You're going to build your prototype twice.
That's the dirty secret of most prototyping tools. You spend weeks perfecting a clickable mockup in Figma or Marvel, show it to users, get excited about the feedback—and then realize none of it translates to production. The animations don't export. The interactions were fake. The "sign up" button never connected to anything real. So you start over, this time with actual code, and hope the final product resembles what you tested.
In 2026, that workflow is optional. The tools have caught up.
This guide covers the best mobile app prototyping tools available right now, from traditional design platforms to AI-powered builders that skip the rebuild entirely. We'll break down what each tool actually does well, where it falls short, and which type of builder it serves. But here's the lens we're using to evaluate them:
The best prototyping tool is the one you never have to leave.
The old boundary between "prototyping" and "building" has collapsed. AI platforms can now generate production-ready mobile apps—with working payments, authentication, and App Store submission—from the same natural language descriptions that once produced static mockups. That changes the question you should be asking. It's no longer which tool makes the prettiest prototype? It's which tool turns my prototype into a product without a rebuild?
That's the filter we'll apply to every tool in this guide. Some are excellent for visual exploration and team feedback. Some are built for developer handoffs. And some let you go from idea to App Store without switching tools or rewriting code. Knowing the difference will save you weeks—and determine whether your prototype ever becomes something people pay for.
Here's what we'll cover:
- Traditional prototyping tools (Figma, Sketch, Adobe XD) and where they still make sense
- Interactive prototyping platforms (ProtoPie, Principle, Framer) for high-fidelity animations
- Hybrid builders (FlutterFlow, Adalo, Glide) that bridge design and development
- AI-powered production tools (Anything, Bolt, Lovable) that build real apps from descriptions
- How to choose based on your goals, timeline, and whether you need a prototype or a product
Let's start with what's actually changed—and why the prototyping category looks completely different than it did two years ago.
What's changed in mobile prototyping
For most of the last decade, prototyping followed a predictable path. Designers created mockups in Figma or Sketch. Those mockups became clickable prototypes in tools like InVision or Marvel. Product teams gathered feedback. And then developers rebuilt everything from scratch because none of that work produced actual code.
This made sense when building was expensive and slow. Prototypes were cheaper than bad software, so teams invested in getting the design right before committing to development. The rebuild was just the cost of doing business.
Three shifts broke that model.
- AI can now generate production code from natural language. Describe what you want—"a feed where users can post updates, like posts, and follow each other"—and modern tools generate working applications, not static screens. The same effort that once produced a Figma mockup now produces a functional app.
- Infrastructure comes built-in. Authentication, payments, databases, and hosting used to require weeks of developer setup. Now they're configuration options. "Add Google login" becomes a one-line prompt instead of a three-week integration project.
- App Store submission no longer requires Xcode expertise. Cloud-signed deployment means you can go from working app to App Store review without downloading certificates, managing provisioning profiles, or understanding Apple's developer portal. The last mile that used to require a specialist is now a button click.
These changes don't make traditional prototyping tools obsolete. They still excel at visual exploration and team collaboration. But they do change the question you should ask when choosing a tool.
The old question: Which tool makes the best prototype?
The new question: Can this prototype become my product without a rebuild?
If you're going to throw away your prototype and start over anyway, that's useful information. You're paying for exploration, not execution. But if you want your prototype to become your product—if you want to test with real users, accept real payments, and ship to real app stores—you need a tool built for that outcome.
Let's evaluate each category with that filter in mind.
Traditional design-first prototyping tools
These are the tools that defined prototyping for the last decade. They remain excellent at what they were designed to do: visual design, team collaboration, and developer handoff. If you have an engineering team waiting to build your product, these tools still make sense. But if you need the prototype itself to ship, they won't get you there.
Figma
Figma became the industry standard for good reason. Real-time collaboration means multiple designers can work on the same file simultaneously. Component libraries and design systems scale across large organizations. Developer handoff with inspect mode gives engineers the specs they need to implement designs accurately.
The plugin ecosystem is massive—thousands of extensions for everything from icon libraries to accessibility testing. And because Figma runs in the browser, there's no software to install or update.
Where it falls short: Figma prototypes are clickable mockups, not functional applications. The "sign up" button can navigate to another screen, but it can't create a user account. There's no database, no authentication, no backend logic. Everything you build in Figma must be rebuilt for production.
Best for: Design teams at companies with dedicated engineering resources. If your prototype is a communication artifact—something to align stakeholders and hand off to developers—Figma remains the best option.
Prototype-to-product gap: Complete rebuild required.
Sketch
Sketch pioneered the modern interface design workflow before Figma existed. It runs natively on Mac, which means excellent performance and offline capability. Symbol and component management is mature and powerful. The plugin ecosystem, while smaller than Figma's, covers most common needs.
