Which AI Coding Platform Actually Builds Shit Faster?

I've spent the last 6 months burning through credits on these AI platforms because the marketing claims got me hyped. Lovable says "20x faster," Bolt.new claims "10x speed," and everyone's throwing around numbers that sound too good to be true. Spoiler alert: they mostly are.

Here's what those speed claims actually mean, and why your first project will take way longer than advertised.

The Math Behind The Marketing

Yeah, generating a todo app in 5 minutes vs coding it in 8 hours is technically "100x faster." But that comparison is like saying a microwave is 1000x faster than a campfire for cooking dinner - technically true, completely useless context.

Here's what they don't tell you:

The Learning Tax: I spent 3 hours figuring out how to prompt Lovable correctly before getting anything decent. Lovable's prompt engineering guide helps, but the community examples show better patterns. Bolt.new took me 2 hours to understand why it kept generating the same broken auth flow. StackBlitz documentation barely covers the common issues. V0 was easiest to learn (30 minutes) but that's because it barely does anything. Tailwind CSS docs and React documentation are more helpful than V0's actual documentation.

The Iteration Hell: That first 5-minute app? It's basically a hello world with a database. Want to add user roles? Another 20 minutes and 3 credits. Need file uploads? Another 30 minutes and 5 credits. By the time you have something real, you've spent 2 hours and $20 in credits.

The Production Reality: Every single app these platforms generate needs major cleanup before real users can touch it. I've never deployed a generated app without spending at least 4 hours fixing security holes, performance issues, and bugs that only show up under load.

Where Each Platform Actually Excels (And Where They Suck)

Lovable: Fast Full-Stack, Terrible Customization
Lovable genuinely creates working full-stack apps faster than anything else. I can prompt "build a CRM" and get something that runs in 3 minutes. The visual editor lets me tweak the UI without burning more credits, which is nice. Lovable's documentation covers the basics, while user feedback on ProductHunt shows mixed production experiences. The Lovable community discussions reveal common pain points around customization.

But try adding anything beyond basic CRUD and you're fucked. I spent 2 hours trying to get Lovable to generate a simple file upload feature. It kept creating forms that looked right but saved files to /tmp instead of persistent storage. The error messages were useless: "Upload failed" with no indication why.

Bolt.new: Great Code Structure, Buggy Implementation
Bolt.new generates the cleanest code structure. I can actually read and modify what it produces, unlike the other platforms. The WebContainer preview is genuinely useful - you see your app running immediately. Bolt.new's GitHub repository shows active development, though user issues highlight common problems. StackBlitz's WebContainer docs explain the underlying technology better than Bolt's own documentation.

The problem? Nothing works on the first try. Authentication breaks if you refresh the page. Database connections timeout randomly. I've never had a Bolt.new app work in production without 3+ hours of debugging. Error handling is nonexistent - expect lots of uncaught promise rejections.

V0: Beautiful Components, Missing Everything Else
V0 creates gorgeous React components that actually follow accessibility standards. The Tailwind CSS output is clean and the responsive design usually works correctly. For frontend-only work, it's unbeatable.

But you're on your own for everything that makes an app useful. No authentication, no database, no API layer. I spent 4 hours building a backend for V0 components that took 2 minutes to generate. The math doesn't work.

Replit Agent: Understands Context, Destroys Budget
Replit Agent is the only platform that actually reads your existing code before making changes. It won't break your auth system when adding a new feature. The incremental approach actually works. Replit's official documentation explains the capabilities, while community pricing discussions reveal the true costs. Replit's documentation shows impressive demos that don't reflect typical user experiences.

Problem: it's expensive as hell. A single "add user profiles" request cost me $0.87. Building a full feature can easily hit $10-15. I burned through $50 in credits in one afternoon, and I'm not a heavy user.

