12 Stitch AI Alternatives for UI Design and Product Teams

If Stitch AI (ex-Gallileo) is great for quick UI sketches but falls apart when you need multi-screen flows, tighter visual control, or a path to shipping, you’ll want an alternative.
Below are the best Stitch AI alternatives grouped by what you’re actually trying to do.

TL;DR: Quick decision guide

• Closest to Stitch (text to UI and multi-screen prototypes): Banani, UX Pilot

• Figma-first (prompting inside your design system): Figma Make

• Publish something live (site/app): Framer, Lovable

• Design-to-code (Figma to front-end code): Locofy, Anima

Where Stitch AI shines / breaks

Stitch AI is built for fast UI exploration: prompt in, UI out, usually with a Material Design style default.

Good at

• Fast prompt-to-layout variations

• Material-aligned UI patterns

• Multi-device previews

• Basic accessibility checks

• HTML/CSS + Figma layer export (mode-dependent)

Breaks down when you need

• Long, connected multi-screen flows

• More brand-level styling control

• Responsive-ready output without manual cleanup

• Backend/product logic (auth, DB, workflows)

• Heavy use without running into monthly caps

• Deeper collaboration features (versioning, robust teamwork)

Text-to-UI tools

These are the tools you should look at first if your team wants the same core workflow: describe UI → generate screens → iterate.

Banani

Best for: Creating editable multi-screen prototypes from text, screenshots, or Figma links

Banani is an AI UI design tool that turns prompts, screenshots, or Figma links into interactive, multi-screen layouts. Compared to Stitch, it leans harder into flow building and iteration—especially when you need more than one isolated screen.

Why it’s good:

• Generate multi-screen UI from a prompt (not just a single view)

• Adjust colors, typography, and design tokens for tighter style control

• Create follow-up states from interactions (useful for flows)

• Export to Figma or HTML/CSS

• Share via links for async review

Key limitation: Output quality depends heavily on prompt clarity, and deeper customization often requires manual token tweaks.
Pricing: Starts at $20/month (individuals) and $30/month (teams), with a free tier including 20 free generations per day, and 3 Figma exports.

If you want something that feels like Stitch but works better for real product flows, try creating your first designs in a few clicks.

Uizard

Best for: Cross-functional teams that want fast wireframes and editable prototypes

Uizard is strong when your team needs to crank out MVP screens quickly—especially if PMs and non-designers are involved. It’s more “get to a usable prototype fast” than “pixel-perfect brand UI.”

Why it’s good:

• Multi-screen generation (especially early-stage flows)

• Screenshot + sketch conversion

• Real-time collaboration

• Theme generation for quick style changes

Key limitation: Direct exports of fully editable design files are limited; SVG-style exports are a workaround in many workflows.
Pricing: Paid plans start at $19/month, with a free tier.

UX Pilot

Best for: High-fidelity screens + Figma-ready output

UX Pilot targets teams that want something closer to a polished UI than loose wireframes. It’s especially useful when you want to bring work into Figma quickly.

Why it’s good:

• High-fidelity UI generation and wireframes

• Screen flows / journey creation

• Figma plugin + export path

• Reference-based styling support

Key limitation: Iterative edits can become inconsistent, and strict “best practices” defaults can make it harder to follow unusual UI directions.
Pricing: Paid plans start at $19/month, with a free, limited-tier option.

Design-to-code tools

If your main issue is “we have designs, now turn them into code,” Stitch isn’t the right starting point anyway. These tools are built for Figma → code workflows.

Figma Make

Best for: Design teams already inside Figma who want prompt-driven prototyping

Figma Make is positioned as a Figma-native way to generate interactive prototypes inside the canvas. The big win is staying in Figma with native layers instead of bouncing between tools.

Why it’s good:

• Deep integration with Figma components and styles

• Prompt-driven edits + direct canvas changes

• Publishing path via Figma Sites

Key limitation: Best inside the Figma ecosystem, yet less appealing if your team doesn’t standardize on Figma.
Pricing: Paid plans start at $20/month, with a free, limited-tier option.

Locofy.ai

Best for: Engineering-led teams that want production-ready frontend code from Figma/Penpot

Locofy is a different kind of “alternative.” It’s not about exploring UI ideas—it’s about outputting code. If your team already has Figma designs and wants to quickly build in React/React Native/Flutter, this is the lane.

Why it’s good:

• Multi-framework code export (React, React Native, Flutter, HTML/CSS, more)

• Plugin-based tagging + component conversion workflows

• GitHub + editor integrations (useful for real teams)

• Works with common design systems (Material UI, Ant Design, etc.)

Key limitation: It’s strongest on static UI → frontend code. Advanced state management and backend logic still need engineering time.
Pricing: Pay-as-you-go at $0.40 per token, or $399/year for ~2,500 tokens.

