

Yes with all four, and all four let you export or push to a git repo. The practical lock-in is not the code, it is the integrations — a Lovable app wired to Supabase or a Replit app on Replit hosting takes work to move, even though the source is yours.

Narrow it down

Lovable vs v0The best AI coding assistantsThe best AI website builders