Where it falls short: Mac-only availability limits team collaboration. Prototyping features lag behind Figma's. And like Figma, there's no path to production without a complete developer rebuild. Market share has declined steadily as teams migrate to Figma's collaborative model.
Best for: Solo designers or Mac-based teams already invested in the Sketch ecosystem who don't need cross-platform collaboration.
Prototype-to-product gap: Complete rebuild required.
Adobe XD
Adobe XD integrates tightly with Creative Cloud—Photoshop, Illustrator, and the rest of Adobe's design suite. Voice prototyping features and auto-animate for micro-interactions set it apart from Figma and Sketch. For teams already paying for Creative Cloud, XD comes included.
Where it falls short: Adobe effectively put XD in maintenance mode in 2023, shifting focus to Figma integration after acquiring Figma (a deal that ultimately fell through). The community and plugin ecosystem are shrinking. The same rebuild problem applies—XD produces mockups, not applications.
Best for: Teams already locked into Adobe Creative Cloud who need basic prototyping and don't want to add another subscription.
Prototype-to-product gap: Complete rebuild required.
The bottom line on traditional tools
These tools remain valuable for visual design and team collaboration. If your goal is to explore ideas, align stakeholders, and hand off polished specs to developers, they work exactly as intended. But they're design tools, not building tools. The prototype they produce is a starting point for development, not a substitute for it.
High-fidelity interactive prototyping tools
The next category creates more realistic prototypes with complex animations, sensor-based interactions, and higher visual fidelity. These tools bridge the gap between static mockups and real applications—but they still don't produce production code.
ProtoPie
ProtoPie specializes in interactions that other tools can't handle. Sensor-based triggers like gyroscope input, sound detection, and camera access. Device-to-device prototyping for multi-screen experiences. Complex micro-interactions that would take days to build in code can be prototyped in hours.
For hardware products, IoT interfaces, and automotive dashboards, ProtoPie is often the only tool that can simulate the full experience before development.
Where it falls short: ProtoPie is expensive ($13–$42 per user per month) and has a steep learning curve for advanced features. It requires design assets from Figma or Sketch—it's not a standalone design tool. And despite the high fidelity, prototypes are still simulations. They don't produce code, connect to databases, or handle real user accounts.
Best for: UX teams testing complex interactions before committing to expensive development sprints, especially for hardware, automotive, or multi-device products.
Prototype-to-product gap: Complete rebuild required, though the detailed interaction documentation helps developers implement accurately.
Principle
Principle takes a different approach: timeline-based animation familiar to motion designers. If you've used After Effects or similar tools, Principle's model makes immediate sense. Creating smooth animations and transitions is fast once you understand the paradigm.
At $129 for a one-time purchase, it's dramatically cheaper than subscription-based alternatives.
Where it falls short: Mac-only. Limited to animations—no logic, no data, no complex interactions. No collaboration features. The product hasn't evolved significantly in years, suggesting limited ongoing development investment.
Best for: Motion designers creating animation specs for developers to implement.
Prototype-to-product gap: Complete rebuild required.
Framer
Framer sits in an interesting middle ground. It uses real React components, which means prototypes can include actual code logic. And unlike pure prototyping tools, Framer can publish live websites—not just preview links, but actual hosted sites with custom domains.
For web designers who know some code, Framer offers a path from design to deployment that Figma can't match.
Where it falls short: Framer is web-focused. It can publish websites and web applications, but mobile app deployment remains limited. There's no path to the App Store. And the learning curve is steeper than pure design tools—React knowledge helps significantly.
Best for: Designers who know some code and want to ship marketing sites or web applications. Not suitable for native mobile apps.
Prototype-to-product gap: Websites can ship directly. Mobile apps require a complete rebuild.
The bottom line on interactive tools
These tools create impressive demos that help teams validate interaction patterns before committing to development. But impressive demos don't tell you whether users will pay. A prototype that can't process a real transaction or remember a user's login can't validate the business model—only the user experience.
Hybrid no-code/low-code builders
The next category genuinely bridges prototyping and building. These platforms produce real applications—not just mockups—while remaining accessible to non-developers. Each makes different tradeoffs between power and simplicity.
FlutterFlow
FlutterFlow is a visual builder that generates real Flutter and Dart code. Unlike the tools above, what you build in FlutterFlow is an actual application, not a simulation. You can export the generated code, continue development in a traditional IDE, and deploy to both iOS and Android.
Firebase integration provides backend functionality—authentication, database, storage—without writing server code. The template library and active community help new users get started quickly.
Where it falls short: FlutterFlow requires understanding Flutter concepts. It's more accessible than writing Flutter code directly, but less accessible than pure no-code tools. Complex applications hit walls that require code escape—dropping into Dart to implement features the visual builder can't handle. And App Store submission still requires developer setup; FlutterFlow doesn't handle signing and deployment automatically.
