CursorAI Coding Agent for Building Ambitious Software
vs
LovableLow-Code & No-Code
Comparison · AI Coding Assistants · weekly run Nov 3
Cursor vs Lovable
Which one do AI engines recommend, and how do they differ on price, fit and features?
The short answer
Cursor is the stronger AI pick in AI Coding Assistants: it has a visibility score of 67.7 versus 0 for Lovable.
Choose Cursor if…
- You want the brand AI engines rank higher (67.7 vs 0)
- AI answers describe it more positively (53% vs 40% positive)
- You need ISO/IEC 27001:2022 or ISO/IEC 42001:2023 coverage
- You prefer a larger, established vendor (501–1,000 employees)
Choose Lovable if…
- You need ISO 27001:2022 coverage
- rapid prototyping and idea validation
- generates working software from plain-English descriptions
- AI-generated code you can eventually own
AI visibility side by side
Latest weekly run · Nov 3
| Metric | Cursor | Lovable |
|---|---|---|
| Visibility score | 67.7% | 0% |
| Change vs last week | New | New |
| Rank in AI Coding Assistants | #2 | #44 |
| Share of voice | 13.6% | 0% |
| Mentions this run | 65 | 0 |
| Positive in AI answers | 53% | 40% |
The stronger value in each row is marked with a ✓.
Visibility score trend
Weekly runs over the last 60 days
Cursor 0pp · Lovable 0pp over 0 weekly runs.
Engine by engine
Cursor leads on 3 of 3 engines
ChatGPT
AI Mode
Perplexity
CursorLovable
Head to head in AI answers
0 engine answers name both brands
0Cursor ranked higher
0Lovable ranked higher
Features, pricing & fit
| Dimension | Cursor | Lovable |
|---|---|---|
| Deployment | Desktop, CLI, web, mobile and cloud agents | Cloud-hosted platform operated by Lovable, also available through Google Cloud Marketplace and Gemini Enterprise. |
| Compliance | AIUC-1, ISO/IEC 27001:2022, ISO/IEC 42001:2023, SOC 2 Type II | SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001:2022, AIUC-1 |
| Support | Customer support by email at hi@cursor.com, Priority support on the Enterprise plan | Dedicated support on the Enterprise plan |
| Founded | — | 2023 |
| Headquarters | — | Stockholm, Sweden |
| Employees | 501–1,000 | 51–200 |
| Funding | Funding round at $9.9B valuation | Series C · $950M raised |
| Best for | Individual developers and engineering teams that hand coding tasks to AI agents, and larger organizations that need enterprise security and admin controls. | People without a deep coding background who want to build apps and websites quickly, and enterprise teams that need admin and security controls. |
Pros and cons
Themes from the AI answers that mention each brand
Cursor
- Strong codebase indexing and multi-file editing
- High user satisfaction and momentum
- Top overall pick for professional developers
- Transparent pricing tiers and annual discount
- Free tier to try it
- Shared credit pool makes heavy agentic usage less predictable
- Free Hobby plan has limited usage
Lovable
- rapid prototyping and idea validation
- generates working software from plain-English descriptions
- AI-generated code you can eventually own
- listed among top low-code and no-code platforms
Data collected ·ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Mode·coverage 100%·next run
Cite as: SlateIndex, “Cursor vs Lovable”, https://slateindex.ai/compare/cursor-vs-lovable, data of Nov 3, 2026. Licence: CC BY 4.0.