Lovable vs Bolt: which one should you choose to create without coding?

Lovable or Bolt (bolt.new) to create an app without coding? If you are looking for “lovable vs bolt”, you especially want to know which one to choose quickly and then understand why.

The quick choice (to decide in 30 seconds)

You can decide with a simple rule.

Choose Lovable (lovable.dev) if your priority is to build a product quickly, with a good level of design, in no-code or low-code mode, and with a clear prototyping path to a usable application.

Choose Bolt (bolt.new) if you want an approach that's closer to an AI coding tool, with code generation, execution, and continuous iteration, like an in-browser app development lab.

To avoid regrets, just ask yourself this question at the start. Do you mainly want to pilot a product-oriented “app generator”, or do you want to control code, even if you don't want to write everything?
‍

The substantive difference between Lovable and Bolt

In many comparisons, Lovable vs Bolt are presented as two similar tools. In reality, they have something in common and a big difference.

The common point is the promise. You describe what you want, the tool offers an interface, screens, and logic. Then you iterate until you get a web application, sometimes a base for mobile applications, and you deploy.

The difference is the center of gravity.

Lovable (lovable.dev) is more like a AI App Builder that helps you design and build an app and then connect it to your workflow and integrations. Lovable also highlights connectors, including personal connectors via MCP, to inject context and automate actions.

Bolt (bolt.new) is more like a development agent. It focuses on “prompt, run, edit, deploy.” In other words, you are in a loop of code generation, execution, correction, and deployment.

If you keep that in mind, the whole comparison becomes easier.
‍

Lovable vs Bolt comparison in a nutshell

If you are non-tech and you especially want to release an MVP

In this case Lovable is often more comfortable. The “idea, prototype, app” path is more natural. You are looking for simplicity, speed, and a good design base. You also want to limit technical choices at the beginning.

Bolt may work, but you'll get to “code” topics more quickly, even in low-code. It's perfect if you accept this diaper and if you like to tinker, live coding.

If you are tech, or you work with a dev

Bolt is getting very attractive. You iterate like in app development, but with AI support. You generate code, you test it, you fix it, you plug in GitHub to version, and you keep maximum flexibility.

Lovable is still useful, especially if your priority is product, UX, prototyping, and a fast integration workflow. But when you want fine control and an architecture that feels like a classic project, Bolt takes the edge.

If your project has a more serious back-end

Neither Lovable nor Bolt always replaces a real back end. The most effective is often a hybrid.

You use Lovable or Bolt for the front and the product logic. Then you plug in a back-end no-code like Supabase for the API and the database, or Airtable To get started quickly on a simple database. Then you migrate to a more solid base if scalability becomes critical.

The nuance is the path. Lovable pushes you more easily towards structured integrations and a product-oriented workflow. Bolt more easily pushes you towards a dev logic, with freer technical choices.
‍

Lovable (lovable.dev) explained simply

Lovable is an AI tool focused on creating applications. You pilot it with text. It offers you an interface. You are correcting. You're rehearsing. You are progressing very quickly on design and prototyping.

What Lovable does very well

Lovable shines when you want:

A clean design base from the start. This is essential on a web application oriented to conversion or daily use.

A simple iteration loop. You describe what is wrong, the tool adjusts. You stay in speed, responsiveness and speed.

A clear integration path. Lovable talks a lot about connectors, with three levels: shared connectors, personal connectors via MCP, and any API. It helps to connect a CRM, an internal tool, a ticket system, or an n8n automation.

Team collaboration. On no-code or low-code projects, it's often the difference between an isolated prototype and a real product.

What Lovable asks you to watch out for

Like any app builder, Lovable can make everything seem simple. In fact, you should keep an eye on:

The quality of the code if you are going to maintain it for a long time. Lovable offers a code mode, which helps when you need to get back in control.

Scalability as soon as business logic becomes dense. The more rules you add, the more architecture matters.

SEO if you are aiming for real traffic on a public web application. Depending on the structure and the rendering, the limits can come quickly. We'll come back to that below.
‍

Bolt (bolt.new) explained simply

Bolt (bolt.new) is an in-browser development agent. The idea is straightforward. You ask, it generates, it executes, you modify, you deploy. Sounds like an AI-driven dev cycle.

What Bolt does very well

Bolt is very good at:

Flexibility. Do you want to change the structure, add a library, adjust a component? You are closer to a classic code project.

Speed in “build mode”. When you know what you want, you can iterate quickly, test, fix, and deliver.

The dev workflow. Bolt highlights integrations like GitHub, and even bricks like Figma or Expo depending on the case. For a lot of teams, it's decisive.

“Dev-first” projects. If you're already using Cursor or Windsurf, Bolt becomes an accelerator. You build in Bolt and then refine in Cursor or Windsurf when you want more control.

What Bolt wants to watch

Bolt uses a cost model that is often linked to tokens. It's changing the way we work. As your project grows, the context increases, and the more each iteration can cost. This is a key point in pricing and cost.

Bolt also requires discipline. If you iterate without framing, you can get a product that works but is hard to maintain. Code generation should remain at the service of the workflow, not the other way around.
‍

How to choose according to your use case

Instead of reasoning “tool A vs tool B”, it is better to reason “use case”.

Case 1: landing + mini web app

Objective: a lightweight web application, a form, a simple member area, a basic dashboard.

Lovable is often a great choice here. You gain in simplicity, you quickly get on the design, and you come up with a credible prototype.

Bolt also works great if you want a more customized look, or if you already know that you are going to push customization further.

Case 2: internal tool connected to your tools

Objective: a back-office tool, an app for the team, automations, a real workflow.

