"Should I use Antigravity, Cursor, or Bolt to build my app?" comes up in nearly every developer conversation I have lately. All three are AI-powered coding tools with distinct approaches, and surface-level feature comparisons miss the parts that actually matter when you're building something real.
I've used all three across actual projects — indie iOS apps, web prototypes, internal tooling — and a clear pattern emerged: each one has a specific zone where it's hard to beat. This article breaks down those zones based on the project type you're working on.
TL;DR — Pick by Project Type
Let me save you scrolling time:
Building a serious native mobile app (iOS / Android)? Use Antigravity. Its Xcode integration, Gemma 4 local execution, and Unreal Engine 5 support put it ahead for native development.
Working on an existing codebase day in, day out? Use Cursor. Its VS Code compatibility, Composer feature, and easy model switching make it the most natural fit for continuous development work.
Need to prototype a web app in 30 minutes? Use Bolt. Browser-only, with live previews running in StackBlitz's WebContainer — nothing else gets you from idea to running app this fast.
The rest of this article explains why those recommendations hold up.
Google Antigravity: Strengths and Weaknesses
Antigravity is Google's AI coding environment, launched in late 2025. It's a desktop app built on VS Code, with Gemini and Gemma 4 integrated natively.
The biggest strength is Gemma 4 local execution support. You can call Gemma 4 directly from inside Antigravity without going through Ollama or LM Studio. When your network is flaky, when you're behind a corporate firewall that blocks cloud AI, or when you just want offline coding assistance, this changes the game.
The second standout strength is deep integration with Unreal Engine 5 and Xcode. This is territory where other VS Code-based AI tools haven't caught up, and it's the main reason game developers and native mobile developers stick with Antigravity.
// Using Antigravity's Agent feature
// Write a prompt and it modifies multiple files coherently
const agent = await antigravity.startAgent({
task: 'Add user authentication with biometric support',
scope: ['src/auth/', 'src/components/LoginScreen.tsx'],
model: 'gemma-4-27b-local'
})The weaknesses are slow startup and VS Code extension incompatibility. Some VS Code extensions don't work correctly under Antigravity, which causes friction during the first week of switching. I personally questioned whether the move was worth it for a solid seven days. The discomfort eventually faded, but the onboarding cost is real.
Cursor: Strengths and Weaknesses
Cursor is an AI-first editor forked directly from VS Code. The Composer feature, Cmd+K inline editing, and multi-LLM switching are its signature elements.
The main strength is flawless inheritance of existing VS Code workflows. Settings, extensions, keybindings — almost everything carries over without modification. When I first tried Cursor, the migration cost was effectively zero. For a developer tool, that's a massive practical advantage.
The second strength is model selection flexibility. You can switch between Claude, GPT, and Gemini from inside the same window, picking the right model for the task. Long design discussions go to Claude, code generation to GPT, image work to Gemini — that kind of granular routing is part of daily workflow.
// Cursor Composer multi-file editing pattern
// Tag files with @ and trigger with Cmd+I
@/src/api/users.ts @/src/components/UserList.tsx
Add cursor-based pagination to the user list with infinite scroll support.The weakness is thin native mobile development support. React Native and Flutter work, but Xcode integration isn't as deep as Antigravity's. Building a serious iOS app rarely stays inside Cursor end to end.
Bolt: Strengths and Weaknesses
Bolt (bolt.new) is StackBlitz's AI-driven web development environment. It runs entirely in your browser, on top of WebContainer technology, letting you spin up Node.js projects instantly.
The main strength is prototyping speed that nothing else matches. Open bolt.new in your browser, type "build me a todo app" in plain English, and a working app boots in tens of seconds. No local environment setup means you can take an idea from thought to running prototype faster than you can write a spec.
The second strength is instant live preview. Generated code starts running in the same browser tab in real time, so the feedback loop is unusually short.
// Typical Bolt-generated code
// One prompt produces a full Vite + React + Tailwind setup
import { useState } from 'react'
export default function TodoApp() {
const [todos, setTodos] = useState([])
const [input, setInput] = useState('')
const addTodo = () => {
if (!input.trim()) return
setTodos([...todos, { id: Date.now(), text: input, done: false }])
setInput('')
}
return (
<div className="max-w-md mx-auto p-6">
<h1 className="text-2xl font-bold mb-4">To Do</h1>
<div className="flex gap-2">
<input
value={input}
onChange={(e) => setInput(e.target.value)}
className="flex-1 px-3 py-2 border rounded"
/>
<button onClick={addTodo} className="px-4 py-2 bg-blue-500 text-white rounded">
Add
</button>
</div>
</div>
)
}The weakness is it's not built for serious development. WebContainer has constraints — libraries with native dependencies (image processing, certain crypto, etc.) don't always work. Complex monorepo setups, production-grade testing, and proper CI/CD pipelines won't fit inside Bolt alone. The realistic pattern is: prototype in Bolt, then move the project to a proper editor.
Decision Matrix by Project Type
Putting it in table form:
Building a new iOS / Android native app → Antigravity. Xcode integration plus Gemma 4 local execution close the case.
Maintaining and extending an existing web app → Cursor. VS Code extension compatibility and model switching support daily work best.
Validating a new service idea (prototype) → Bolt. Build something runnable in 30 minutes, show it to users or investors, decide.
Game development with Unreal Engine 5 → Antigravity. Almost no contest in this category.
Developing entirely with local LLMs (offline included) → Antigravity. Gemma 4 support is most polished here.
Short-term internships or learning environments → Bolt. Zero setup, immediate start.
Team-based development with code review → Cursor. Git integration and PR workflows feel most refined.
Pricing and Usage Limits (May 2026)
Pricing changes often, so check official sources for current numbers, but here's the May 2026 landscape:
Antigravity offers a free tier, with paid plans expanding AI usage limits monthly. Cursor's Pro plan (around $20/month) is the standard, with Business plans unlocking team usage and audit features. Bolt offers a free tier and Pro plans ($20-30/month) priced by generation count and project quota.
In my own setup, Cursor Pro is a fixed monthly cost since I use it daily, while Antigravity and Bolt are used as needed. I haven't found it necessary to keep Pro subscriptions on all three.
My Current Stack
For reference, here's the combination I'm running as of May 2026.
Cursor Pro is my primary editor. I migrated from VS Code, every extension still works, and switching models is fast — those reasons keep it as the daily driver.
Antigravity comes out for serious iOS work. The Xcode integration and the ability to keep coding with local Gemma 4 when I'm working from a cafe with unreliable Wi-Fi — that combination is hard to replace.
Bolt gets used for new idea validation. Typing "an app like X" and seeing something runnable in seconds beats explaining concepts in slide decks every time.
Looking back
Google Antigravity, Cursor, and Bolt aren't really competitors so much as different tools for different jobs. Spending time agonizing over which one to commit to misses the point — picking the right tool per task is the higher-leverage move.
Native mobile → Antigravity. Existing codebase work → Cursor. Rapid prototyping → Bolt. Memorize that triangle and most decision-making becomes simple.
For deeper dives into each tool, see our other articles on Antigravity's Gemma 4 integration, Cursor's Composer feature, and Bolt's deployment workflows. Pick whichever rabbit hole matches what you're building next.