Anima

Best for: Teams that want a broader builder workflow (prompt → UI → deploy)

Anima sits closer to “product builder” territory. It supports prompt- or screenshot-based starting points, but it also integrates with deployment and dev workflows via APIs.

Why it’s good:

• Prompt-based UI generation plus Figma-to-code workflows

• Live previews + shareable links

• One-click deployment options

• API access for dev tooling and AI agents

Key limitation: Generated code often needs cleanup, and some teams report plugin lag/bugs.
Pricing: Starter is $25/month, with a free, limited-tier option.

Prototype to publish

If what you really want is “get something online,” a design generator alone won’t help. These tools are for publishing.

Framer

Best for: Teams building websites with design + CMS + SEO in one place

Framer is ideal when you want a modern site builder that supports responsive layouts, animations, and a real publishing workflow.

Why it’s good:

• AI-assisted layout generation

• Collaboration + fast iteration on live pages

• Localization and SEO tools

• Built-in CMS

Key limitation: Code-level control can feel restrictive, and CMS depth has limits depending on the plan.
Pricing: Paid plans start at $15/month, and enterprise pricing is available.

Relume

Best for: Structured website planning (sitemaps + wireframes) before design

Relume’s angle is “plan first.” If your team struggles more with information architecture than UI layout, this is a strong starting point—then you export to your design/dev tool of choice.

Why it’s good:

• AI-generated sitemaps + wireframes

• Large component libraries (1,000+ elements mentioned)

• Style guide builder for brand direction

• Export to Figma/Webflow/React

Key limitation: Not a host/CMS replacement—more of a planning + handoff tool.
Pricing: Paid plans start at $26/month, with a free, limited-tier option.

Code-first builders

These tools aren’t “Stitch replacements” in the pure design sense. They’re better described as Stitch substitutes for teams that want a deployable app fast.

v0 by Vercel

Best for: Prompt-to-UI generation that can be deployed quickly (especially in a Vercel workflow)

v0 is useful when you want to generate UI fast and push toward a working web app deployment workflow.

Why it’s good:

• Generates usable UI/components quickly

• Visual editing mode

• Templates + design systems

• GitHub sync + Vercel deployment

Key limitation (as described): It doesn’t generate full backend/API endpoints by default, so real functionality still needs engineering.
Pricing: Paid plans start at $20/month, with a free, limited-tier option.

Lovable

Best for: Small teams that want a conversational prompt-to-app workflow

Lovable is straightforward: chat, templates, quick output. It’s good when the goal is speed and simplicity.

Why it’s good:

• Chat-driven creation

• Template library for common site patterns

• Supports attachments for context

• Quick path to basic sites

Key limitation: Less deep control for advanced customization; credit-based models can make iteration feel expensive.
Pricing (as described): Paid plans start at $25/month, with a free, limited-tier option.

Bolt.new

Best for: Prompt-driven apps/sites with deployment plumbing included

Bolt.new is positioned to generate websites and apps via chat, with integrations that matter when developers need to take over.

Why it’s good:

• Prompt-to-app workflow

• Hosting + database management through Bolt Cloud

• Supports mobile and web builds

• Integrations (Figma, GitHub, Expo, Stripe mentioned)

Key limitation: Primarily geared for JS-based stacks (limited for Python/non-JS backend needs).
Pricing: Pro is $25/month, with a free, limited-tier option.

Paraflow

Best for: Canvas-based “AI agent” workflow that spans product thinking to UI output

Paraflow is more of an end-to-end product workspace than a UI generator. If your team likes defining requirements, mapping flows, and generating UI in a single canvas, it can work.

Why it’s good:

• PRD generation + user flow mapping

• Style-consistent high-fidelity UI

• Interactive prototypes + live previews

• Frontend code handoff

Key limitation: Integrations can be limited compared to tools teams already use day-to-day.
Pricing (as described): Pro is $25/month, with a free, limited-tier option.

Quick comparison table

This is intentionally simplified to stay readable.

FAQs

Are Stitch AI alternatives beginner-friendly?

Some are. If you want the easiest onboarding, tools like Banani and Lovable tend to feel simpler. Tools like v0 and Paraflow can be more complex because they assume multi-step workflows and/or developer involvement.

Which alternatives support Figma integration?

Based on the workflows described above, Banani, UX Pilot, Relume, and Figma Make are the most Figma-friendly paths. Bolt.new mentions Figma integration, and Framer has limited Figma support depending on your workflow.

Conclusion

Stitch AI is a powerful tool, but to choose the better tool, ask yourself a simple question.
Do you want designs, code, or a live product?

• If you want designs and prototypes, stay in the Text-to-UI bucket, use Banani/Uizard/UX Pilot

• If you want frontend code, go design-to-code, use Locofy/Anima

• If you want a live site/app, go publish or code-first, use Framer/Bolt/Lovable/v0