Capability comparison
Grouped by engineering layer, because that is where these products differ.
| Capability | BELA | Base44 |
|---|---|---|
| Application creation | ||
| Turns a plain-language description into a working application The capability all five products share. | BELA Yes — evidenced | Base44 Yes |
| Generates the user interface Screens, styling and design control. | BELA Yes | Base44 Yes |
| Generates a backend and a database A server side and a schema, not only a front end. | BELA Yes — evidenced | Base44 Yes |
| Authentication and user accounts in the generated app Sign-in, registration and per-user access. | BELA Yes | Base44 Yes |
| Third-party integrations Connecting the generated application to services you already use. | BELA Generated integration layer | Base44 Yes |
| Choice of target technology Whether the technology the application is generated in is a choice or a fixed stack. | BELA Yes — evidenced | Base44 Not documented |
| Application ownership | ||
| Download the generated source code Getting the code out as files you hold. | BELA Yes — evidenced | Base44 Yes |
| Run the application outside the vendor’s platform Whether the generated application runs independently of the service that made it. | BELA Yes — evidenced | Base44 Partial |
| Hold or export the application’s data Getting the records out, not only the code. | BELA You hold the database | Base44 Yes |
| Version history and restoring an earlier version Going back to what the project looked like before. | BELA Yes — evidenced | Base44 Yes |
| Engineering process | ||
| A planning step before code changes A mode that discusses or plans the change before anything is written. | BELA Yes — evidenced | Base44 Partial |
| A persisted plan or specification that survives the chat An artifact you can reopen, rather than a conversation you scroll back through. | BELA Yes — evidenced | Base44 Partial |
| A persisted model of the BUSINESS — entities, roles, relationships, rules Not a plan for the code: a model of how the business works, that the software is then engineered from. | BELA Yes | Base44 Not documented |
| Architecture or schema design as a distinct step before code Structure decided, and recorded, before implementation begins. | BELA Yes — evidenced | Base44 Partial |
| A dependency-resolved build order derived from the architecture Every component placed in an execution level, dependency cycles collapsed, before any code. | BELA Yes — evidenced | Base44 Not documented |
| Refuses to build while a contradiction in the requirements is unresolved Stopping, rather than generating something that cannot be right. | BELA Yes — evidenced | Base44 Not documented |
| Deterministic generation — the same description produces the same software Reproducibility, stated by the vendor. | BELA Yes — evidenced | Base44 Not documented |
| Runs with no external AI model configured Whether the engineering path depends on a model outside the product. | BELA Yes — evidenced | Base44 Not documented |
| Automated review of the generated code Security, quality and standards checks over what was produced. | BELA Partial | Base44 Yes |
| Detects a defect and applies the fix itself Automatic repair, as opposed to reporting the problem to you. | BELA Controlled rollout | Base44 Partial |
| Generates tests for your application Test artifacts delivered with the application. | BELA No | Base44 Yes |
| Production engineering | ||
| Hosting for the generated application A vendor-operated place to run what was generated. BELA delivers a source ZIP and you deploy it where you choose. | BELA Not offered — you self-host | Base44 Yes |
| Connect your own domain Documented custom-domain support for the running application. BELA has nothing hosted to attach a domain to. | BELA Not offered | Base44 Yes |
| Separate preview and production environments Somewhere to try a change that is not where your users are. | BELA Your own environments | Base44 Partial |
| Backups and restore for the application’s database Protecting the data the running application holds. | BELA No | Base44 Yes |
| Roll the live deployment back to an earlier release Reverting what your users are being served. | BELA Version rollback, not deployment | Base44 Yes |
| Monitoring or logs for the deployed application Seeing what the running application is doing. | BELA No | Base44 Yes |
| Governance and business control | ||
| Roles and permissions Who may do what, across a team. | BELA Yes — evidenced | Base44 Partial |
| Audit trail of who changed what, and when A record an auditor can read without asking anyone. | BELA Yes — evidenced | Base44 Yes |
| Approval workflow before a change ships A named approver standing between a change and your users. | BELA Yes — evidenced | Base44 Partial |
| Published compliance certifications (SOC 2, ISO 27001) Independently audited certifications, stated in the vendor’s own documentation. | BELA No | Base44 Yes |
- Yes — evidenced BELA implements this and its own engineering record carries the evidence.
- Controlled rollout Built and validated, deliberately not generally available yet.
- Partial Documented with a qualification the vendor states — set out beneath the table.
- Not documented The vendor’s own documentation was read on the date below and does not address it. It is not a statement that the capability is absent.
- BELA Assessed against BELA’s own implementation and engineering record. “Yes — evidenced” marks a capability with named certification tests behind it.
- Base44 Source: docs.base44.com, read 2026-09-19.
Comparisons describe publicly documented capabilities at the date shown. Where a vendor’s documentation establishes a capability, it is recorded as theirs. “Not documented” means their documentation does not address the question — it is not a statement that the capability is absent, and BELA claims no advantage from it.
How we compare
BELA and Base44 both turn a description of what you want into a working application with a backend and a database. That is the overlap, and it is a large one.
The questions below ask what happens either side of that: what is understood before code is written, what is checked afterwards, what you can take away with you, and what you can govern. Rows where both products answer the same way are left in, because a comparison that only lists differences is an argument.
What Base44’s documentation qualifies
Compliance is the strongest of the four products compared here: the documentation states SOC 2 Type II certification confirmed by independent audit, ISO 27001 certification, GDPR compliance with a data processing agreement on request, and PCI DSS-certified payment processing. BELA holds none of these today.
