The four-way comparison
| Decision factor | v0 (Vercel) | Lovable | Bolt.new | Archiet |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary output | React/Tailwind UI components | Full-stack web app in browser | Full-stack web app in browser | Downloadable production ZIP (15 stacks) |
| Backend + database | Not generated | Generated (Node-centric) | Generated (Node-centric) | Flask, FastAPI, Django, NestJS, Laravel, Go, Java, Rails, .NET, SAP, Salesforce, Dynamics, Tauri |
| Architecture model | None — prompt per component | Implicit in session | Implicit in session | Formal genome (ArchiMate-aligned IR) |
| ADRs + traceability | None | None | None | MADR v4 ADRs + traceability matrix in every ZIP |
| Compliance docs (SOC 2, GDPR, HIPAA) | None | None | None | Generated from architecture when overlays enabled |
| Multi-tenant isolation defaults | N/A | Varies — review carefully | Varies — review carefully | Built-in: workspace/org filters, httpOnly JWT cookies |
| Auth token storage | N/A | Often localStorage — verify | Often localStorage — verify | httpOnly cookies (web), secure store (mobile) |
| Migrations | N/A | Varies | Varies | Alembic / stack-native migrations — never bare db.create_all() |
| Iteration speed | Fastest for single components | Fast for full-app prompts | Fastest browser loop | 60–120s generation; then you own the ZIP |
| Best stage | Custom UI inside existing project | Founder validating product shape | Demo / stakeholder walkthrough | Production handoff, compliance, multi-stack |
When to pick each tool
Pick v0 when you need one excellent screen or component and already have a codebase to paste it into.
Pick Lovable when you want a working full-stack demo quickly and plan to rewrite or harden before production.
Pick Bolt when the browser iteration loop is the product — speed of "show something that works" beats depth of architecture.
Pick Archiet when:
- An engineering team (not just you) will maintain the codebase for 12+ months
- You need ADRs, traceability, or compliance evidence alongside code
- You may need the same product on Flask today and NestJS for a different client tomorrow
- An auditor, investor, or enterprise buyer will ask why each technical decision was made
The workflow that actually works
The pattern we see across teams:
- Bolt or Lovable — validate UX and product shape with stakeholders (days)
- Archiet — generate the production scaffold from a formal PRD/blueprint (hours)
- v0 + Cursor — customise UI components and line-by-line features inside the Archiet codebase (ongoing)
Throwing away the prototype is normal. Shipping the Archiet ZIP is the bet.
What Archiet adds that the other three do not
Every Archiet generation ships:
- Backend + frontend + mobile (when in scope) from one genome
docs/decisions/— ADR per material choicedocs/traceability/matrix.md— requirement → code mappingdocs/compliance/— DPIA, HIPAA, PCI, SOX when flaggedARCHITECTURE.md— consulting-grade headline doc (gated before delivery)- Quality + shippability gates — blocks placeholder secrets and CRITICAL defects
CTA
Compare honestly, then pick the right stage. When you are ready for production handoff, start at archiet.com/register — free plan, no credit card.
FAQ
Is Archiet a replacement for v0, Lovable, or Bolt?
No. Archiet replaces the three weeks of scaffolding after you know what you are building — auth, billing, migrations, compliance, docs. Many teams keep v0 or Cursor for daily editing inside the Archiet codebase.
Which tool is best for SaaS startups?
For a demo: Lovable or Bolt. For a codebase your first engineering hire will not curse: Archiet. The "best AI code generator for SaaS startups" answer depends on whether you mean prototype speed or production survivability.
Does Archiet generate frontend UI?
Yes — Next.js + shadcn pages from your screen manifest. v0 is still better for one-off bespoke components; Archiet is better for the full auth-to-settings surface area.