Best for: Developers or technical builders who want to accelerate Flutter development, not replace coding entirely.
Prototype-to-product gap: Partial. Applications can reach production, but the process requires technical knowledge and external service configuration.
Adalo
Adalo targets true no-code users. There are no programming concepts to learn—you build applications by arranging components and defining actions. Publishing to the App Store and Google Play is possible directly from the platform. Built-in database and user authentication mean you don't need to configure external services.
Where it falls short: Performance degrades with complex applications. Customization is limited compared to code-based tools. Pricing scales with users, which can get expensive as your app grows. And some features require third-party integrations through Zapier or similar tools, adding complexity and potential failure points.
Best for: Non-technical builders creating simple applications—directories, membership communities, basic marketplaces—who can accept the platform's limitations.
Prototype-to-product gap: Small for simple apps. Significant for anything complex or performance-sensitive.
Glide
Glide's unique approach builds applications directly from spreadsheets. Connect a Google Sheet, Excel file, or Airtable base, and Glide generates an app interface automatically. For data-driven applications, this is remarkably fast—a working app in minutes instead of days.
The learning curve is nearly nonexistent if you already know spreadsheets.
Where it falls short: Apps built in Glide look and feel like "spreadsheet apps"—functional but limited in design flexibility. Glide produces Progressive Web Apps (PWAs), not native mobile apps, so you can't publish to the App Store. Complex logic is difficult or impossible to implement. And using a spreadsheet as your database creates scaling limitations as your user base grows.
Best for: Teams who need quick internal tools or simple data-driven applications and don't need App Store presence.
Prototype-to-product gap: Can reach production for simple use cases. Not suitable for consumer mobile apps or complex applications.
The bottom line on hybrid builders
These tools genuinely bridge prototyping and building—what you create is a real application, not a mockup. But each has a ceiling. FlutterFlow requires technical skills. Adalo struggles with complexity. Glide is limited to spreadsheet-shaped problems. For builders who need full production applications without those constraints, the newest category offers a different approach.
AI-backed production builders
The most significant shift in 2026 isn't better prototyping tools—it's tools that skip prototyping entirely by building production applications from the start.
These platforms don't create prototypes. They create apps. Natural language or conversational input replaces drag-and-drop. Backend infrastructure—databases, authentication, payments—is automatic. The "prototype" is already a working product you can test with real users and real money.
Bolt
Bolt, built by StackBlitz, provides a browser-based full-stack development environment. Describe what you want to build, and Bolt scaffolds complete applications using modern frameworks like React and Next.js. For developers who want AI assistance without leaving their familiar workflow, Bolt accelerates the process significantly.
Where it falls short: Bolt is developer-oriented. It expects you to understand code, debug issues, and configure external services. Backend functionality requires integrating services like Supabase—Bolt doesn't provide built-in infrastructure. And while Bolt can build web applications quickly, mobile app deployment isn't the primary focus.
Best for: Developers who want to accelerate their workflow with AI assistance, not replace development skills entirely.
Prototype-to-product gap: Can reach production, but requires developer skills and external service configuration.
Lovable
Lovable generates clean, stylized user interfaces and integrates with GitHub for code export and version control. For creating web prototypes and marketing sites quickly, Lovable delivers polished results. The enterprise and prototyping focus means good tooling for team collaboration and handoff.
Where it falls short: Lovable relies on third-party services like Supabase for backend functionality—authentication, databases, and storage require external configuration. Mobile app support is limited. And while Lovable excels at generating front-end code, the "last mile" to production still requires connecting and configuring additional services.
Best for: Designers and marketers creating web prototypes, or teams exploring ideas before handing off to engineering.
Prototype-to-product gap: Moderate for web applications. More significant for mobile apps.
Anything
Anything takes a different approach: complete business infrastructure built into the platform from the start. Stripe payments, user authentication, databases, and hosting aren't integrations to configure—they're built-in capabilities you can add with a single prompt. "Add Google login" works immediately. "Let users pay with Stripe" works immediately. "Deploy to the App Store" works immediately.
This end-to-end approach eliminates the configuration gaps that block other tools from reaching production. Mobile and web applications deploy from the same project with a shared backend. Cloud-signed App Store submission means you don't need Xcode, provisioning profiles, or Apple developer expertise—Anything handles the entire submission process.
Anything Max, the platform's autonomous agent mode, builds, tests, and debugs applications without supervision. Describe what you want, and Max iterates until it works—trying the app in a browser, identifying errors, fixing them, and continuing until the goal is achieved. For complex applications, this eliminates the "doom loop" where builders get stuck on bugs they don't understand.
The platform handles applications at scale. Automatic refactoring keeps projects maintainable as they grow to 100,000+ lines of code. The underlying infrastructure—PostgreSQL on Neon—is the same stack used by major enterprises.