The Shit They Don't Warn You About

These platforms love to show you the 5-minute demo. Here's what happens in the hours after that demo:

Debugging Generated Code Is Hell

Bolt.new loves hardcoding database URLs and API keys directly in components. I've found production database credentials committed to generated code three times. The error handling is either missing or catches everything and logs "Something went wrong."

Lovable generates code that works until you try to scale it. Database queries without indexes, N+1 problems everywhere, and memory leaks in React components that only show up after 30 minutes of use.

Integration Nightmare
Every platform generates apps in isolation. Need to connect to your existing user database? Good luck. V0 components assume you have a magical backend that matches their exact prop structure. Bolt.new generates APIs that don't match any real authentication system.

I spent 6 hours connecting a Lovable-generated app to our company's Okta authentication. The generated auth flow was completely incompatible with SAML. Had to rewrite the entire user management system.

The Prompt Engineering Tax
"Just describe what you want!" they say. Bullshit. Each platform has specific prompt patterns that work and others that generate garbage. I maintain a 20-item checklist for Lovable prompts because missing one detail means regenerating the entire app.

Replit Agent is the worst for this - the same prompt can cost $0.20 or $2.50 depending on how you phrase it. No documentation explains why.

The Speed vs. Not-Breaking-In-Production Trade-off

Want it fast? You're getting shit code. Every single platform optimizes for demo speed at the expense of everything that makes software maintainable:

Database Design That Makes DBAs Cry
Lovable creates databases with no foreign keys, missing indexes, and tables named things like "user_data_table_final_v2". I've seen it generate a users table with separate columns for "password", "password_hash", AND "encrypted_password" in the same schema.

Security That Would Make You Quit
Authentication flows that store JWTs in localStorage, SQL queries built with string concatenation, and API endpoints with no rate limiting. Bolt.new generated an admin panel where the admin check was literally if (user.name === "admin") in the frontend JavaScript.

Performance That Dies Under Load
Generated apps typically fail around 50 concurrent users. No caching, database queries in render loops, and images that aren't compressed. I've seen React components that make API calls on every keystroke with no debouncing.

Error Handling? What's That?
Bolt.new's favorite error handler: catch (error) { console.log("oops") }. Lovable shows users a generic "Something went wrong" for everything from network timeouts to database corruption.

The bottom line: these platforms are great for proving a concept works. If you plan to have real users, budget 4-8 hours of cleanup for every hour of generated code.

My take after wasting $200+: Use AI platforms like expensive wireframing tools. Generate something quickly to show stakeholders, get feedback, then rebuild it properly with real code. Don't try to ship the generated mess to production - you'll hate yourself later.

After burning $200+ testing these platforms and building the same apps multiple times, here's when each one doesn't completely suck.

Lovable: Great for Demos, Terrible for Everything Else

Lovable genuinely builds working full-stack apps faster than anything else. If you need to show investors a working prototype in 30 minutes, it's unbeatable. The visual editor lets you tweak things without burning more credits, which is nice.

When Lovable Actually Works:

• Demo day presentations: Build something impressive-looking in under an hour
• Internal business tools: CRUD apps for small teams who won't stress-test the code
• Proof of concepts: Show that an idea can work before building it properly

The visual editor is genuinely fast for simple changes. You can modify UI elements, add database fields, and tweak basic logic without regenerating the entire app.

When Lovable Becomes a Nightmare:

• Any business logic more complex than "save data, show data"
• Real-time features (it generates polling that kills your database)
• Custom integrations (good luck connecting to anything beyond the basic APIs)
• Scaling beyond 20-30 users (performance dies hard)

Bolt.new: Good Code Structure, Broken Everything Else

Bolt.new generates the cleanest, most readable code of any platform. You can actually understand what it built and modify it without losing your mind. The WebContainer preview is legitimately useful - you see your app running immediately.

