NewBase
Send your site
astro

Compare

Lovable vs Astro

The code is already yours and already in a repository, so nothing here is about getting out. It is about whether a generated single-page application is the right shape for a site whose job is to be found and read.

Send your site
Price
From $5,000
Timeline
Typically 4–6 weeks
Included
30 days of hypercare
Code
In your name

Price and what it includes. The move I make is to Astro, The NewBase Stack.

Input

Your Webflow URL

Paste a Webflow URL. The trace stays a sample. Only the site check can go live.

Sample URL: https://northwind.example

Sample address

https://northwind.example

The trace and the pull request card are drawn for this reserved example. They do not change for the URL you paste.

Trace
Three finished steps. Replay run redraws them.
Pull request
The NewBase Stack. Sample only. This page does not open one.
Live
The site check, on an address this page can read.
Otherwise
The box says so and offers Send your site.

Output

Migration trace

Sample run

northwind.example

  1. 01 Read the Webflow site
  2. 02 Map pages, CMS fields and redirects
  3. 03 Draft an Astro pull request

Pull request

The NewBase Stack

Astro, Sanity and Cloudflare. Sample only. This page does not open a pull request.

Site check

Not live

Not run on the sample

This trace is a sample of a migration. The site check has not run. Paste a Webflow URL and only this pane can go live.

Send your site

Reasons

Move to Astro, The NewBase Stack, when

  1. The pages are words, and they are being assembled in the browser to show them.

  2. Most of the page should be in the initial HTML rather than assembled after JavaScript runs.

  3. Changing a headline means editing a component and opening a pull request.

Differences

Four things that change when the public site gets its own architecture.

  1. Routing

    Routes become documents, not just application states

    A client-side application can have perfectly valid URLs. What it often does not have is a page whose content exists before the application runtime has assembled it.

    For a marketing site Astro renders that content into the HTML ahead of time and adds JavaScript only where the page needs behavior. Most of the schedule goes into this, and on a page whose job is to be read it is the change that matters most.

  2. What ships

    The page stops waiting on the application

    A generated project may ship a client runtime whose job is to assemble the page in the browser. That is the right order when somebody is using an application.

    For mostly static marketing pages Astro renders the content first and hydrates only the interactive pieces, which on a marketing site is usually a menu and a form.

  3. Structure

    Structure gets decided once

    Generated code answers each prompt on its own terms, so components repeat, state sits in odd places and the same value is fetched three ways. None of it is wrong and none of it was designed.

    Moving is the moment that becomes one structure somebody chose, which is what makes the next change cheap.

  4. Data

    The bundled database stops being the default

    When a database comes free with the builder it gets used for things that are really content.

    Separating what genuinely needs a server from what is really content can remove a surprising amount of application infrastructure. What remains is infrastructure the product actually needs.

Compare

Capability by capability.

What is being compared Lovable Astro
Development workflow Lovable Prompt-driven, against generated application code Astro Repository-driven, against explicit components, routes and a content architecture
What reaches the browser first Lovable The framework, then the words Astro HTML built before anyone asks for it The reason most of these projects move. A generated app ships the framework first and the words second, which is the wrong order for a page whose purpose is to be read and indexed.
How the structure got decided Lovable One prompt at a time, by whoever asked last Astro A model or a person, against a codebase with a shape
Content model Lovable Whatever the generated code happened to do Astro Collections somebody designed
Where the data lives Lovable Usually a hosted database wired in by the builder Astro Kept, replaced, or turned into content, on purpose

Questions

Lovable and Astro, answered.

Do I have to reconstruct the site from a visual builder?

No, and that is the major difference from most platforms on this site. A Lovable project starts from application code, so the work begins with the existing components and logic rather than reverse-engineering a rendered page. What is left to decide is what should stay, what should become Astro, and what application infrastructure the marketing site never needed.

Is Astro better than Lovable?

They answer different questions. Lovable is built to get a working application in front of you from a description, which is the right tool while you are still finding out whether the idea holds. Astro is built to render pages before anyone asks, which is the right tool once the answer is yes and people need to find you.

What if my project is actually an app?

Then keep it, and put a marketing site in front of it. That is a real outcome of the first conversation rather than a failed one: rewriting an application into a static site is the wrong project, and the pages that explain it are a much smaller and better one.

How long does it take?

Four to six weeks for a marketing site, then 30 days of post-launch checks. Nothing has to be recovered, so the time goes into turning client-side routes into pages, lifting the copy out of components, and the same inventory, redirect and launch checks as any other migration.

If you do decide to move, here is what it involves

Next step

Let me plan your next step.

Send your site

I can scope a migration. Send a brief and I will reply by email with next steps.