Where it falls short: Less control than hand-coding for highly custom requirements. Newer platform (launched August 2025) compared to established tools. Subscription cost ($19–$199 per month) is higher than basic prototyping tools. Best suited for builders who want to ship, not developers who want to tinker with code.
Best for: Non-technical and tech-adjacent builders who want production apps that make money—not prototypes that need rebuilding. Solopreneurs, agencies, and anyone who's been burned by the prototype-to-production gap.
Prototype-to-product gap: None. The prototype is the product.
The results speak for themselves. A finance professional in Japan made $34,000 selling AI finance tools built on the platform. A medical student launched a CPR training app charging $85 per month per user. A real estate agent built an AI-powered property portal with $85 monthly subscriptions and $1,000 virtual training sessions. These aren't prototypes waiting to become products—they're businesses generating real revenue.
The bottom on AI-backed builders
This category represents a fundamental shift, not just a feature upgrade. The question isn't which tool makes the best prototype—it's which tool gets you to paying customers fastest.
Bolt serves developers who want AI assistance with their existing workflow. Lovable serves teams who need polished prototypes for handoff to engineering. Anything serves builders who want the app done—complete with payments, authentication, and App Store submission—without rebuilding anything.
How to choose the right tool
With this many options, the choice depends on what you're actually trying to accomplish. Here's a decision framework based on your goals, not feature comparisons.
Start with what you're building
Features don't matter if the tool can't get you where you're going. Here's the shortest path based on your actual goal:
- If you need team design collaboration and developer handoff: Figma remains the industry standard. Your prototype is a communication artifact—a way to align stakeholders and hand specs to developers. The rebuild is expected and budgeted.
- If you need to demonstrate complex interactions before development: ProtoPie or Principle. Your prototype proves the interaction concept is worth building. The development team needs the detailed specifications these tools provide.
- If you need a marketing site or web application (not mobile): Framer or Lovable. You can publish directly to the web without involving developers.
- If you need a simple internal tool or data-driven application: Glide. Speed matters more than polish or App Store presence.
- If you're technical and want AI-assisted development: Bolt or FlutterFlow. You're accelerating your workflow, not replacing development skills.
- If you want a production mobile app without coding or rebuilding: Anything. Your prototype becomes your product, complete with payments and App Store submission.
The three questions that matter
Before choosing any tool, answer these questions honestly:
- Do I need a prototype, or do I need a product?
If you have developers who will build the real thing, traditional prototyping tools work fine. They're designed for exploration and handoff. But if you need the prototype to be the thing—if there's no development team waiting to rebuild it—you need a production builder.
- Will this require a rebuild?
Every rebuild costs weeks and introduces drift from your original vision. The screens look the same, but the interactions feel different. Features get cut for time. The polish you achieved in the prototype gets lost in the translation to code.
Factor rebuild time into your "prototyping" timeline. It's not free, and it's often longer than people expect.
- Can I validate with real money?
Clickable mockups generate opinions. "This looks great!" "I'd definitely use this!" "My friends would love it!" But opinions don't pay rent.
Working apps generate revenue. The only way to know if your idea works is to charge for it. If you want real validation, you need a tool that can accept real payments.
The shift that matters more than any other tool
The prototyping category has split into two.
On one side: tools for communication. Figma, Sketch, ProtoPie, and their peers help teams explore ideas, align on direction, and hand off detailed specifications to developers. They're excellent at what they do, and they'll remain valuable as long as companies have design teams and development teams working in sequence.
On the other side: tools for production. Anything, and to varying degrees Bolt and Lovable, skip the handoff by generating real applications from the start. They're not better at prototyping—they're replacing prototyping with building.
Neither approach is wrong. They solve different problems.
If you have an engineering team waiting to build whatever you design, Figma still makes sense. The prototype is a spec, and the rebuild is budgeted. The workflow has worked for years and continues to work.
If you need to validate an idea with paying users before investing in development, you need a tool that ships. The only prototype worth testing is one that accepts money and works at 2 a.m. when your first customer tries to sign up.
The real question
Are you building something to show people, or something to sell them?
If you're showing, optimize for visual polish and team collaboration. Figma excels here.
If you're selling, optimize for production readiness and time to revenue. The tool that gets you to paying customers fastest is the tool that serves you best.
For most readers of this guide—solopreneurs, indie builders, small agencies, anyone without a dedicated dev team—that means choosing a tool where your prototype becomes your product. Where "add payments" means Stripe works immediately. Where "deploy to the App Store" means your app is in review, not that you need to learn Xcode.
The best prototyping tool in 2026 is the one you never have to leave.
Get started
If you need to validate an idea with real users and real revenue: Start with Anything. Describe your app, add payments in one prompt, and deploy to the App Store without leaving the platform.
