Benchmarks
Bolt vs v0 (2026): Benchmarked Across 6 Axes
Bolt and v0 scored across BuilderProof's six axes in July 2026. v0 finishes 47/60, Bolt 45/60, and they split the axis wins. Here is the per-axis scorecard, with every score cited.
8 min read78
Author
BuilderProof editorial team
The BuilderProof editorial team maintains open, reproducible, community-editable benchmarks of AI app builders. We score documented capabilities against a public methodology and cite vendor primary sources for every claim.
Benchmarks
Lovable vs Bolt vs Replit (2026): 6-Axis Leaderboard
Lovable, Bolt, and Replit scored on BuilderProof's six reproducible axes in 2026. The three pairwise results form a near-cycle, not a clean 1-2-3. See who wins each row.
11 min read95
Benchmarks
Replit vs Lovable (2026): Benchmarked Across 6 Axes
On BuilderProof's six-axis rubric, Replit edges Lovable 45 to 44 in 2026. Replit wins first-build stability, deployment breadth, and default auth posture; Lovable wins code portability and front-end output quality. A reproducible, documentation-sourced head-to-head.
9 min read133
Benchmarks
Replit vs Bolt (2026): Benchmarked Across 6 Axes
On BuilderProof's six-axis rubric, Replit and Bolt tie 44 to 44 in 2026. Replit wins first-build stability and deployment breadth; Bolt wins output coherence and default-on credential hygiene. A reproducible, documentation-sourced head-to-head.
8 min read71
Methodology
Proposing an Auth and Access-Control Posture axis for AI app builders (July 2026)
A proposed community-editable BuilderProof axis scoring how well the app an AI builder generates protects sign-in and per-row data access. Five 20-point sub-axes, a fixed protocol, and a provisional documentation-based cohort table for July 2026.
8 min read82
Methodology
Iteration Fidelity: A Proposed BuilderProof Axis for How AI App Builders Handle Follow-Up Edits (v2 Axis Proposal, July 2026)
First-build scores rate one generation. Most real work is the follow-up edit. We propose iteration fidelity: a five-part rubric, a repeatable protocol, and a provisional July 2026 cohort table.
10 min read84
Methodology
Code-portability: a v2 axis proposal (June 2026)
We are proposing a fifth BuilderProof axis to score whether an AI app builder ships code that can leave the platform. Five sub-axes, 0 to 100, provisional cohort scores included.
18 min read120
methodology
Sunsetting binary 'first-build success' from BuilderProof's H2 2026 rankings (and what replaces it)
Effective with the H2 2026 ranking, BuilderProof retires binary 'first-build success' as a scored axis. The signal saturated across the seven-builder cohort. It becomes a precondition (must pass to be ranked) and the rank weight moves to time-to-first-functional-build, measured as p50 and p90 over six trials on the v1 prompt set.
8 min read99
lab-notes
Deploy quality: why two Lighthouse runs disagree (2026)
Two Lighthouse runs on the same deployed AI-builder output rarely return the same score, and that is the most-contested observation in the lab notebook for the four June 2026 BuilderProof axes. This note documents the variance phenomenon, the reproducibility protocol the next iteration will adopt, and where median-of-five runs out of road. No score from the published table is changed.
15 min read116
Methodology
First-build stability: a v2 axis proposal (June 2026)
Proposing first-build stability as the fifth BuilderProof axis: the fraction of OQ-7 prompts that complete without manual intervention. Failure-mode taxonomy, measurement protocol, scoring rubric and open questions, dated June 20, 2026.
9 min read112
Methodology
How We Benchmark AI App Builders: The BuilderProof Methodology v1
The BuilderProof methodology v1, dated June 19, 2026, in full: four axes, the OQ-7 test brief, environment standards, scoring weights, reproducibility steps, the operator disclosure, and the v2 open questions. This is the rubric that produces every June 2026 BuilderProof score.
9 min read119
Agency suitability
Agency-suitability benchmark: whitelabel, MCP and API surface (June 2026)
Agencies build for clients, which changes what matters: can you remove the builder's branding, drive it programmatically, integrate via a stable API and export the code you ship? We scored seven builders on whitelabel, MCP support, API surface and portability. Totalum and Bolt.new led on the programmatic axes thanks to broad API and MCP surfaces; the consumer-first builders scored well on output but lagged on whitelabel and export. This page documents each capability, verified hands-on against current docs.
6 min read84