The best Rork alternatives depend on the one thing Rork changed about itself: what it writes for you.
If you are hunting for Rork alternatives because you want one React Native codebase for iPhone and Android, the short answer is that Rork stopped being that tool. Rork's own documentation now carries a warning that you can no longer create Expo projects there. New Rork apps are Swift for iPhone, Kotlin for Android and React for the web, which makes an iPhone app and an Android app two separate codebases inside one project. If a shared codebase was your reason for picking Rork, look at Expo with EAS, a0.dev, FlutterFlow and the builder we make. You can also read how we compare with Rork, where we obviously have a stake in the answer.
If you came for the opposite reason, the recommendation flips. Nothing on this page matches Rork Max for Apple Watch, Vision Pro, widgets, Live Activities or an AR game, and the honest move is to stay where you are. Most of the write-ups about apps like Rork still describe a tool that builds React Native projects. That product is not on sale any more. Check the output first and the price second.
Jump to the four alternativesThe short version
Pick the replacement by what it writes, not by what it charges.
Every tool here turns a sentence into an app. They part company at the file you are left holding. Rork hands you a SwiftUI project or a Kotlin project. FlutterFlow hands you Flutter. Expo, a0.dev and the builder we make hand you React Native and TypeScript. That one choice decides whether your second platform is a recompile or a rewrite. It also decides who you can hire, and whether a repository you already own counts for anything.
Price is the easier axis and the less important one. Rork's plans page lists Pro at $20 a month and Max from $200 a month. FlutterFlow's pricing page lists Basic at $39 a month. Expo's pricing page lists Starter at $19 a month plus usage, on top of a free tier. None of those numbers will matter in six months if the output was wrong for the product.
What changed at Rork, and why people started looking
Rork used to generate Expo and React Native projects. It does not any more. The page Rork publishes about it is titled What happened to Expo? It opens with a warning that you can no longer create Expo projects in Rork. New apps are native iPhone in Swift, native Android in Kotlin, or web. The reason Rork gives is its own internal benchmarks: the agent wrote better Swift apps than React Native apps. Projects created before the switch keep working, and Rork says you can still build them, publish them and sync them to GitHub as before.
The consequence is the part worth sitting with, and Rork is direct about it on that page. React Native shares one JavaScript codebase across iOS and Android, Rork calls that a real engineering advantage, and Rork no longer keeps that model. An iPhone app and an Android app are now two separate native apps in one project. They share the chat, the backend and the Publish menu. They do not share a file. Rork's own wording is that the two apps can drift, and that the agent is how you keep them in step.
For an Apple-first product that is probably the right trade, and the capability list it unlocks is long. It is also the single biggest reason people start searching for alternatives to Rork. If your plan was to write once and ship twice, you are now paying for two codebases and trusting a model to keep them matched. Nothing is broken. It is simply a different product from the one most comparison posts are still describing.
Rork Pro and Rork Max are not one product
Comparisons go wrong here more often than anywhere else, so take the tiers apart. Rork's plans page lists Free at $0, Rork Pro at $20 a month and Rork Max from $200 a month. Free runs in design mode only, which proposes screens and a look. Build mode, the part that writes real Swift, Kotlin or React you can preview and publish, starts on a paid plan. Free gets 5 design credits a day, and up to 35 a month in major markets. Pro includes 100 credits a month. Max starts at 1,000 credits for $200, then climbs through $500, $900 and $1,800 tiers.
What the two paid tiers produce is not the same, which is exactly why treating Rork as one product misleads people. Rork's page is explicit that native iPhone apps with SwiftUI are included in Pro, so you do not need Max to build for iPhone. Pro covers iPhone, Android and web. Max adds the rest of the Apple family, iPad, Apple Watch and Vision Pro, plus native games, iOS widgets and priority chat support. The real question is not Pro against Max on price. It is whether your app needs a watch face, a home screen widget or a 3D scene.
One caution, because we opened both pages today. Rork's public FAQ still describes Rork Pro as React Native and Expo and Rork Max as SwiftUI, and it still quotes a $25 floor where the plans page says $20. Rork's documentation contradicts Rork's own FAQ. We have gone with the plans page and the Expo page, because they are the more specific of the two. The warning sits at the top of Rork's own page. Open both yourself before you commit money. If iPhone output is the axis you care about, we went deeper on it in best ai app builder for iphone.
The four alternatives, and who each one is for
Expo with EAS is the closest thing to what Rork used to be, minus the agent. You write the React Native yourself, or with an AI editor, and Expo's service builds it and submits it. Expo's pricing page lists a free tier with 15 iOS and 15 Android builds, store submission and updates to 1,000 monthly active users. Paid plans start at $19 a month plus usage, with Production at $199. Choose it if you have, or can hire, somebody who writes code. It is the only option here where the project never lived inside a vendor's editor in the first place.
a0.dev is an AI mobile builder that stayed on React Native. Its documentation describes previewing in the browser with react-native-web, or on a phone through Expo Go. It covers generating IPA and APK files and pushing over the air updates. Connect your App Store Connect account and a0 creates the listing and uploads the build. Backends are Convex or Supabase. We are not quoting a price for it, because its pricing page did not render one for us. Open that page yourself before you compare.