Version history can publish an earlier version to the live app while the current draft stays open — a rollback of what users are being served, which two of the other three do not document.
The security scan covers seven categories including exposed secrets, unauthenticated backend functions and code vulnerabilities; code vulnerability scanning requires the Builder plan or above, and findings are reviewed rather than applied automatically.
Database backups are documented for Elite (7 days) and Enterprise (30 days) and are not offered on lower tiers. Branches share live data — code is isolated, records are not.
The source-code export endpoint is documented as being in beta, with the vendor advising against depending on it in production.
Where BELA’s engineering model goes further
Each of these names what both products do before it says where BELA continues.
BothAll five products turn a description into a working application, and three of the four document a planning or discussion mode before code — Lovable saves the approved plan to a file in the project.
BELABELA models the business itself first: the entities, roles, relationships and rules it found, held as an append-only graph where every fact is traceable to the sentence it came from — and generation is blocked while a contradiction in that model is unresolved.
Evidenced: contradiction-blocking is covered by named tests that hold it across first generation, regeneration and across projects. BELA publishes no accuracy figure for what it extracts, because the figure it measures is not one worth quoting yet.
BothEvery product here generates a backend and a database, and Lovable documents designing architecture and schemas inside plan mode before building.
BELABELA derives a technology-neutral architecture from the business model and then a dependency-resolved build order — every component in exactly one execution level, cycles collapsed — as separate stages, each recording the business facts a decision was grounded in.
Evidenced: both stages carry named certification tests, including that the result is technology-neutral, complete, non-overlapping and deterministic end to end.
BothAll five generate from natural language. Bolt’s documentation addresses reproducibility directly, to say that language models are predictive rather than deterministic and can differ on the same prompt; the other three do not discuss it.
BELABELA ships with no AI model configured and the same description produces the same software. Where a provider is connected it may only enhance a result the deterministic path has already produced — and if it fails or is denied, that result stands.
Evidenced: determinism is asserted end to end for understanding, architecture, planning, the blueprint and code realization, with AI switched off in the tests themselves.
BothTeam governance is real in this market: Lovable documents a four-tier role system and an audit log with roughly 90 days of retention, Base44 an Enterprise audit-logs API, Bolt team and project roles.
BELABELA governs the engineering work itself — access is default-deny, changes that require approval pass through a recorded ledger naming who asked, who approved and whether it executed, and privileged actions are written to a write-once audit log.
Evidenced: the access tests are adversarial — an ungoverned endpoint fails closed, a deny overrides a role allow, and a newly added route cannot hide from the capability registry.
Self-review of generated code, automatic repair and runtime validation of the application BELA builds you are deliberately absent from this list. BELA’s own engineering record does not establish them as shipping capabilities, so they are not claimed here.
What these products do that BELA does not
Compliance certifications. Base44 documents SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, GDPR with a DPA on request and PCI DSS; Bolt documents SOC 2 Type II. BELA holds none of these today — they are on our roadmap and we will not describe them as anything else.
Hosting the application for you. All four host what they generate, with custom domains, and three document backups or monitoring for the running app. BELA does not host your application at all today — not in limited release, not for selected customers. You download the source and deploy it where you choose, and BELA reserves an address for the day hosting opens.
Tests for your application. Base44 documents a testing agent that generates browser tests from your app, and Lovable documents frontend, edge-function and browser testing. BELA’s generator does not emit tests for the application it builds you.
Automated review of the generated code. Base44, Bolt and Lovable each document a security review over the generated codebase — Lovable’s deep scan is described as an agentic code review. BELA runs a deterministic completeness check over the generated modules before delivery; it is not a security or standards review, and this page does not present it as one.
Environment separation. Emergent documents a preview and a production deployment that use completely different databases and never share data — bluntly stated, and stronger than the drafts and branches the others document.
What this is worth to you
We will not guess. What BELA saves you depends on what you are building, and that can be measured the moment you describe it.
- Describe your business in a sentence — BELA engineers a working application from it.
- The Engineering Estimator reads that real project: its entities, workflows and integrations.
- The Commercial Resolver prices the result in your region, with your tax rules applied.
Work it out with your own numbers
Enter what this project would cost you to build the usual way, and pick the BELA plan you would be on. Nothing here is sent anywhere, and nothing is saved.
- Plan used
- —
- Currency
- —
- Duration used
- —
This plan is priced on request, so BELA has no figure to put on the other side of the subtraction — and showing nothing is the honest answer, because showing zero would invent the largest possible difference out of a missing price. Talk to us and we will give you a real one.
How this is worked out
- Your current cost = (team size × months × cost per developer per month) + (QA per month × months) + (maintenance per month × 12).
- BELA plan cost = the plan’s own price, from BELA’s commercial configuration, multiplied by the months you entered — or by whole years where a plan is billed annually.
- Difference = your current cost − the BELA plan cost. The percentage is that difference as a share of your current cost.
- Nothing else is applied. No productivity multiplier, no assumed team reduction, no benchmark.
This is a scenario calculation based on the figures you entered and the plan you selected. It is not a quotation, a prediction or a guarantee, and it is not a promise that your engineering cost becomes the plan price — your own costs do not disappear on the day you adopt a tool. BELA has not assessed your project. A figure BELA stands behind comes from the Engineering Estimator reading a real project.
No assumed salaries, no invented multipliers, no percentage on this page. A figure appears only when it can be computed from your project.
Work out what this is worth on your own numbers
Your figures and your assumption — a scenario calculation, not a promise.