Lovable can be very good thanks to its personal MCP integrations and connectors. You can connect your sources, provide context, and automate actions.

Bolt is great if the internal tool needs to stick to a code architecture, or if you want to version and collaborate like in classic dev with GitHub.

Case 3: app data, database, API, business logic

Objective: advanced CRUD, filtering, roles, and lots of data.

In this case, the question isn't just Lovable vs Bolt. The real question is “what back-end.”

A simple and effective approach:

You are starting with Airtable if you want to go very quickly on an accessible database, perfect for prototyping.

You switch to Xano when scalability becomes important, when you want a robust API, and when the back-end becomes a product in itself.

Then you use Lovable or Bolt for the front, the design, and the iteration.

Case 4: mobile applications

Let's be clear. Lovable and Bolt can help build a base, but for “serious” mobile applications, specialized tools like FlutterFlow or Adalo are often more suitable.

FlutterFlow is very strong if you are a Flutter user and want a powerful mobile app.

Adalo is very fast for a simple, no-code mobile app.

In an honest comparison, Lovable vs Bolt is primarily about creating web applications. For mobile, you think of a “hybrid stack” more quickly. For example: design and screens in Lovable, logic and API in Xano, mobile in FlutterFlow.
‍

Simplicity, speed, flexibility: what you feel every day

The marketing sheets talk about performance and speed. What matters is your day-to-day experience.

Simplicity

Lovable is often easier to manage for a product or marketing profile. You can move forward without asking too many technical questions.

Bolt is simple if you are comfortable with dev logic. Otherwise, you will quickly feel that you are touching on choices that resemble the code.

The speed of iteration

If your priority is to test ideas, Lovable is very pleasant. You iterate on UX, content, screens, and you quickly arrive at a coherent product.

If your priority is to build a solid technical base by moving fast, Bolt can go really fast too. It's great when you know what you want, and you want to translate it into code generation.

Flexibility and personalization

That's often where Bolt gets the upper hand. The more you want to customize, the happier you are to be close to the code.

Lovable remains flexible, but you are more dependent on the framework of the tool and its patterns. In exchange, you gain speed and consistency.
‍

Code quality and maintenance: the subject that comes after the prototype

The classic pitfall in no-code and low-code is to judge a tool only for the first few hours.

To make a good Lovable vs Bolt choice, look at month 2, not just day 2.

With Bolt, you often get code that's closer to a standard project, especially if you're versioning and refactoring on time. This helps with maintenance, updates, and collaboration with a dev team.

With Lovable, you get a very fast execution on the product side. For maintenance, the key point is your ability to take control when necessary, via code mode, and to structure your back-end correctly.

A simple best practice: as soon as your app exceeds 10 screens and 3 roles, impose a mini architecture. Even with vibe coding, you save time.
‍

Deployment and integration: what happens after “it works”

Creating an app is one thing. Deploying and integrating it into your stack is another.

With Bolt, the story is very focused on “deploy quickly”. This is consistent with the idea of a full-stack agent in the browser.

With Lovable, the story is more “connecting to the right place.” Connectors, MCP servers, APIs. This is very useful if you need to connect an app to your existing tools, or if you want to automate part of the workflow.

In either case, ask these three questions before choosing:

Where does your data live? Airtable, Xano, other database.

How do you deal with secrets? API keys, Stripe, etc.

How do you manage the update? Who deploys, when, and how you avoid regressions.
‍

SEO for web applications: Lovable vs Bolt, who really helps?

SEO is often the blind spot for AI tools. However, if your web application needs to capture traffic, you need to think about it from the start.

SEO depends less on the name of the tool, and more on your architecture: rendering, performance, page structure, route management, and tag management.

What to aim for:

Indexable pages. Ideally, a rendering that helps engines understand the content.

Performance. Loading speed, page weight, stability.

A clear structure. Headlines, metas, accessible pages, clean roads.

Bolt, because it's more code-centric, can be easier to adapt to a technical SEO strategy if you know what you're doing.

Lovable, because it is more app generator oriented, can move on the product very quickly. But as soon as SEO becomes a major issue, you will often have to define your structure sooner.

If you come from no-code, compare with Bubble. Bubble is sometimes more mature for complex public web apps, but it can require real performance and structure work. The advantage of Lovable and Bolt is the iteration and the speed to converge to the right version.
‍

Prices and pricing: credits vs tokens, how to reason

Rates are not only compared in euros per month. They compare in iteration costs.

Lovable works with a logic of credits according to the plans, with a monthly part and a daily part depending on the offers.

Bolt highlights a logic related to tokens, with limits according to plans, often with a daily and monthly dimension.

The consequence is simple.

If you iterate a lot on a rapidly growing project, your cost may increase more quickly on a token model, because the context swells.

If you mostly iterate on the product, and you do short cycles, a credit model can be more predictable.

In all cases, pricing must be linked to your workflow. Test on a real feature, not on a todo list.
‍

Next step: go from a tool to a product that lasts over time

When your Lovable or Bolt (bolt.new) prototype starts to block, it's not a failure, it's often a signal that you're moving from prototyping to a real product. At this stage, the challenge is no longer just speed, but code quality, scalability, performance, deployment, and a clean iteration workflow.

At Scroll, we intervene precisely at that moment. We take over your Lovable (lovable.dev) or Bolt project, we secure the architecture, we improve customization and flexibility, then we set up a robust back-end with a reliable database. Very often, We recommend Supabase to accelerate properly (auth, database, database, storage, API), or Xano according to your constraints. The objective is simple: keep the speed of AI tools, without suffering the limits of no-code or low-code when the app grows, and allow you to deliver a V2 that is stable, maintainable and ready to evolve.