FlutterFlow is the genuinely different answer. It writes Flutter, and it is a visual canvas with AI attached rather than a chat window. Its pricing page lists a free plan capped at 2 projects. Basic at $39 a month is the tier that unlocks code download, APK download and one-click App Store deployment. Growth at $80 for the first seat adds GitHub integration and real-time collaboration. Its pricing page also advertises more than 1,000 prebuilt templates. The catch is the stack: your team either knows Dart or does not.
Newly is the one we build, so weigh this paragraph accordingly. It writes a React Native and TypeScript project and runs it on cloud iOS and Android simulators while it builds, which keeps the one-codebase model Rork gave up. It costs $25 a month with no free plan, so if you want to spend nothing while you decide, FlutterFlow and Expo both have free tiers and we do not. The field is wider than these four, and we lined the rest up in best ai mobile app builder.
Two questions
Which one replaces Rork for you
Answer both. The result is the tool whose output matches what you said, not the one with the best landing page.
What are you shipping?
What matters most?
A React Native builder: Newly or a0.dev
One codebase on both phones is the model Rork gave up. Both of these kept it, and both upload the build to App Store Connect for you.
What comes with you, and what does not
Before you move anything, work out what is actually portable. Rork's FAQ says you own the generated code on paid plans, and that you export it through a two-way GitHub integration. You can carry on in Cursor or any editor. That is real ownership of the files. What it is not is portability between builders. A SwiftUI Xcode project does not open in a React Native tool, and a Flutter project opens in neither. Changing stacks means a rebuild, whoever or whatever does the typing.
The backend deserves its own look. Rork's backend page says your app and backend keep running after you cancel your Rork subscription, and that your data stays. It also says you can transfer the backend and your data into your own Supabase account. Rork describes that transfer as one way. Read that sentence twice before you design a schema. If you are on Rork Web, note that published web apps carry a Built with Rork badge which only owners on a paid plan can switch off in project settings.
The question to ask every tool on this page, ours included, is what you are holding the morning after you cancel. Rork and FlutterFlow both put code export behind a paid plan. Expo never had the question, because the repository was yours from the first commit. Work out which files, which database and which store listing survive the cancellation, and in what format, before the trial ends. That is what you keep if you leave.
What each one writes, where it ships, and whether you can try it free
| Tool | What it writes | One codebase for iPhone and Android | Where it ships | Free tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rork Pro | SwiftUI for iPhone, Kotlin and Compose for Android, Vite and React for web | No, two native apps in one project | App Store and TestFlight, Google Play, a rork.app address | Design mode only, no build |
| Rork Max | Everything in Pro, plus iPad, Apple Watch, Vision Pro, games and iOS widgets | No, two native apps in one project | Same stores as Pro | Design mode only, no build |
| Newly | React Native and TypeScript | Yes, one project for both | TestFlight, Google Play internal testing, standalone APK | None |
| FlutterFlow | Flutter, from a visual canvas | Yes, one Flutter project | App Store and Play Store, one-click from Basic, plus web | Yes, 2 projects, no code download |
| Expo with EAS | React Native that you write | Yes, one project for both | EAS builds and submits to both stores | Yes, 15 iOS and 15 Android builds |
If one codebase for both phones is what you lost
That is the gap Rork's switch opened, and it is the gap Newly was built for. You describe the app in plain English and it writes a real React Native and TypeScript project you own. It runs on cloud iOS and Android simulators while it builds, so the preview is the app behaving like an app rather than a picture of one, with no QR code and no Expo Go in the loop.
Shipping works the way the stores expect. Newly uploads to App Store Connect and TestFlight, as owner or admin, and it does not submit for review, so you press that button yourself. On Android it publishes to Google Play internal testing and separately builds a standalone production APK. New apps start local-first, keeping their data on the phone with no accounts and no server. The agent adds Newly Backend only when the app needs accounts, shared data, syncing or payments. That brings sign-in, an API service, a Postgres database per environment and file storage.
It is $25 a month and there is no free plan, which is a straight reason to try FlutterFlow or Expo first if you want to spend nothing while you make up your mind. Code leaves as a ZIP from project settings, through two-way GitHub sync under Deploy, or with the CLI.
Questions people ask when they go looking for a Rork alternative
There is no single winner, because these tools no longer make the same thing. If you want one React Native codebase for both phones, look at Expo with EAS, at a0.dev, or at the React Native builders in the table above. If you want Flutter and a visual canvas, FlutterFlow. If you want Apple Watch, Vision Pro, widgets, Live Activities or an AR game, nothing here matches Rork Max. The sensible move is to stay.
Write down the app before you pick the tool
Name the platform that actually matters, iPhone, Android or both, then the one capability the app cannot ship without. If that capability is a watch face or an AR scene, your answer is on Rork's side of this page. If it is one codebase running on two phones, go and build it.
Start building