When Bolt.new Doesn't Suck:

• Code scaffolding: Generate a solid app structure to build on
• Learning projects: The generated code is readable enough to learn from
• Quick demos: Build prototypes for stakeholder meetings

The big advantage is that you own the code. Unlike Lovable's proprietary platform, Bolt.new gives you actual React and Node.js files you can deploy anywhere.

When Bolt.new Ruins Your Day:

• Everything breaks on the first try (authentication, database connections, error handling)
• Token costs explode when debugging (asking it to fix bugs burns tokens fast)
• No understanding of production requirements (security, performance, scalability)
• Generated APIs are usually missing essential middleware

V0: Beautiful Components, You Handle the Hard Stuff

V0 generates gorgeous React components faster than any other platform. The Tailwind CSS output is clean, the responsive design usually works, and accessibility standards are followed. For pure frontend work, it's legitimately great.

When V0 Shines:

• Design systems: Generate consistent, professional-looking components
• Landing pages: Beautiful, responsive pages in minutes
• Component libraries: Clean, reusable React components
• UI mockups: Convert designs to working code quickly

The components V0 generates are actually maintainable. Unlike other platforms, I can read and modify V0's output without wanting to rewrite everything.

The V0 Reality Check:
You're building the entire backend yourself. Authentication, APIs, database, file uploads, payment processing - all on you. V0 makes beautiful forms, but you're writing the code that processes them.

This means V0 projects take 3x longer than advertised because the component generation (fast) is 20% of the work and the backend (slow) is 80%.

Replit Agent: Expensive But Actually Understands Code

Replit Agent is the only platform that reads your existing code before making changes. It won't break your authentication system when adding user profiles. It actually understands context, which is revolutionary compared to the other platforms.

When Replit Agent Doesn't Suck:

• Adding features to existing apps: Modifies code without breaking everything
• Bug fixes: Actually understands the codebase enough to fix issues properly
• Code refactoring: Improves existing code without rewriting from scratch
• Integration work: Connects to APIs while respecting existing patterns

The incremental approach is genuinely faster than regenerating entire applications. You can ask it to "add user roles" and it will modify just the necessary files.

The Replit Agent Problem:
It's expensive as hell. Every task costs real money, and complex requests can easily hit $5-10. I've burned $50 in a single afternoon building one feature.

The pricing model encourages you to be super specific in prompts, which means spending more time thinking about requests than actually coding.

Compared to Old-School No-Code Tools

Traditional no-code platforms like Bubble and Webflow are slower upfront but way more maintainable long-term:

Traditional No-Code Reality:

• Learning curve: 20+ hours to get proficient with platform-specific interfaces
• Template customization: 4-6 hours to modify pre-built apps for your needs
• Complex workflows: 8-15 hours for advanced business logic
• Third-party integrations: 6-10 hours to connect external services

AI platforms are genuinely 3-5x faster for initial development. But traditional no-code tools don't fall apart when you need to modify them 6 months later.

What Actually Works for Speed

After wasting money on every combination:

Use one platform, then rebuild: Generate a prototype with Lovable or Bolt.new to validate the idea, then build it properly with real code once you know what you're making.

V0 + hand-coded backend: Generate clean UI components, write your own APIs. This actually works but defeats the "no-code" promise.

Don't try to mix platforms: V0 components in a Bolt.new app is integration hell. Different styling frameworks, incompatible state management, and configuration nightmares.

Invest in prompt engineering: Each platform has magic words that work and others that generate garbage. Spend 3-4 hours learning the patterns - it pays off over time.

Budget for cleanup: Every generated app needs 4-8 hours of fixes before real users can touch it. Security, performance, error handling, accessibility - none of it works out of the box.

The fastest development approach is understanding what these platforms are actually good for (prototyping) versus what they're terrible at (production applications).

Bottom line: I've tested every combination, burned hundreds of credits, and built the same app dozens of times. The platforms that promise the fastest development often slow you down the most. Choose based on your actual use case, not the marketing hype - and always budget for the cleanup time they won't tell you about.