Rork alternatives

The field

Every company in the comparison, as the corpus records it. Open a row for the verdict and the sources behind it.

Also in the corpus

Read on the same question but not part of this comparison, because their own pages carry no figure on these four axes.

The answer

The reason to leave Rork is almost always the same number: iOS costs $200/mo there, because "iOS apps with SwiftUI" first appear on Rork Max and the $20/mo Pro tier is Expo, Android and web. Three alternatives beat that outright. Vibecode is $20 /month with "App store submission" and "Download source code" on its cheapest paid plan. FlutterFlow is $39/month for "One-Click App Store Deployment" plus "Download project source code or APK" — the cheapest price at which anyone here gives you both the store and the code. Expo + EAS is $0: "15 Android and 15 iOS builds" and "Submit to app stores" are on its free tier, and what it wants in exchange is that you write the app. Three of the seven do not answer this question at all, and their pricing pages say so by omission — Replit, Bolt.new and Lovable price projects, tokens and domains and name no iOS tier anywhere. That is not a gap in this table; it is the answer. Pick Rork anyway if native SwiftUI from a prompt is the point, because nothing else here does it. StoreReady sells none of these.

What each one costs

The same four criteria for every company, each figure read off that company’s own page. Open a row for the page it came from, the day it was read and the wording the re-check looks for.

Not published means that company does not state the figure on the page cited beside it. It is not a claim that no such figure exists. A company that publishes no limit most likely has none, and most likely is not a fact, so this ledger prints what was read rather than what was inferred. 5 of the cells here say it.

Free tier. what the vendor gives you at $0 a month, in its own words

Cheapest plan that reaches iOS. the tier on which the product can actually produce and submit an iOS app — which on most of these is several steps above the price the page leads with, and is the single figure none of them puts next to the headline

What the plan is metered in. credits, tokens or build minutes — the meter under the plan fee, which is why none of these prices is a bill

When to pick each one

In their favour, with no hedge taking it back in the same sentence. A comparison with no case for the other side is an advert, and an advert does not get cited.

RorkYou want to describe an iOS app and have one exist, and you are prepared to pay for that rather than assemble it. Rork Max is the only tier in this table that generates native SwiftUI — plus iPad, Apple Watch and Vision Pro targets — from a chat, and the App Store is the stated destination of the product rather than a thing you bolt on afterwards.

VibecodeYou want App Store submission and the source code on the cheapest plan you can buy, and you would rather pay for model tokens at cost than pay a margin on them. Vibecode's $20 Plus tier already lists "App store submission" and "Download source code", and its whole pricing argument is "$1 in credits on Vibecode = $1 in AI usage on Anthropic, OpenAI, etc. We charge exactly what we pay."

Replit MobileThe app is really a full-stack product and the mobile shell is the least of it. Replit is the only entry here that gives you the database, the deploys, the collaborators and the agent on one bill: Core at $20 carries "$20 towards most powerful models", "plan mode" and "unlimited workspaces", and Pro adds "10 parallel agents" and "up to 15 collaborators". It is no longer the free option, which it was until 2026-09-18.

Bolt.newYou are building the web product first and will decide about a store later. Bolt's free tier is the most generous starting point in this table — "300K tokens daily limit", "1M tokens per month", private projects and hosting at $0 — and Pro at $25 removes the daily cap entirely rather than raising it.

LovableThe thing you are building belongs on the web and you would rather stop pretending otherwise. Lovable's free tier publishes to a real URL with unlimited collaborators and no card, and Pro at $25 / month adds custom domains, roles and per-member credit limits — which is a better answer for a web product than paying a mobile builder to wrap one.

FlutterFlowYou want the source code and the store deployment at the cheapest price at which anyone in this table offers both. FlutterFlow's Basic tier is $39/month and its own headline for that tier is "Download project source code or APK", with "One-Click App Store Deployment" listed beside it — and the output is Flutter, so the thing you take away is a real codebase rather than a bundle.

Expo + EASYou can write the app, and what you actually need is the build and submit pipeline. Expo's free tier is the only one in this table that both compiles for iOS and submits — "15 Android and 15 iOS builds" and "Submit to app stores", at $0 a month — and everything above it is the same service with more credit and a faster queue rather than a feature gate.

Answers

On the page rather than behind a control, because a passage an engine cannot see is a passage it cannot quote.

What is the cheapest way to get an AI-built app into the App Store?

Expo + EAS at $0, if you can write the app: its free tier lists "15 Android and 15 iOS builds" and "Submit to app stores". If you want the app generated for you, Vibecode at $20 /month is the cheapest — "App store submission" is on its entry tier. FlutterFlow at $39/month is the cheapest that gives you the store deployment and the source code together. Rork, the product most people arrive here from, is $200/mo for iOS. Every figure read off the vendor's own pricing page on 2026-08-15.

Which AI app builders let you export the source code?

On the evidence of their own pricing pages: Vibecode ("Download source code" on every published tier) and FlutterFlow ("Download project source code or APK", from Basic at $39/month). Expo + EAS is not a builder — the source is yours because you wrote it. Rork, Replit, Bolt.new and Lovable do not state an export position on their pricing pages, which is not the same as refusing one; StoreReady's per-builder pages carry the sourced answer where one exists.

Why do Replit, Bolt.new and Lovable show nothing in the iOS row?

Because their pricing pages name no iOS tier. Replit prices projects, credits, collaborators and agents; Bolt prices tokens, hosting and web requests; Lovable prices lovable.app domains, custom domains and publishing. None of the three mentions the App Store or a mobile build anywhere on the page. That is a real answer rather than missing data — if a builder is going to take you to the store, the pricing page is where it says so, because it is the thing it is selling.

Is a free AI app builder enough to ship?

Only in one direction, and one of these free tiers does not even build. Rork's free plan is design mode — 35 design credits a month, five a day, with "Build mode: turn designs into working apps" held back for Pro at $20/mo; FlutterFlow's is "Build & test your app" with web publishing only; Bolt's and Lovable's are web products with no mobile path published at all. The exception is Expo, whose free tier includes 15 iOS builds and store submission — because Expo is the pipeline rather than the builder, and the part it gives away is the part everyone else charges for.

Rork alternatives, priced at the tier that ships

What is the cheapest way to get an AI-built app into the App Store?

Which AI app builders let you export the source code?

Why do Replit, Bolt.new and Lovable show nothing in the iOS row?

Is a free AI app builder enough to ship?