How we test AI app builders
Last updated September 14, 2026
Every review, comparison and guide on this site follows the same method. If a piece does not meet it, it does not get published.
1. A real scenario with written requirements
We start from a concrete business, for example "a two-chair barber shop that needs online booking with deposits and SMS reminders". Before building, we write the requirements list the app must pass: user roles, data, payments, notifications, mobile use.
2. Same brief, every tool
In comparisons, each builder gets the identical starting prompt and the same follow-up budget. We do not hand-tune prompts for the tool we prefer.
3. Real costs
We record the plan used and the credits and money each build consumed. Prices in articles come from the vendor's pricing page on the date shown.
4. Everything is logged
We keep a test log for every piece: date, plan, prompts, time spent, what failed and how it was fixed. Screenshots on the site come from these sessions, not from vendor marketing material.
5. Scoring
| Criterion | Weight | What we check |
|---|---|---|
| Did it meet the requirements? | 35% | Share of requirement checks passed without hand-written code |
| Cost to a working app | 20% | Plan price plus credits consumed to reach a usable result |
| Reliability | 20% | Bugs, regressions after edits, data and auth issues |
| Ease for a non-developer | 15% | Could the business owner maintain it themselves? |
| Ownership and exit | 10% | Code export, custom domain, data export, vendor lock-in |
6. Re-tests
AI builders change monthly. We re-check pricing every quarter and re-run builds when a major version ships. Each article shows its last update date.
How AI is used here
We use AI tools to help run builds, outline, transcribe and proofread. The builds, measurements and verdicts come from our own testing, and every piece is reviewed by the editor before it goes live.