Fix an app built by Lovable, Cursor, Bolt, v0 or Replit.

Every one of these tools does the same headline trick: it gets you from an idea to something running in front of you, fast. That part genuinely works. Where they differ, and where the real risk lives, is in what "done" means once real users show up. A generated app that looks finished in the builder's preview is not the same thing as a production app. One only has to handle a few clicks from you. The other has to hold up under strangers, bad input and time. That gap is where our work starts, and it looks different depending on which tool built the thing in front of you.

Lovable, Bolt and Replit each hand you a working backend along with the front end, which is genuinely useful and also the source of most of their risk. The backend they generate is built to demo well, not to survive real traffic or protect real data — the rules deciding who may read which record never switched on, secrets handled casually, a deployment tied to a sandbox rather than infrastructure you control. Each tool has its own particular flavor of this: Lovable's risk centers on a hosted database left open to anyone who looks, Bolt's on the jump from browser sandbox to production, Replit's on hosting tied to one platform. The underlying pattern is the same across all three.

Cursor and v0 fail in more specific ways. Cursor doesn't generate a whole app — it speeds up a person writing one, suggestion by suggestion. Enough accepted suggestions without a guiding architecture, and you end up with a codebase that runs but has no consistent shape and no tests to catch what breaks. v0 has close to the opposite problem: it produces a genuinely well-built front end, but no backend, no auth and no real data behind it. What looks like a finished product is, structurally, a very good mockup.

That's why we don't offer one generic fix for "AI-built apps." The right fix for a Lovable app is a security and data review. For a Cursor codebase it's structure and test coverage. For a v0 build it's an entire backend that doesn't exist yet. Pick the tool that built your app below and you'll land on a page written for that specific failure mode.

The approach stays consistent underneath, whichever tool you used. We start with an audit rather than an assumption, because what's actually wrong is rarely what a founder expects going in. We keep what's sound — a full rewrite is a last resort, not a default — and whatever we fix ends up on infrastructure you own and in a codebase your team, or ours if you'd like us to stay on, can keep building on.