Bolt.new vs Floot

Both tools give beginners an autonomous build agent and a $25/mo entry plan if the free tier runs out. Bolt.new goes further with documented Figma and screenshot import, letting a newcomer start from a picture instead of a blank prompt and fix visual misses without touching code. On free tier caps, Bolt.new allows 300,000 tokens per day (1,000,000 tokens per month) while Floot caps at 100 Build Actions per day with 400 more rolling in per week, different meters that are hard to compare directly, but the design import capability is the difference a first-time builder actually notices.

Both tools export the full project as real code, Bolt.new as a full project and Floot as a runnable ZIP with run instructions, so that hard filter is satisfied either way. The other hard filter splits them: Bolt.new offers bidirectional GitHub sync, while Floot's GitHub sync is recorded as none. Both let you self-hostself-host - Run the software on your own servers instead of the vendor’s cloud. the generated output. On the backend, Bolt.new documents a bring-your-own Supabase integration that plugs into your own database, while Floot runs on a built-in proprietary stack you cannot swap out, a tradeoff engineers who want control over their own systems, not just their own code, will weigh.

Bolt.new's free plan caps at 300,000 tokens per day (1,000,000 tokens per month), while Floot's free plan caps at 100 Build Actions per day plus 400 more rolling in weekly, different meters but both are hard daily limits to learn on. The bigger gap is what happens after: Floot's own policy states free accounts lose hosting once you stop paying, so a free project can go dark, while Bolt.new lists no such takedown policy. Both let unused credits roll over, and both gate a custom domain behind a paid tier, Bolt.new at Pro and above and Floot at Pro and Power only.

Ops and IT teams need auth, SSO, and a way to reach existing systems. Floot has authentication built in, while Bolt.new relies on a bring-your-own Supabase integration for auth. But Bolt.new offers SSO on its Enterprise plan, a fact Floot has none for, plus built-in team collaboration, which Floot also lacks on record. Floot describes itself as not a marketplace model, with Claude as the build interface rather than a library of connectors, while Bolt.new's Supabase backend gives a real, swappable data layer to wire into company systems. Bolt.new covers more of what an IT team needs here.

For builders targeting a phone, Floot is the only one of the two with a documented native mobile output. Bolt.new's output stack is described as full-stack JS/TS web projects, with no mobile output fact on record, so it is built for the browser, not the app store. Both self-hostself-host - Run the software on your own servers instead of the vendor’s cloud. the generated output and both run an autonomous build agent, and both document a backend, Bolt.new through a bring-your-own Supabase integration and Floot on a built-in proprietary stack, but neither of those secondary points closes the gap once one tool simply does not produce native mobile apps.

Builders who want to run the app builder itself, not just its output, need facts about running offline, the license, and paying through their own API keys. Neither Bolt.new nor Floot publishes any of those: both are hosted products with no local-first mode, no open license, and no bring-your-own-key billing on record. The one fact both share, that you can self-hostself-host - Run the software on your own servers instead of the vendor’s cloud. the generated output, is the same for both, Bolt.new and Floot each confirm yes. With no vendor facts distinguishing them on the core requirement, this comes down even.

Bolt.new documents Figma and screenshot import, the core requirement for a design-led team going from a file to a working front end, a capability Floot has no fact for. Bolt.new also backs that with versioning and rollback plus multiplayer collaboration, letting a team iterate on the same import and step back when a change misses the mark. Floot's own facts are silent on design import, collaboration, and versioning here, so there is nothing on record to counter Bolt.new's UI-focused feature set for this use case.