Head to head / curated pair / cycle 04
Replit vs Bolt.new
Both products were given the identical 9 prompt vibeOps specification, 5 times each. Nothing on this page is an impression, all of it is a measurement from the same harness.
The most operationally complete result: a real queue, working scheduled jobs and a database that survived the 50000 row load without a rewrite. It is also the slowest of the top group because the agent runs a longer plan and test cycle. The public marketing surface was the weakest part, client rendered in 4 of 5 runs.
Very fast to a running artifact and the code that comes out is plain and portable, which is why it takes the highest code ownership score here. It burns tokens quickly on the longer prompts: two runs stalled mid way through prompt 6 and had to be recorded as partial because the allowance ran out before the job queue was finished.
Index gap
1.48
Replit leads
Axes won
5 / 5
Replit versus Bolt.new, of ten axes
Faster median
Bolt.new
82.1 s per prompt
Higher pass rate
Replit
86.7%
Every measurement, side by side
Cyan marks the better figure on each row. The delta column is the first product minus the second.
| Measurement | Replit | Bolt.new | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Composite index | 73.42 | 71.94 | +1.48 |
| Agent performance (weight 18) | 83.0 | 81.0 | +2.00 |
| Reliability (weight 18) | 86.7 | 80.0 | +6.70 |
| Scalability (weight 13) | 80.0 | 70.0 | +10.00 |
| SEO and GEO (weight 12) | 62.0 | 66.0 | -4.00 |
| API and MCP (weight 9) | 71.0 | 58.0 | +13.00 |
| Integrations (weight 8) | 77.0 | 72.0 | +5.00 |
| Design output (weight 7) | 73.0 | 85.0 | -12.00 |
| Speed (weight 7) | 23.1 | 38.2 | -15.10 |
| Value (weight 5) | 66.0 | 74.0 | -8.00 |
| Code ownership (weight 3) | 82.0 | 88.0 | -6.00 |
| Median seconds per prompt | 135.7 | 82.1 | +53.60 |
| p10 seconds | 92.8 | 51.8 | +41.00 |
| p90 seconds | 188.8 | 136.0 | +52.80 |
| Executions failed | 2 | 1 | +1.00 |
| HTML bytes, no JS | 9.0 KB | 12.0 KB | -3072.00 |
| LCP milliseconds | 2,880 | 2,460 | +420.00 |
| CLS | 0.120 | 0.090 | +0.03 |
| Entry price EUR | 22.00 | 18.00 | +4.00 |
Screenshot diff
Both landing pages, captured by the lab on 14 Aug 2026 at 1440 by 900. Stored locally, never hotlinked.
Replit, captured 14 Aug 2026.
Bolt.new, captured 14 Aug 2026.
Speed spread on a shared scale
Replit
92.8 / 135.7 / 188.8 seconds
Bolt.new
51.8 / 82.1 / 136.0 seconds
Axis by axis, who wins
Replit wins 5 of 10
- Agent performance83.0
- Reliability86.7
- Scalability80.0
- API and MCP71.0
- Integrations77.0
Bolt.new wins 5 of 10
- SEO and GEO66.0
- Design output85.0
- Speed38.2
- Value74.0
- Code ownership88.0
Verdict
Replit takes the composite by 1.48 points. That is inside the noise of a five run sample, so the correct conclusion is that these two are tied on the composite and the choice should come down to a single axis you care about.
If the work in front of you is mostly interface, weight the design and speed rows. If it is a product with an API, webhooks and background jobs, weight agent performance, reliability and the API and MCP row, which together carry 45 of the 100 index points. If the project has to outlive its vendor, read the code ownership row first and treat everything else as secondary.
Both products in this comparison were measured in the same cycle, on the same specification, by the same harness. The per run data for each is on its product page and in /api/runs.json.